D&D 5E My biggest gripe about 5e so far, as a DM

[Mouseferatu]

JRR is exactly right, that there's a massive excluded middle here. But there's something else that's being overlooked as well. We're comparing... Well, not apples to oranges, certainly, but perhaps apples to applesauce.

Specifically, the 1E stat block in question isn't entirely complete.

1E relies heavily on charts. Attack rolls and saving throws, based on monster HD, are found elsewhere. The stat block looks simpler than it is, in part, because it's foisted the complexity off elsewhere.

Plus, in the case of any critters with special abilities, those powers tend to be described in text after the stat block in 1E adventures--text that, I'd argue, we should count.

Don't get me wrong, if the overall point is that stat blocks in 1E were shorter, you'll get no argument. But I DO maintain that they're not AS MUCH shorter--all details being taken into account--as they appear on first glance.

 

[gideonpepys]

That is not my idea of a stat block. That's the official statblock of AD&D for an orc. It worked from 1974 to 2000. What else do you need to know about an orc? You don't need his strength score for most encounters, but if you must know, it's 12. If in doubt, roll 3d6. There's a whole lot of space between a 10 page stat block and nothing. Excluded middle and all that.

I didn't say it was your idea of a stat block - I recognise an AD&D stat block, and have played the game since 1979.

My point was that if, in any discussion about what was desired/required in a stat block, one party insists that the answer is 'this much and no more' one can always argue further that, if some fairly important information (relative strength values, perception score, etc) are unnecessary - as the DM can invent them on the fly - why have any information at all.

A lot of people (including myself) want the designers of the game to do a bit more work for their money than the amateur enthusiasts who stumbled upon the magic recipe for roleplaying some 40 years ago. There are nice, simple mechanical ways to distinguish an orc from a kobold from a goblin from a hobgoblin, that go beyond AC and HD - and these wee mechanics happen to be one of the things I think 4e did very well.

But this does not in any way preclude or exclude the responsibility of the DM to roleplay and describe such creatures.

To return to the point of the OP - I too very much hope that I don't have to pick up a rulebook or go online to access lists of spells or spell-like abilities for any of the creatures I am DMing. It slows down the game.

 

[rastus_burne]

I didn't say it was your idea of a stat block - I recognise an AD&D stat block, and have played the game since 1979.

My point was that if, in any discussion about what was desired/required in a stat block, one party insists that the answer is 'this much and no more' one can always argue further that, if some fairly important information (relative strength values, perception score, etc) are unnecessary - as the DM can invent them on the fly - why have any information at all.

A lot of people (including myself) want the designers of the game to do a bit more work for their money than the amateur enthusiasts who stumbled upon the magic recipe for roleplaying some 40 years ago. There are nice, simple mechanical ways to distinguish an orc from a kobold from a goblin from a hobgoblin, that go beyond AC and HD - and these wee mechanics happen to be one of the things I think 4e did very well.

But this does not in any way preclude or exclude the responsibility of the DM to roleplay and describe such creatures.

To return to the point of the OP - I too very much hope that I don't have to pick up a rulebook or go online to access lists of spells or spell-like abilities for any of the creatures I am DMing. It slows down the game.

Well sure. Information in one place certainly helps. And it sounds like you prefer the 4e stat blocks over say 1e. That's not to say one is superior, or that an offering in 1979 isn't as robust or useful as one made in 2008, as you seem to be implying by the 'amateur enthusiasts' comment.

A good DM can work with either stat block and create interesting and flavoursome encounters.

 

[Prickly]

I just wish they would put more technical and concise version of the spell in the stat block.

Then everybody would be happy. The same spell but easy to read at a glance.
I'd actually even put that in my char sheet if I was playing a spellcaster.

 

[pemerton]

So why have a stat block at all? Surely, if you can decide how strong on orc is, you can decide what his AC is, and what his hit points are.

Well, 4e showed one way of doing this. For the bulk of combat resolution, the stats are in the monster's stat block. But for non-combat resolution, the DCs are mostly determined from a DC-by-level chart.

I don't think this is perfect (eg sometimes it can get a bit wonky at the combat/non-combat interface). And obviously, there are some people who completely hate it. (But I assume you're not one of them, from your other post saying you like 4e.)

My point is just that, ultimately, the function of a stat block is to support resolution of actions that the players declare for their PCs, and there are different ways a game can offer this support.