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


log in or register to remove this ad

dave2008

Legend
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.
2 pages is a lot for a monster statblock. 4 pages is probably to many for most people.

That being said, in general I really like A5e monster design and their take on spellcasting monsters. But at some point it does get to be to much.
 



dave2008

Legend
So 4 pages would be ok for the avatar of Orcus? Seems like a distinction without a difference.
The point I was making is that I would consider something like this for an end of the campaign battle. An Archlich is not that for me, so I wouldn't want to have to deal with a 3-4 page statblock to run one. That is the distinction I was making.
 

NotAYakk

Legend
It becomes a design ethos if you phrase it as 'Rulings over Rules'.
Sure, but when it is "throw everything into a bag and don't check how it works together" it is one thing, and "don't try to cover every corner case with rules" it is another.

They are, in fact, on opposite ends of a spectrum.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
You're comparing spell slots for players vs a DM having to keep track of 3-4 monsters with different abilities, some of which have spell slots as well. Novice DMs running a high-level one-shot like this Vecna one-shot are all but impossible in the old system. And many DMs on all social media have talked about how they feel they can finally comfortably use spellcasters as monsters now due to the new format.
There's no real difficulty in tracking 3-4 monsters with spells and abilities. You just write down what you have used if your memory isn't good enough to remember. You have the stat block and you have a quick note. Easy peasy.

If you want to argue that this is a preference thing and you like one format over another, that's one thing. To argue that it's difficult to keep track of a few spells used isn't really a solid argument, though.
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
The point I was making is that I would consider something like this for an end of the campaign battle. An Archlich is not that for me, so I wouldn't want to have to deal with a 3-4 page statblock to run one. That is the distinction I was making.
I think an arch-Lich is exactly the kind of enemy that makes a campaign ender, which of course is just a matter of taste. So here's what we really need -- a "campaign BBEG" template that we lay on top of the "adventure BBEG" level enemies.
 

dave2008

Legend
If you want to argue that this is a preference thing and you like one format over another, that's one thing. To argue that it's difficult to keep track of a few spells used isn't really a solid argument, though.
Because it isn't difficult for you, doesn't mean is easy for everyone. That is a very self-centered viewpoint. Not everyone has the same strengths and weakness. When someone tells you something is difficult for them, telling them "no, it is not," is pretty rude at the least. How about we listen and accept other's experiences.
 

dave2008

Legend
I think an arch-Lich is exactly the kind of enemy that makes a campaign ender, which of course is just a matter of taste. So here's what we really need -- a "campaign BBEG" template that we lay on top of the "adventure BBEG" level enemies.
It is a matter of taste, I think I made that clear though. For me, a lich is a minion master and having to deal with a 4 page statblock for the lich and all of its minion is probably to much. To be honest I would probably ditch the statblock and just improvise.

Also, I don't really want my end of campaign BBEGs to have more than a 1 page statblock if I can help it. I have made monsters with longer statblocks, but I wouldn't want to run them!
 

Split the Hoard


Split the Hoard
Negotiate, demand, or steal the loot you desire!

A competitive card game for 2-5 players
Remove ads

Top