D&D 5E Radically shrinking stat blocks

[mearls]

The full caster class gets level+1 spell points. The spell cost is the slot itself. The highest slot possible is half the max spell points. So a level 5 caster has 6 points, can cast upto slot 3 spells, and Fireball costs 3 points. The spell points refresh after each rest (short or long).

Nifty! I like this approach and am going to look at using it in my games. I like that it makes spellcasting more of a menu of focused options. If I keep it to simple spells, I might even be able to summarize spells within the stat block.

 

[mearls]

So @SlyFlourish mentioned FATE-style aspects, so I took a pass at adding those to my orc stat block. Here's what I have:

Traits are keywords to help guide roleplay and they grant advantage to checks that take advantage of them and disadvantage to checks where they would be a hindrance. In this case, this orc is vigilant and cowardly. I'd give them advantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks and disadvantage on rolls against Intimidate attempts or fear effects.

As I toy with the concept, it feels like an easy way to give some texture to a specific NPC or a group of monsters without adding a bunch of rules text or special abilities.

 

[Zaukrie]

So @SlyFlourish mentioned FATE-style aspects, so I took a pass at adding those to my orc stat block. Here's what I have:
View attachment 378814
Traits are keywords to help guide roleplay and they grant advantage to checks that take advantage of them and disadvantage to checks where they would be a hindrance. In this case, this orc is vigilant and cowardly. I'd give them advantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks and disadvantage on rolls against Intimidate attempts or fear effects.

As I toy with the concept, it feels like an easy way to give some texture to a specific NPC or a group of monsters without adding a bunch of rules text or special abilities.

Mike, how often does damage type matter for a monster? Not that it takes up too much space, but there can't be more than 1 or 2 edge cases where it matters what damage a PC takes (and, let's face it, how often do we roll monster vs monster, and even most monsters it doesn't really matter).

 

[Quickleaf]

The Cat statblock is slightly tricky to simplify.

Here, the Fortitude saving throw represents both Strength and Constitution skill checks. The Cat is strong, athletic, and effective in combat attacks. However, its Carrying Capacity is Tiny proportional to its size.

Perception serves as a save that keys off of Intelligence, thus also represents Intelligence skill checks. The low number relates to its animal Intelligence. But it has "Senses" as a special trait that gives an alternate Perception number. The dichotomy means, the Cat is more likely to sensorily detect something, but is less likely to figure out what something unfamiliar is.

The Claws inflict 1 point of Slashing damage, and key off of Reflex, whence the +4 attack (Proficiency + Reflex) and 3 Slashing (1 + Reflex).



View attachment 378804

A few of those cats could definitely kill a commoner.

I think when your template starts producing the monster's Sensory info in multiple places/lines, it probably needs to be streamlined.

You're butting up against a variation of the "Angelic Weapons" issue. Rather than just changing the number to reflect your design, your stat block mentions Senses as a special trait and then redoes the Perception number. "Angelic Weapons" is a trait adding radiant damage to an attack which works in the same way. I wonder what the purpose is for these sorts of duplicated/redundant bits? Is it that we as the designers feel we need to justify our design to GMs who are going to forensically analyze the stats?

For example in the 2024 D&D stat blocks, we seem to have indication that they've removed anything like Keen Senses (advantage on Perception) and instead just increased the Perception score. I'm not sure WHY this change was made... maybe to keep down the number of rolls for common things like Perception?

 

[Yaarel]

A few of those cats could definitely kill a commoner.

Heh. Tradition!

I think when your template starts producing the monster's Sensory info in multiple places/lines, it probably needs to be streamlined.

I am still thinking about how best to stat the "Cat".

It is worth separating out the Senses, because not all animals have the same senses. Most animals arent especially observant, so a negative to the Perception is reasonable.

Meanwhile seeing something that is faint or obscure, doesnt necessarily mean one understands what one is looking at.

You're butting up against a variation of the "Angelic Weapons" issue. Rather than just changing the number to reflect your design, your stat block mentions Senses as a special trait and then redoes the Perception number. "Angelic Weapons" is a trait adding radiant damage to an attack which works in the same way. I wonder what the purpose is for these sorts of duplicated/redundant bits? Is it that we as the designers feel we need to justify our design to GMs who are going to forensically analyze the stats?

For example in the 2024 D&D stat blocks, we seem to have indication that they've removed anything like Keen Senses (advantage on Perception) and instead just increased the Perception score. I'm not sure WHY this change was made... maybe to keep down the number of rolls for common things like Perception?

I consider the Cat and certain other animals with preternatural senses as corner cases that are specific to the species.

For any canine species, including Wolf, I would go so far as to have the mechanics say, if it exists at all, the canine can Smell it within 5 feet or downwind from it. It wouldnt even be a check. A scent trail lasts roughly 7 days (2d6), unless dispersed by rain or strong winds.

 

[Voadam]

Yeah, very few monsters have a vulnerability to a specific type of physical damage and for those that do, it's very easy to adjudicate. If you have an axe, a treant takes double damage; a mace, skeletons and ice mephits take double damage.

Treant is one I missed where weapon type matters. They are actually a bit subtle as it is not quite a vulnerability to axes. They have vulnerability to fire and resistance to bludgeoning and piercing but not slashing axes.

I don't recall ever reading the Rakshasa vulnerability, it's interesting that it needs to be weilded by a good creature, that's one of the few times I've seen alignment matter in 5e.

This dates back to 1e "Rakshasas cannot be harmed by non-magical weapons, magical weapons below +3 do one-half damage, but hits by crossbow bolts blessed by a cleric kill them." My question to Gygax on the big thread here was what the origin story was for them as it sounded very specific and I had never read anything about that specific weakness.

He was inspired by an episode of Kolchack the Night Stalker where Kolchak kills one with a crossbow. I saw the series about 15 years ago but I cannot remember if there was a priest blessing in it and if so whether it was a Hindu or Christian priest. I remember on seeing the rakshasa episode thinking the cause of death was more just being shot by a crossbow bolt than a blessing piercing any theoretical defenses.

 

[cbwjm]

Treant is one I missed where weapon type matters. They are actually a bit subtle as it is not quite a vulnerability to axes. They have vulnerability to fire and resistance to bludgeoning and piercing but not slashing axes.

This dates back to 1e "Rakshasas cannot be harmed by non-magical weapons, magical weapons below +3 do one-half damage, but hits by crossbow bolts blessed by a cleric kill them." My question to Gygax on the big thread here was what the origin story was for them as it sounded very specific and I had never read anything about that specific weakness.

He was inspired by an episode of Kolchack the Night Stalker where Kolchak kills one with a crossbow. I saw the series about 15 years ago but I cannot remember if there was a priest blessing in it and if so whether it was a Hindu or Christian priest. I remember on seeing the rakshasa episode thinking the cause of death was more just being shot by a crossbow bolt than a blessing piercing any theoretical defenses.

Ah okay, I'd gone too far the other way with treants, no vulnerability just no resistance to physical damage from slashing weapons.

Interesting inspiration behind the Rakshasa weakness. I probably would have drawn the same conclusion as you (Rakshasa: "Crossbow bolts, one of my many weaknesses!"), but it does make for a more interesting weakness than just piercing weapons.

 

[Yaarel]

He was inspired by an episode of Kolchack the Night Stalker where Kolchak kills one with a crossbow. I saw the series about 15 years ago but I cannot remember if there was a priest blessing in it and if so whether it was a Hindu or Christian priest. I remember on seeing the rakshasa episode thinking the cause of death was more just being shot by a crossbow bolt than a blessing piercing any theoretical defenses.

Yeah, at least for 5e, this would be more like a "Fiend bane" magic weapon, or a magical ritual to create one. A specific ritual might require a bolt, but seems just as easy to require an arrow or a sword.


It seems like 5e 2014 adopted dividing the "Weapon damage type" into the subtypes Slash, Pierce, and Bludgeon, for a modular option to develop from it. For example, Chain armor might be resistant (or even immune?) to slashing. Maybe because of the priority of combat balance, this mod seems to have never materialized? As for now, when thinking thematically about damage types like Fire and Psychic, I tend to group together and think in terms of "Weapon". When assigning elemental themes, I primarily assign Cold to Water and Weapon to Earth, and to some degree both to both.

 

[Voadam]

It seems like 5e 2014 adopted dividing the "Weapon damage type" into the subtypes Slash, Pierce, and Bludgeon, for a modular option to develop from it. For example, Chain armor might be resistant (or even immune?) to slashing. Maybe because of the priority of combat balance, this mod seems to have never materialized? As for now, when thinking thematically about damage types like Fire and Psychic, I tend to group together and think in terms of "Weapon". When assigning elemental themes, I primarily assign Cold to Water and Weapon to Earth, and to some degree both to both.

Bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing were defined weapon stat damage categories in 2e and 3e but not 4e. It is possible 5e was bringing back 2e and 3e style and rejecting 4e stuff.

2e even had an optional AC adjustment for different armors versus different types of weapon attacks.

Before 2e some monsters had specific interactions with such but it was spelled out in the specific monsters and weapons were not specified as doing bludgeoning or whatever in stats. The 1e skeleton for instance states "Skeletons suffer only one-half damage from sharp and/or edged weapons (such as spears, daggers, swords). Blunt weapons such as clubs, maces, flails, etc. score normal damage."

 

[mearls]

Mike, how often does damage type matter for a monster? Not that it takes up too much space, but there can't be more than 1 or 2 edge cases where it matters what damage a PC takes (and, let's face it, how often do we roll monster vs monster, and even most monsters it doesn't really matter).

It matters somewhat. Mostly for creatures that an energy type defines, like a fire elemental. I think you can safely ignore types and resistances as long as you are upfront with the players. I don't think it makes for particularly good gameplay, unless the monster is a puzzle to solve.