No stat blocks in modules per the GSL?

[Zinovia]

I can understand WotC not wanting to allow wholesale republication of their critters from the MM, but not including the statblocks in a module is a hassle for a GM. We want the stats to be right there, because putting slips of paper in the MM and flipping back and forth between different entries in the middle of combat is annoying. Even in the course of creating individual adventures most DM's copy out the statblock from the MM and insert it (whether by hand or cut and paste) into their write-up.

Could we not have been better served by a restriction that amounts to "You can publish WotC monster stat blocks only as part of an adventure, not in a collection of monsters." Restrict it to X number of monsters published in a work, with further stipulation that the work be at least 70% (or whatever) original material. I know defining an "adventure" or a "module" can be a little vague, but that's where the lawyerese comes in. There should be a way to define those things without letting people abuse the intention of the rule.

I'm sad that they won't let 3rd party publishers include stat blocks for anything in the MM. If D&DI had a way of printing up a collection of stat blocks for you, then maybe it would work, but it still entails more work for the DM than just including them in the module. Bah.

 

[Eytan Bernstein]

I can understand WotC not wanting to allow wholesale republication of their critters from the MM, but not including the statblocks in a module is a hassle for a GM. We want the stats to be right there, because putting slips of paper in the MM and flipping back and forth between different entries in the middle of combat is annoying. Even in the course of creating individual adventures most DM's copy out the statblock from the MM and insert it (whether by hand or cut and paste) into their write-up.

Could we not have been better served by a restriction that amounts to "You can publish WotC monster stat blocks only as part of an adventure, not in a collection of monsters." Restrict it to X number of monsters published in a work, with further stipulation that the work be at least 70% (or whatever) original material. I know defining an "adventure" or a "module" can be a little vague, but that's where the lawyerese comes in. There should be a way to define those things without letting people abuse the intention of the rule.

I'm sad that they won't let 3rd party publishers include stat blocks for anything in the MM. If D&DI had a way of printing up a collection of stat blocks for you, then maybe it would work, but it still entails more work for the DM than just including them in the module. Bah.

You can always create your own goblin NPCs or make your own goblin and put it in the adventure. You just can't copy the stat block from the MM.

 

[AstroCat]

This is really going to hurt 3rd part modules. I think this is terrible, and will pretty much stop me from buying any non-WOTC modules. Which sucks, because I am a big Goodman Games fan. Sad

 

[am181d]

Really? Sticking a bookmark in the MM is too much trouble now? Jotting down some notes on a piece of paper? When I was a boy...

 

[JDJblatherings]

I can understand WotC not wanting to allow wholesale republication of their critters from the MM, but not including the statblocks in a module is a hassle for a GM.

The stats are pretty much the entire MM writeup.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Really? Sticking a bookmark in the MM is too much trouble now? Jotting down some notes on a piece of paper? When I was a boy...

Yeah, but it's *faster* without page-flipping.

Cheers, LT.

 

[ExploderWizard]

This is WOTC's way of making sure that 3rd party adventures are largely advertisements for the core books.

Step1) Design a game that centers on combat encounters.

Step2) Write a GSL that prevents 3rd parties from including "official" stats in thier published adventures.

Step3) Profit

pure brilliance

 

[Hawke]

You can't even cite the page number - that's REALLY annoying... especially for the MM. I mean, I can understand they may wish to revise their work and alter the page numbers, but with the format of the MM and the one monster on a page and so much white space I can't imagine they could alter it so much as to mess with the page numbering.

 

[jgbrowning]

Yeah, but it's *faster* without page-flipping.

Cheers, LT.

Not only that it also helps with combat conceptualization and with dealing with issues on the fly. Having all the things that can be done by all creatures in the combat on a single page helps locate ability synergies. Given 4e's encounter design principles many encounters will have three or more differing critters.

joe b.

 

[jeffh]

Considering this is the way *most* modules have been done, whether you're talking about the 3rd edition era or the classic 1st edition and BECMI adventures, this is a complete non-issue. You have to things exactly the way people have been doing them all along, boo hoo.