Published Adventures: Full Monster Stats or Book References?

[MatthewJHanson]

For those of you who buy published adventures, I'm wondering what you think about having all the monsters stats published in the adventure itself vs. having some of the encounters feature monsters published in the Monster Manuel and asking you to reference that.

Assume for this that we're talking about something like an orc warrior.

Thanks.

 

[OnlineDM]

Full monster stats. I say this from experience.

I wrote an adventure that I shared on my blog a couple of weeks ago. I had run a version of this adventure for my home game months ago and decided to formalize it as something to share. I then ran the adventure from the "published" version at my local store.

Not having the monster stat blocks right there was a huge pain in the butt. So, I added them in the revised version.

 

[Pour]

I am lazy when it comes to published adventures. If I'm running one, I want everything there for me, otherwise I'm usually putting in enough work where I might as well create my own material. Okay, that's an exaggeration... but I do like the convenience of the blocks right there.

I figure that must force 3rd party to make like-equivalents to WotC monsters, but it's worth it.

 

[KidSnide]

If I'm using a published adventure, I definitely want all the stab blocks in the text of the adventure. I think it's OK to have a pull-out reference that includes any monsters that appear over-and-over again, but it should all be in the text of the adventure.

-KS

 

[Dross]

It would not be a deal breaker for me, although everything else being equal I'll take ease of use over referencing other books.

There is one slight advantage to having references to MM1. Given that it is very likely the DM will at least have access to a MM1, more space can be devoted to the adventure or less tree felling can occur (at least for any paper copy).

 

[fba827]

while i can appreciate the fact that simply referencing the MM can reduce cost of production (and therefore lost sale price), in the end ... it is probably a minor enough price difference that is not worth what I consider a HUGE convenience.

Thus, I'd want the monster info included in the product itself rather than as a simple reference to another product.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

I'd be satisfied with book references as I transfer the monster stats into the Combat Manager anyway.

Come to think of it, transferring it is easier with from the DDI Compendium than typing all the stuff from plain text, so a reference is actually easier to use. Hmmh, what about a link in the PDF calling up the Compendium page?

But as we're talking PDFs here, there seems no big saving in production costs to be achieved, right? Perhaps collect the full statblocks at the end of or, better yet, in a separate PDF. The DM running it from the PDFs could easily call up the info if he wants it.

For reading the adventure a short hand notation would be cool. Something like Orc Painbringer (MM1, p. 192, level 8 brute). One can assay the enemy without using another source.

 

[delericho]

Full monster stats (at least as full as required in the adventure). That was one of the few things the Delve Format got right.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Definitely in the adventure. And I would hope most published adventures would have at least a few unique creatures.

 

[MerricB]

In the published adventure. Especially now, as you can't be certain that the DM will have access to the monster book you got the stats from.