WotC Considering NPC Stat Format Change

Merric goes into this a decent amount: https://merricb.com/2015/10/05/a-short-history-of-monster-stat-blocks/

*Deleted by user*

lowkey13 said:

....yeah. You didn’t run many 1e modules, did you?

Click to expand...

Not being 45+ years old, I got my start with 2e. And never found the micro statblocks useful in the least. It was wasted space that only existed to help the small segment of DMs who had system mastery.

Unless it was something like an orc or goblin, it wasn’t worth the sentence.

*Deleted by user*

Why not just have perforated cards in back with stats on them so you can remove and keep handy with all information. No need to put any thing other than name as all on card in back of adventure or book.

lowkey13 said:

Okay. So I feel like I have to explain these things that I shouldn't have to explain. I mean, if you had a lot of experience with this, and you were complaining, I would understand. But it's kind of weird having to explain this to someone who doesn't seem to understand the purpose and is making completely .... irrelevant argument. But sure, let's do this!

Click to expand...

Oh, I understand the purpose. It's just that the purpose was flawed and ineffectual that has rightly been abandoned.

lowkey13 said:

1. In 1e, as you should know, the important things for the particular monster are the HD, the AC, the #AT, and the damage. The movement is pretty useful too. That's it. With that, you can run any combat. Other than that, the only thing that really differentiates monsters are SA and SD (specula attacks, special defenses).

Click to expand...

Yeah, not so much. Because there were monsters with special abilities, and being told "rusting" or "glue" or paralysis" or "poison" isn't enough information to remotely run the monster. Yeah, you know what the giant spider needs to hit you, but not what happens when it does.

lowkey13 said:

2. It's not "just" orcs and goblins that don't have SA or SD. If you limit SA and SD to 1, you have no covered the vast majority of monsters in D&D. This is so obvious and simple that you can reproduce the entirety the original monster manual in the appendix of the DMG as a table. Go on. Look. It's all there.

Click to expand...

Right. But it doesn't tell you want half the special abilities actually DO. It doesn't really help when running the game if you need to have the page open anyway.

lowkey13 said:

3. Doing this for combat in one quick line allowed the actual text in the description to be used for what the monsters might do, or pertinent details and descriptions including gender, age, etc, or, if an NPC, how it would interact with the party (you know, the social aspect you are talking about). In 1e, this would never be in a stat block because it COULDN'T be in a stat block.

Click to expand...

It's all well and good to summarize the additional information like name and alignment of NPCs, but the little abbreviated monster statblocks could be useless.

I had multiple a fun experience running an adventure where a monster was included that I was unfamiliar with. Is it intelligent? Can it be reasoned with? Can it even speak? Can the PCs sneak by in the dark? Heck, can it seen in the dark?
I also have memories of an adventure like that where the monster I needed wasn't in the Monstrous Manual so I then had literally no idea what it looked like or how to run it. It was a random name attached to random powers. That I knew its hit points and defenses did absolutely nothing for me.

Products shouldn't be designed assuming system mastery or memorization. They shouldn't assume the DM is experienced. They should be for everyone.

lowkey13 said:

4. Again, this was all possible because 1e didn't have "stat blocks" because monsters didn't have stats, and because almost everything as keyed into the HD.

Click to expand...

Quick, without looking at your books, what did the mind flayer's Mind Blast do in 1e? What was the range?

lowkey13 said:

5. And, sure, while there was the occasional monster that you might have to refer to (such as a beholder), these monsters were pretty darn rare. And to the extent that you saw them in a module, they either 1) had a quick rundown in the text, or 2) had a quick reference so you know they had additional abilities.

Click to expand...

Sometimes. Sometimes not. Like most things in 1e, there wasn't a lot of consistency, and things changed constantly. Later stat blocks got larger and larger as they included more and more details people discovered were needed to run the monsters. Like intelligence and briefer descriptions of powers. But that ate up more and more of the adventure. Whole pages were wasted on text that could be looked up in a hook the DM was likely to have on hand anyway.

I don't know about you, but I'd rather have five more rooms of dungeon than a brief incomplete description of every monster.

lowkey13 said:

But sure, maybe it's not for you. But seriously- WHAT KND OF STAT BLOCK COULD YOU POSSIBLY HAVE WHEN THE MONSTERS DIDN'T HAVE STATS AND SOCIAL ABILITIES WERE NOT ROLLED FOR?

Click to expand...

How about the one this thread was started to talk about. The NPC write-up that gives the named non-player character description in sentence form.
Y'know, like they did when describing important named NPCs in 1e.

*Deleted by user*

lowkey13 said:

... 1e is that monsters didn’t have stats (ability scores).

Click to expand...

It is so easy to forget that part after not playing that edition for 20+ years and getting so used to the 4e/5e monster paradigm (I know it is a 3e one as well - I just skipped that edition)

Jester David said:

Sometimes not. Like most things in 1e, there wasn't a lot of consistency, and things changed constantly. Later stat blocks got larger and larger as they included more and more details people discovered were needed to run the monsters. Like intelligence and briefer descriptions of powers. But that ate up more and more of the adventure. Whole pages were wasted on text that could be looked up in a hook the DM was likely to have on hand anyway.

Click to expand...

I almost always DM my 5e games. Having sat in on a few 5e games DMed by others I've found that if the DM hasn't taken the time to extract the monster stats then combat grinds to a halt as the DM has to look up stats. It's even worse if the combat has more than one type of monster or the creature is described in the adventure itself. Now the DM can't have both the encounter page and creature stat page easily accessible.

It's awful. The game stops. A good adventure design would never handicap the DM like this. With the adventures I run, which are all converted 1e or B/X adventures, I make a spreadsheet with each creatures stats reduced to 3 or 4 lines in one column.

I almost never have to open up another book to look up stats. I consider doing so a failure. If an adventure forces me to have to turn to some other page to routinely run encounters it is a bad adventure.

TL;DR I'm guessing the vast majority on this forum are opposed to this new look format.