D&D 5E Radically shrinking stat blocks

[Zaukrie]

For me, I wouldn't like that way.

There are times when a game element modifies a particular type of attack (melee or ranged) or a particular weapon. IMO, being able to more-quickly parse out which numbers change and which numbers don't and being able to do that from a cursory glance is more user friendly than the extra conciseness.

I don't understand your point. It's pretty clear it's +5 either way.

 

[Argyle King]

I don't understand your point. It's pretty clear it's +5 either way.

If an ally uses a spell or ability to give a bonus to only ranged attacks...

For me personally, having it separated out a little bit more is easier to work with in play.

I've also found that, when handing index cards to new players, have the different options broken into different lines helps avoid confusion.
(In the game I'm currently running, I can fit the majority of a character on a 3x5 index card.)

 

[mearls]

Inspired by this thread the work done by @Quickleaf and @SlyFlourish here is my own take on a reduced stat block. I've started with the orc, so a much simpler monster, but I also found that I could junk the six ability scores, saves, and skills by reducing down to three attributes that should look familiar to 3e and 4e players:

I also have played with tearing out extraneous words in action and attack types, along with needlessly restrictive rules for monster abilities. For instance, removing the restriction on the orc's bonus action movement does not in my opinion break or unbalance the mechanic. If anything, I think it makes it more useful and flavorful.

In this world, Fortitude covers all Strength and Constitution checks and saves. Reflex covers Dexterity, and Will covers Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. Whether that's easier or not... well, I'm giving it a try this week so I should have three sessions under my belt soon enough. At a glance, though, I like six values arranged into two rows of three as a base unit.

Lots of stuff, like languages, creature size, or creature type, either doesn't come up into play for me or is obvious to me based on context. I know that orcs are size Medium because I can look at the miniature on the table or just remember they are human sized. I'm not sure if that's true for most DMs, but it works for me.

Finally, the version of Darkvision above is my homebrew, simpler version. In my games I allow stealth in dim light, so this keeps Darkvision from shutting down stealth and makes light useful in dungeons.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Inspired by this thread the work done by @Quickleaf and @SlyFlourish here is my own take on a reduced stat block. I've started with the orc, so a much simpler monster, but I also found that I could junk the six ability scores, saves, and skills by reducing down to three attributes that should look familiar to 3e and 4e players:

View attachment 378704
I also have played with tearing out extraneous words in action and attack types, along with needlessly restrictive rules for monster abilities. For instance, removing the restriction on the orc's bonus action movement does not in my opinion break or unbalance the mechanic. If anything, I think it makes it more useful and flavorful.

In this world, Fortitude covers all Strength and Constitution checks and saves. Reflex covers Dexterity, and Will covers Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. Whether that's easier or not... well, I'm giving it a try this week so I should have three sessions under my belt soon enough. At a glance, though, I like six values arranged into two rows of three as a base unit.

Lots of stuff, like languages, creature size, or creature type, either doesn't come up into play for me or is obvious to me based on context. I know that orcs are size Medium because I can look at the miniature on the table or just remember they are human sized. I'm not sure if that's true for most DMs, but it works for me.

Finally, the version of Darkvision above is my homebrew, simpler version. In my games I allow stealth in dim light, so this keeps Darkvision from shutting down stealth and makes light useful in dungeons.

Initiative, Stealth and Perception being 1d20+Reflex in this case? Like, Perception is more or less a Reflex saving throw against Stealth (and vice-versa).

Question: Where does the +3 to damage comes from? Shouldn't it be +5 (+ Fort). I guess that's probably from 16 STR (+3) + Prof bonus in the original statblock? But it makes it harder to modify the monster if you dont know which bonus from the statblock you add to damage. Added bonus: if you add your Fortitude both to hit and damage, you dont have to repeat it twice in the attack description; just go with Melee attack +5, 1d12 slashing, with an explanation in the book that you add the attack modifier to both hit and damage roll.

And for flavor reason, I think I'd favor replacing the basic Attack with something like:
Orcish Brand (M): +5 for 1d12+3 (9) slashing
Cruel Barb (R 30/120): +5 1d6+3 (6) Piercing

 

[SlyFlourish]

Inspired by this thread the work done by @Quickleaf and @SlyFlourish here is my own take on a reduced stat block. I've started with the orc, so a much simpler monster, but I also found that I could junk the six ability scores, saves, and skills by reducing down to three attributes that should look familiar to 3e and 4e players:

View attachment 378704
I also have played with tearing out extraneous words in action and attack types, along with needlessly restrictive rules for monster abilities. For instance, removing the restriction on the orc's bonus action movement does not in my opinion break or unbalance the mechanic. If anything, I think it makes it more useful and flavorful.

In this world, Fortitude covers all Strength and Constitution checks and saves. Reflex covers Dexterity, and Will covers Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. Whether that's easier or not... well, I'm giving it a try this week so I should have three sessions under my belt soon enough. At a glance, though, I like six values arranged into two rows of three as a base unit.

Lots of stuff, like languages, creature size, or creature type, either doesn't come up into play for me or is obvious to me based on context. I know that orcs are size Medium because I can look at the miniature on the table or just remember they are human sized. I'm not sure if that's true for most DMs, but it works for me.

Finally, the version of Darkvision above is my homebrew, simpler version. In my games I allow stealth in dim light, so this keeps Darkvision from shutting down stealth and makes light useful in dungeons.

Cool idea!

I bet it could be shrunk further by omitting the speed of a monster unless its significantly faster or slower. I get your take on darkvision but I bet we could come up with some default vision for most monsters like Shadowdark has (monsters see in the dark, characters don't). That way one need only put in vision if it really matters.

I dig the idea of fort, reflex, and will to abbreviate saves but it does remove the edge cases where they use ability checks for things. But six full scores also doesn't seem required either. Something like Might, Speed, and Intellect might work to abbreviate the six ability scores into three.

For me, for improvising monsters, I can usually do it in my head. Sometimes they get their ability + proficiency bonus on a check or save if they're good at it. Sometimes its just a flat roll. Almost like FATE style aspects. Is the thing they're doing or saving against tied to the aspect of a monster? Then it's a trained ability check. Is it not? Then it's just a flat roll. It's not perfect but it makes for tiny stat blocks =)

CR 5 AC/DC 15 HP 95 Atk/Prof +7 DPR 35 Atks 3 × 1d6 + 9

(I love my keyboard macro)

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I like the idea.

Would it be simpler, perhaps, to keep saves/checks separate, but mark proficient saves with an asterisk? Or perhaps to have "+N/+S" for those things that have proficiency, where N is the bare modifier and S is the modifier with proficiency?

 

[Zaukrie]

It seems so unnecessarily complex to overly worry about saves and skills for monsters. I endorse what Mike has here. Also, I don't think the stack bonus needs to tie to player rules at all. Make them a reasonable number for their threat. 3e insistsnce that monsters follow the same rules as player characters really over complicated the game. All just my opinion, of course.

 

[Yaarel]

@Quickleaf, I love this thread!


For this statblock, "Perception" is a saving throw and keys off of Intelligence. Thus the Perception save represents Intelligence checks as well as general observation powers such as interacting with Illusions and Invisible creatures. Animals such as canines with an unusually powerful sense of smell, list it as a "skill" or a trait.

Meanwhile the Will save represents both Wisdom and Charisma checks. Fortitude is for both Strength and Constitution checks. Reflex is Dexterity checks. (Personally, I would also use Reflex for agile Athletic stunts, and let Fortitude be "brute strength" only.)

With these four saves, the stat block represents a wellrounded character, that can display many concepts. With the "5 Folks Band" tropes, Fortitude is the Big Folk, Reflex is the Rebel Folk, Perception is the Smart Folk and Will is the Heart Folk. The "lead singer" is wellrounded with decent scores in all four saves.

For my DM style, the Proficiency number is extremely important. I use skill checks to handle any kind of improvisational stunts, and these happen often. I can use the Proficiency number and add the number from whichever save seems to make the most sense thematically for the skill check. The Proficiency number is followed by the skills a creature is particularly good at, if any. The Proficiency also communicates what "tier" of power the creature is, and this helps me flavor the encounter. Proficiency +2 is "student" levels, college years challenges. Proficiency +4 is "master" levels, impacting a region. Proficiency +7 is "epic" levels impacting a planet.

 

[grimmgoose]

I mostly agree. I'd go one step further in that - outside of a few incredibly minor instances - Stats and Saves should be combined to a single number.

It would be cleaner to say that this Fire Giant's dex is +3, rather than saying the ATTRIBUTE is -1 but the SAVE is +3. Or that the Con is just simply +10. Separating it out is just bloat, where so little is gained.

I'm a big believer in that the statblock should make the monster easier to run at the table where it's going to come up 90% of the time: combat.

 

[Rabulias]

Shrinking stat blocks to gain space can be a worthy goal, but there is one thing I like about standardizing stat blocks that include standard entries: If a field is left out, like Size or Speed, one can be left wondering if it is intentionally left out or is it a typo? A rare case, but a reason I find complete stat blocks a good thing. It is also easier to compare two or more creatures at a glance if their main stats are all present.

With that said, I do think there is room for two different stat blocks. One, a standard, fuller "main entry" stat block that includes more detail and background of the creature, and intended to be used for game prep. The other would be a shorter, more concise stat block for use in an encounter, with only relevant information (though again, with a standard set of entries).