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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tzarevitch" data-source="post: 6376580" data-attributes="member: 1792">1. Most spells can be summarized in less than a line. A couple may take 2 or may be too complex to summarize. Your CR 4 wizard will take maybe 12 lines, and your CR6 wizard might take 16. Unless you are statting out an entire wizard's guild it won't take "several pages."  Even if you were statting out an entire wizard's guild, the spells will overlap and it won't take "several pages."2. How exactly would it cut down on story content? They are two separate things. Unless you are assuming these things are written with a word count limit of some sort, in which case, where are you getting that?3. The vitals of a spell don't really need to take more than a line. The DM doesn't need the fluff. For quick operation the DM only needs a couple of stats such as range, area, damage, and saving throw. I'm not sure what you are arguing here.  You are saying that weapons are simple but then you argued they have special abilities and are therefore not simple. Also, spell blocks DO change more than weapon blocks do. Attack spells alone have two types of attack mechanisms, up to 6 types of saving throws, and several different types of durations, actions, targeting effects and scaling mechanics, and this is without going into fluff like components. The DM can guess what a weapon does pretty handily without a lot of help, if you are unfamiliar with a particular spell you HAVE to stop play and go look it up. That is more reason why a quick-read line spell line for creatures would be helpful.That just means that the summary he proposed needs improvement. You just need to have a standardized system of notation like shorthand, and you place key of the abbreviations somewhere in the PHB. After that is easy. Most spells take less than a line. Shocking grasp has a couple of non-standard things so it wraps onto a second line. For some spells like Prismatic Spray, you may just have to say "see PHB p.XX" after special if the special effects are longer than a second line. Most of the spells which you can't easily summarize are non-combat spells though. They don't need to be summarized in a combat stat block. Fireball: L3; CT:1A; R: 150'; AoE: 30' radius sphere; Save: Dex 1/2; Dam: 8d6 Fire; Scale: +1d6/lvl; Special: none.  Shocking Grasp: L0; CT: 1A; R: Touch-Attack; Save: No; Dam: 1d8 lightning; Scale: +1d8 5th, 11th, 17th lvl; Special: Advantage to attack if target wears metal; target hit can't take reactions until start of next turn. 1. Again, where are you getting that a couple of extra lines increases cost to the consumer or reduces content? If they improve the players' ability to use the product I don't think WotC would object to adding a few more lines. They wasted enough text in the spell description section of the PHB that it is pretty clear they aren't that concerned about word or page counts. 2. If Hoard of the Dragon Queen is any indication, monster stat blocks come in the appendix, not in the story. There is no reason that would affect the flow of the story in any way. 3. By your reasoning there is no reason to put the monster stat blocks in any adventure either. They would also break up the story, add cost and reduce content. You can also just look them up on the monster manual just as easily as you can look the spell up.</blockquote>

Verification