D&D 5E New Spellcasting Blocks for Monsters --- Why?!

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes, the GM can just decide those things, but it is exactly this sort of fiat some people might want to avoid. I mean GM could decide everything, they could also just decide when the enemies are defeated, so why the statblocks need to have hit points?

Because players do things that cause hit points to be reduced.

I'd love to see your examples of player abilities that reduce opponent spell slots. Or interact with any other portion of a monster's statistics other than HP, AC, hit bonus, damage dice/bonuses, and saving throws. Counterspell is a player response to a creature's actions, not something the players can just do whenever.

Saves, AC, and HP, along with hit bonus and damage dice/bonus, are just about the barest of barebones things you need to actually use the system as presented to the players. Now, obviously, you could just choose not to do that. Nobody can stop you. But I strongly suspect most players would not respond well to finding out that all the stuff they've been doing, like attack rolls, inflicting or making saving throws, etc. was completely pointless because you just arbitrarily decided when a creature had expired or dealt a crit or whatever else.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

We just got an A5E version of The Archlich (no copyrights were harmed in the making of this stat block), and once again I can't help but express my pleasure at their design.

The spells are easy to read, but the spell slot system is preserved and actually serves a game purpose (Touch of Death gets more powerful depending on the spell slots you expend while doing it). There's even a special trait that says that the Archlich can cast any Wizard spell as a ritual, which gives a DM so many opportunities!

I just don't understand how the Vecna block can come anywhere close to this in terms of interesting uses as well as ease of use.

It's three pages long. And that's only if you use half-inch margins. Without that, it's pushing four full pages, and they didn't even include all of the spell descriptions (nothing below 4th level is described, so if you need to look up how expeditious retreat or animate dead work, you're on your own.) Oh, and that's completely leaving out anything that isn't explicitly the statblock. The opening paragraphs of fluff text and the "Combat" section add almost another full page of text.

It absolutely contains some clever stuff, including that "any wizard spell as a ritual" (though that might run into issues with spells that don't really make sense as rituals, e.g. instant spells.) But good Lord, this is unwieldy as hell and would absolutely require page-flipping if you were trying to use it from a book, just to look at all its actions.

 

[Ondath]

It's three pages long. And that's only if you use half-inch margins. Without that, it's pushing four full pages, and they didn't even include all of the spell descriptions (nothing below 4th level is described, so if you need to look up how expeditious retreat or animate dead work, you're on your own.) Oh, and that's completely leaving out anything that isn't explicitly the statblock. The opening paragraphs of fluff text and the "Combat" section add almost another full page of text.

It absolutely contains some clever stuff, including that "any wizard spell as a ritual" (though that might run into issues with spells that don't really make sense as rituals, e.g. instant spells.) But good Lord, this is unwieldy as hell and would absolutely require page-flipping if you were trying to use it from a book, just to look at all its actions.

I think in a game as detailed as A5E, 4 pages is absolutely fair. Character sheets can run upwards of 4-5 pages for a PC of 20th level. For the climactic endboss of a campaign (which is what this would be, I think), 4 pages is an absolutely acceptable length.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Personally I think A5E is currently the pinacle of monster design. Now expand that with the monster toughness revisions by Nixlord in his Expanded Monster Manual along with the incredible artwork in that book as well selecting the best art from A5E and the WotC MM's and you will have a super explosive deadly monster manual (or likely set of Monster Manuals). It will easy be the size of GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire...

But one can dream, right?

 

[Reynard]

It's three pages long. And that's only if you use half-inch margins. Without that, it's pushing four full pages, and they didn't even include all of the spell descriptions (nothing below 4th level is described, so if you need to look up how expeditious retreat or animate dead work, you're on your own.) Oh, and that's completely leaving out anything that isn't explicitly the statblock. The opening paragraphs of fluff text and the "Combat" section add almost another full page of text.

It absolutely contains some clever stuff, including that "any wizard spell as a ritual" (though that might run into issues with spells that don't really make sense as rituals, e.g. instant spells.) But good Lord, this is unwieldy as hell and would absolutely require page-flipping if you were trying to use it from a book, just to look at all its actions.

Is 4 pages really too much for what is supposed to be the culmination of a multi-year campaign?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Is 4 pages really too much for what is supposed to be the culmination of a multi-year campaign?

It just seems like a bad example when most of the people pleased about the changes 5e's designers are making, are specifically pleased because these new changes increase brevity and effective communication of critical components. By comparison, your example is almost profligate with its text, intentionally over-sharing information. "Look at how beautiful this thing is that not only doesn't do any of the things you guys like, but in fact goes in exactly the opposite direction, whole hog, full steam ahead!"

 

[Ondath]

It just seems like a bad example when most of the people pleased about the changes 5e's designers are making, are specifically pleased because these new changes increase brevity and effective communication of critical components. By comparison, your example is almost profligate with its text, intentionally over-sharing information. "Look at how beautiful this thing is that not only doesn't do any of the things you guys like, but in fact goes in exactly the opposite direction, whole hog, full steam ahead!"

4 pages of content can still be easy to read provided it is layouted in a useful way. I think A5E's stat blocks do that.

 

[NotAYakk]

"Any wizard spell as a ritual" is a game designer punting.

To use that effectively, the DM has to do so much work, they basically get no help from the monster designer.

It is "do whatever you want, but at the same time spend a bunch of extra effort making sure it is within some huge and difficult to research set of rules before you do it". It is anti-helpful. Literally saying "the Lich can perform ritual magic beyond mortals. The effects of this ritual magic should be no greater than a typical 9th level spell" would be more useful to the DM than what they typed, because it gets rid of a bunch of (basically pointless) homework the monster designer assigned the DM.

I mean, this is an NPC that can wish as a ritual, which means they can cast any spell up to 8th level without components as a ritual, which means that the entire description is misleading because it implies the lich is somehow limited to wizard spells. But did they highlight this? Nope! The DM has to do homework.

It is an utter flaming pile of garbage as a stat block, full of spinning gears and details, but either actively unhelpful or incompetent at helping the DM use it.

I mean, it is fun to fiddle with. Rules that are complex with no reason are fun to fiddle with. But actually use as a monster or even an epic foe? Waste of pages.

I want my game (and monster) designers to put in work. And more words and options is less work, not more, past a certain quality point.

 

[billd91]

That, however is a separate issue. That's not a problem with the length of the spell list.

It's a related problem since those shortened spell lists also serve to make the NPC a fairly single faceted encounter. I am basically looking at it as a single project - taking the full spell list and paring it down to a simpler encounter.

 

[Reynard]

It's a related problem since those shortened spell lists also serve to make the NPC a fairly single faceted encounter. I am basically looking at it as a single project - taking the full spell list and paring it down to a simpler encounter.

This goes back to purpose. In a perfect world, the MM entry for the creature/NPC would look different than the module entry. The latter would be tailored to its purpose in the encounter, while the former would be a broader and more extensive mechanical and lore description. GMs not using modules would have to be expected to be proficient enough to make those necessary changes or at least use the MM entry on the fly.

This of course goes back to who we are writing for. Frankly I think we can assume some level of willingness to do some work and expect some degree of proficiency in non-Beginner Box style materials. I don't think it is necessary to over simplify and limit the core game materials when you have multiple entry avenue products.