DUNGEON's NEW STAT BLOCK FORMAT

[Felon]

Well, the DM can always just pull a number out of his bum...most do, I suspect.

But if you're going to bother having an entry for it, make the generation method clear. Otherwise, just ditch it altogether, save some space, and let the DM rely on bum-pulls.

 

[Simplicity]

So, what about the stat block format for rooms? Is that format now official for Dungeon?

This is what I speak of (excerpts from WotC's Return to Undermountain web article):

Room 6 Summary

Creatures: (1) One 5th-level aristocrat human ghost.
Traps: (Many) See below.
Terrain: Normal, but random trap activation in each square.
Lighting Conditions: Bright (due to the fire and lightning traps).
Magic: None except treasure (faint transmutation).
Detectable Alignments: None or moderate evil. The ghost is on the Ethereal Plane until she manifests.
Secrets: (2)The chest and its contents appear to be the treasure, but the chain that binds them is more valuable. Also, the corpse in the room hides the secret to permanently defeating the ghost.
Treasure: (5,535 gp) A jeweled chest worth worth 10 gp. Twenty gems worth 10 gp. A +1 adamantine spiked chain worth 5,325 gp.

I like this format. It at least make it easier to skim through a dungeon. Seems to only be used sporadically in Dungeon though.

Don't forget about the "Relevant skill checks" section. Also interesting...

 

[Glyfair]

The DMG II preview in Game Trade Magazine has a really nice example of the stat block of a high level character - the 20th level high priest (I assume it's the same, I haven't compared them closely).

Some highlights for me:

1) Lots of details about abilities - For example, "Command undead 5/day (+4, 2d6+19, 17th)" and "Smite 1/day (+4 attack, +17 damage)."

2) DCs listed for every spell where it is relevant (especially important with this character because of varying bonuses to different types of spell for each level). Also, "D" notation by domain spells.

3) Notation of which spells are used and in effect (in this case, certain spells and spell-like abilities are used daily).

 

[S'mon]

Looks nice - looks a lot like my Quick NPC System stat block.

 

[S'mon]

The 3-18 ability score range has to stay. It's too important for random ability score generation by rolling dice.

I'm slightly conflicted on this - I quite like the rolling of the PCs on 3/4d6, but I never use this for NPCs; my NPCs are always listed "STR+4" rather than "18". Actually the only really good reason to retain the 3-18 stats is one that 3e doesn't even address, which is that making an eg STR check on d20+mod often gives far too much randomness, ST 18 is only 20% better than ST 10 even though it's theoretically about 4 times as strong! For those kind of rolls I do it on 1d6 + full stat vs the DC; or just use a minimum STR to accomplish the task - if a task needs ST 22 then 1 ST 22 or 2 18s will do it. Probably the latter approach fits "d20 system" better.

 

[MerricB]

Of course, in the Miniatures Game, they only list the most important features on the stat cards, and leave out the rest. (So, you have to notice the HP are high to realise about Toughness, etc.)

Cheers!

 

[John Cooper]

Glyfair: Also, don't forget the small number of people who go through stat blocks and look for missing feats, skill points, etc. You don't want to ruin their fun

Monte At Home: Yes. Yes I do.

Ouch.

 

[Mark]

Well, the DM can always just pull a number out of his bum...most do, I suspect.

But if you're going to bother having an entry for it, make the generation method clear. Otherwise, just ditch it altogether, save some space, and let the DM rely on bum-pulls.

Bum-Pulls

 

[Vigwyn the Unruly]

Ouch.

You go, John.

I love Monte's work, but I love yours, too.

It's guys like you that make guys like him better.

He shouldn't have anything against what you do. After all, you're just making sure people faithfully follow the system he helped design.

Plus, I doubt Monte really wants to ruin anybody's fun. He seems to me like the kind of guy that wants everybody to be having as much fun as possible.

And another thing--he can pretend to not be interested in that kind of thing, but he actually married an editor, and the best one in the business, too!

 

[A'koss]

You go, John.

I love Monte's work, but I love yours, too.

It's guys like you that make guys like him better.

Indeed, I think John's work has been immensely helpful and I can't imagine a single gamer not appreciating it. Hell, we need more guys like him out there!

Cheers!