Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dave2008" data-source="post: 9555259" data-attributes="member: 83242">I guessed that is what you were going for, but I thought it could also be a typo too. More fussy than it needs to be IMO. I must say I have a love hate relationship with complexity and monster design. I have an instinct to put everything I want or believe a monster should be able to do in a stat block. But that is just not realistic and quickly becomes cumbersome. Finding the correct balance of variety, flexibility, and simplicity is tough.I was just watching a video by some veteran monster designers/publishers and they were really railing on the type of inclusive design that has been common in my monsters for years. By inclusive I mean including in the stat block everything/most of what a monster can do. For example, they hated that monster stat blocks might have a dagger (1d4) and sword (1d8) in the stat block when clearly you will always use the sword because it causes more damage. They even complained about this directly to the D&D designers! I don't know if they are correct, but they have a lot more cred and experience than I do so it makes me think for sure. I can see both sides, but I am not sure if one is better or the are just different mindsets.</blockquote>