You put together a really tight stat block. It’s tricky when presenting spellcasters in the conversation about “condensing” stat blocks because the go-see-X-Page-for-spell-description offloads TONS of space.This statblock is to simplify a more complex creature, here the Drow Favored Consort.
The official statblock says "Wizard". His Proficiency is legendary +6, yet the highest slot spell is Dimension Door 4. Possibly a Fighter/Wizard concept. I am arbitrarily rating him something like a Bladesinger Wizard at roughly level 18.
"Wizard 18" means use the Wizard spell list, with 18 spell points. The slot of the spell is its spell point cost. The statblock lists the slot level after each spell. Thus the 18 points can cast Dimension Door four times plus Shield twice, before running out of spell points. The DM can easily have the Consort cast different spells from a spellbook or personalize a particular Consort who has different spells prepared. The highest castable spell slot is half the max spell points. This Wizard concept is high enough level to cast slot 9 spells. (Half of 18 spell points is slot 9 spells.) The Mage Armor appears as an adjustment to the AC number.
Here too, "Perception" is a saving throw that keys off of Intelligence, thus also handles Intelligence checks, as well as discerning Illusion and Invisible. The Investigation serves as the skill. The Athletics proficiency also handles Acrobatic checks. Persuasion helps convey the Charisma of the concept.
View attachment 378778
I figure, if a particular spell is central to the monster concept, then stat it out in the statblock. Otherwise, even here for the Drow Favored Consort, the statblock has the Arcane Eruption as a go-to, and Shield, Fly, Dimension Door, and Darkness dont take too much thought, so the DM can conveniently play it.You put together a really tight stat block. It’s tricky when presenting spellcasters in the conversation about “condensing” stat blocks because the go-see-X-Page-for-spell-description offloads TONS of space.
For me, it gets back to the why I’m condensing stats - to make it easier to run at the table. Yeah that means being able to visually find info quickly & parse text smoothly… but I also think that means not being expected to reference another book/website for a monster feature/spell.
I want the essential info right there in the block.
If you saw my Ancient Green Dragon rewrite you’ll see I modestly condensed the stat block while even adding brief descriptions for key combat spells. For me that’s the cool move: Doing MORE (in terms of usability) with less space.
One more thing I just remembered, I don't bother differentiating between bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing any more, I just note it as physical if I note it at all, sometimes I don't using that as the default and just call out damage types that are different.
monster vs monster? Even then, kind of boring for the most part.Does it matter for any 5e PC side thing coming from a monster?
Skeletons and ice mephits have bludgeoning vulnerability. Rakshsasas have vulnerability to magic piercing weapons wielded by good creatures.
Does the weapon damage bludgeoning, slashing, piercing type matter in any other context?
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.Does it matter for any 5e PC side thing coming from a monster?
Skeletons and ice mephits have bludgeoning vulnerability. Rakshsasas have vulnerability to magic piercing weapons wielded by good creatures.
Does the weapon damage bludgeoning, slashing, piercing type matter in any other context?