Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 9558839" data-attributes="member: 20323">I also have objections to the layout/format of the stat blocks, but I've already posted extensively on that with before/after examples of my preferences: <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/radically-shrinking-stat-blocks.706400/" target="_blank">D&D 5E - Radically shrinking stat blocks</a> I didn't want to weigh down the thread by duplicating my opinions, but I'm there on record if it's of interest!"too much writing devoted to one ability"I haven't seen the new gold dragon's Shapechange ability - the <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/check-out-the-new-monster-manual%E2%80%99s-ancient-gold-dragon.709531/" target="_blank">post here</a> only shows part of the new stats - but I think referencing spells in monster stat blocks should be very carefully/judiciously done due to the added burden of looking up spells. There are "knock-on" effects of "it's like spell X, but Z" which I'm not sure yet how much 2024's books take into account – things like a gold dragon's Shapechange (like shapechange but Z) potentially being affected by dispel magic, antimagic/dead magic zones, and the like.I've written a couple very complicated monsters. With those "wordy" abilities, it's a matter of iterating design, going back and forth between "can I cut the words down to make this clearer and shorter" vs. "can I sacrifice some of what I'm trying to do to make it shorter while preserving its essence." Several times my solution was designing synergistic monster features that, when working together in play, would yield the outcome I wanted."too many powers leading to analysis paralysis"My problem with D&D is that when we say BBEG there's a host of assumptions about what the climactic conflict should look like – the game system trains us for what to expect, and so we discuss things like combat length, keeping it fresh, engaging all the players, avoiding stun-locking, etc, etc. It's the questions we don't ask that have become of greater interest to me. Monster design is not the only contributing factor, but it's a very significant one.D&D from very early on has had an obsession with codifying every dang creature it could, and using the same stat block for each of them. If you noticed something in 5th edition, green slime became a hazard mentioned in the DMG rather than a monster – no one talked much about that move, but it was a huge paradigm shift. When I look at a gold dragon or unicorn written up the same way as a red dragon or nightmare, it makes me wonder what the design intent is, how the designer anticipates the creature being used. If the priority isn't on it being an involved fight, maybe it doesn't need to be written up as something to fight. A great example: Horse statblock. It has a hoof attack. Great. Now tell me what its overland pace is and how much it can carry, because IME 9 times out of 10 that information for a horse is far more necessary at the table than its hoof attack.Paradigm shifts like that aren't for everybody. D&D isn't for everybody. I'm just trying to point out an example of such a shift that occurred in the current edition to establish that... I'm not crazy? Hah. That there is a way it can be done without feeling like the game we know and love is being torn asunder."trying to say too much and not using layout well"It really depends on what you intend to emulate with a "boss monster." What I usually hear when that term is brought up in D&D is a collection of specific expectations about how that combat will play out (e.g. sense of suspense or catharsis going into the combat, not over too fast, a mix of good power gaming / lucky rolls / quick thinking necessary to avoid casualties or disaster).That's not the only "boss monster" experience, however.For example, juggernaut-style monsters which are nearly impervious until they're lured into a trap whereupon they can be readily defeated, but up until that point it's a chase to stay alive. In the film Brotherhood of the Wolf there's a climactic encounter with the monster where they have to trap it in a cage.Another example, "inside your head" monsters like the Purple Man from Jessica Jones who act through a charmed / possessed surrogate, where the catharsis is about how the surrogate fights to shake of the charm, and their friends have to face them without killing them.Rather, there are dozens of "boss monster" experiences that... in my opinion... D&D doesn't do a great job of facilitating... which is in part because of the obsessive statting of monsters in the same manner. IME that leads to a cognitive pigeon-holing both for the GM and for the players who learn to game the system (which any clever player wanting to win is going to do) which results in a certain set of tactics getting repeated, and then that sense of freshness and wonder and creativity suffers.A quick thought experiment: Imagine a monster without hit points. What becomes the determining factor in how long that confrontation lasts? The point is that a lot of a GM's (legitimate) concerns about "will this boss monster last long enough to keep the players engaged for a suitable period of play time so it feels satisfying and offers an emotional payoff?" ...that concern requires the monster to have hit points in order to exist. Remove the hit points, and the root of the question is revealed – It's not fundamentally a question about numbers. It's a question about emotion and perception. The numbers are just the medium we end up using.I'm not saying throw out Hit Points, but I do recommend at least once in a GM's career running a monster without any stats, just the creative grist you bring to the table, and let yourself discover the monster along with the players. Why is that useful? Because it puts the GM in intimate contact with the emotional dimension of roleplaying. If I'm not focused on the stat block, where does that portion of my focus go? When I did this exercise for myself – it was running a "striga" mystery in 4e – I found that portion of my focus went directly to the emotional experience of my players and cultivating the brooding mystery/horror atmosphere I wanted. Up until that point I'd failed at the #1 most important thing I wanted for this adventure, which was to make it legitimately scary. However, I'd really felt like I hadn't captured the players' hearts and minds UNTIL I did this experiment, and that session everyone was sharing how they were on the edge of their seats, they were dreading facing the "striga", and they kept talking about how creepy the session was.There was an important lesson I needed to learn there, and I hope I'm articulating clearly.</blockquote>

Verification