D&D 5E Spells in Stat Blocks are Terrible

[Savage Wombat]

While I'm a supporter of spell lists in general, I have to admit that this is a Starter Kit for new players, as [MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION] pointed out. And they don't know what Burning Hands does.

Seems to me that this is the point where the module's designer needs to limit his monster choices to ones without spells as much as possible.

 

[Thaumaturge]

Seems to me that this is the point where the module's designer needs to limit his monster choices to ones without spells as much as possible.

Like 3/15-20?

I voted "no" in the poll.

EDIT: Part of why I like spells in stat blocks is it allows the NPC more flexibility. The climactic encounter of Legacy of the Crystal Shard involves a person who can cast. I looked at the NPC's stat block a few times. I always glossed over the presence of dispel magic. In the end, dispel killed a PC, because it ended... a very necessary spell. If the designers had stuck to one or two powers, they, likely, wouldn't have placed a dispel, which wouldn't have given me the needed encounter flexibility.

But I understand your concerns about page turning.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Obryn]

After playing a lot of 4E, I'm quite ready to go back to spells in stat blocks. There are some major advantages with the system, of which the main one is that it gives the creature versatility.

One of the problems I had with 4E was that monsters were very limited in what they could do. Typically they had one main attack and one special attack. The trouble came when the players did something to negate the special attack - at that point, they lost most of their effectiveness. Having a list of spells allows monsters more versatility depending on the situation. A monster that can cast thunderwave, web and fireball is more interesting than one that only thunderwaves.

Of course, I also detest having to memorize hundreds of spells to use them with monsters... but, with any luck, most monsters will stick to a relatively small list of spells which we'll memorize easily because they're used so much.

The things I really wanted eliminated from monster stat blocks - and doesn't appear in 4E or 5E - were feats. Feats are tremendously more obscure than spells, and are a major pain in running 3E and PF.

One minor benefit of having monsters use spells is that, as the DM, I get to read spell descriptions rather than just taking my players' word for what spells do...

Cheers!

I'm not really seeing how my 2nd point is at all incompatible with what you're saying here.

For example, you could provide capsule descriptions of spells that are deemed likely to see in-combat use, and then put the rest into a list in a "this is the other stuff this dude can do" fashion with less detail.

(Even though I super-duper-double-dog dislike that a "list of interesting noncombat stuff this dude can do" should be equivalent to a "list of spells.")

 

[JeffB]

I am with ya Obryn. 13th Age and 4e do it right. I always cringe when I am running OD&D/Clone or have picked up a Pathfinder module to run and have to start referencing other books..

Drives me nuts with Demons, NPC spellcasters, etc., that may have several spells or spell like effects going on.

 

[SigmaOne]

This, in a game made in 2014, is pretty darn close to a deal-breaker for me on its own, and combined with everything else I'm iffy on, my desire to run Phandelver as an interlude for my group is pretty well plummeting. I've seen how 13A and 4e work with self-contained stat blocks and I just don't want to go back.

Then perhaps this belongs in the /ragequit thread. If you were that uncertain about your interest in 5e, you should have checked against all your "deal-breakers" and "near deal-breakers" before buying it. You could have asked here, and you could have canceled your order. The box has been out for over a week. As it is, it's probably not too late to return it for a refund or credit.

 

[Zaukrie]

I too am a fan of all the data with the monster. Heck, having to page back to the monsters was annoying, let alone then paging to the spells

 

[mips42]

IMHO Spells are fine for monsters if there's a reason for it (Ogre Mage comes immediately to mind) and, I would also agree that a brief summary is helpful. EG: Flaming Lips Target one creature; +4 to hit; 2d6+2 fire damage, dc15 con save ends, everything tastes like mutton for 1d6 days.
I want this spell now, darnit.

 

[Pentegarn]

I didn't purchase the Starter Set, as 5th edition isn't what I'm after. I did watch an unboxing on youtube, however, when I was making my final decision whether to buy or not.

On this subject, though I prefer monsters and NPC's use spells as they did in past editions, I do not like the return to 3rd edition style monster appendixes. This is one of the things I hated about 3rd edition. I feel a monster should be presented in the book, where it's encountered, and reprinted if needed if encountered multiple times. That, or the appendix should be separate from the module. The same can be said for maps.

I don't mind having separate books open beside me to glance at. But I hate having to mark different pages of the module and constantly flip back and forth from point to point to glean a detail about a monster or room while trying to DM. If monsters and maps were kept in separate booklets, I could simply glance at the map or monster, while remaining on point in the module where the PCs are located.

 

[Obryn]

Then perhaps this belongs in the /ragequit thread. If you were that uncertain about your interest in 5e, you should have checked against all your "deal-breakers" and "near deal-breakers" before buying it. You could have asked here, and you could have canceled your order. The box has been out for over a week. As it is, it's probably not too late to return it for a refund or credit.

I don't think this is a "ragequit."

Besides, I like to be educated about new stuff so I can talk about it. I'm not canceling my PHB pre-order either; this just means I'm not looking forward to trying it out as much.

 

[Mouseferatu]

[MENTION=100714]Pentegarn[/MENTION],

Apropos of nothing, "Pillars" was easily one of my favorite D&D CYOA books when I was a kid. I must've run through it a few dozen times. Thanks for sparking the memory.