Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 9448394" data-attributes="member: 20323">Thank you for generously sharing some of your team's work as CC resources, Mike! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I've been following the TotV/Black Flag monster design, and I see some nice innovations alongside carrying traditional design choices over from 5e that lead to stat block bloat. I thought I'd take a backstab at a re-write of the Cultist Fanatic...[ATTACH=full]378428[/ATTACH]Key changes - probably obvious to you, but I'll spell them out for clarity's sake...<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Tried to match formatting pretty closely to make it as close to apples-to-apples as I could.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Condense the basic stats (HP, AC, Speed, Senses, Stealth, Languages). There's an argument to leave white space here for hand-tracking HP with scribbled notes.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Merging Perception &amp; Senses, with the philosophy NOT to present blank lines just cause it adheres to the proscribed template.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Avoiding repetition (e.g. Resistant Dark Devotion + Dark Devotion, or Unholy Weapons + fire/necrotic damage to dagger). I think the theory is &quot;repeat important things so GMs don't miss it&quot; – and also &quot;thwart players/GMs who'd interpret the necrotic/fire as magical properties of dagger that PCs can loot&quot; (which might be solved with a Treasure/Loot section of the overall monster entry explaining it's just a dagger). I experience an opposite effect with significant repetition in stat blocks, where it's just more text lines I need to sort through (whereas long-form writing like an adventure, repetition makes more sense to me).</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Avoiding redundant text baked into 5e's original presentation (e.g. Multiattack redundant language).</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Shrink action text without necessarily adhering to complete sentence structure. Controversially remove &quot;damage&quot; from attacks/action and instead just list the &quot;damage type.&quot;</li>
</ol></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 9448394, member: 20323"] Thank you for generously sharing some of your team's work as CC resources, Mike! :) I've been following the TotV/Black Flag monster design, and I see some nice innovations alongside carrying traditional design choices over from 5e that lead to stat block bloat. I thought I'd take a backstab at a re-write of the Cultist Fanatic... [ATTACH type="full"]378428[/ATTACH] Key changes - probably obvious to you, but I'll spell them out for clarity's sake... [LIST=1] [*]Tried to match formatting pretty closely to make it as close to apples-to-apples as I could. [*]Condense the basic stats (HP, AC, Speed, Senses, Stealth, Languages). There's an argument to leave [I]white space [/I]here for hand-tracking HP with scribbled notes. [*]Merging Perception & Senses, with the philosophy NOT to present blank lines just cause it adheres to the proscribed template. [*]Avoiding repetition (e.g. Resistant Dark Devotion + Dark Devotion, or Unholy Weapons + fire/necrotic damage to dagger). I think the theory is "repeat important things so GMs don't miss it" – and also "thwart players/GMs who'd interpret the necrotic/fire as magical properties of dagger that PCs can loot" (which might be solved with a Treasure/Loot section of the overall monster entry explaining it's just a dagger). I experience an opposite effect with significant repetition in stat blocks, where it's just more text lines I need to sort through (whereas long-form writing like an adventure, repetition makes more sense to me). [*]Avoiding redundant text baked into 5e's original presentation (e.g. Multiattack redundant language). [*]Shrink action text without necessarily adhering to complete sentence structure. [I]Controversially[/I] remove "damage" from attacks/action and instead just list the "damage type." [/LIST] [/QUOTE]

Verification