There is one thing I hope they fix, and that's the formatting of the ability stat block. They should remove emphasis of the stat, since it won't be used most of the time.
Instead of writing
Str
18 (+4)
They should have written:
Str
+4 (18)
I'd expect to be artwork for most monsters somewhere in the book, especially those whose description is not intuitive (it's much more easy for the players to imagine a zombie or skeleton than a nothic, for instance).Is it possible there is artwork on the facing page?
Nah, I found it confusing as well.Am I the only one who would be much MORE confused by that?
My initial reading would be something like "Yay, I get to add four! Why is 19 in parenthesis? Is that a max or something?"
I'm very curious to see if the Invisible Stalker appears in MM1 5e and if the art is a throwback to 1e.
I fail to see how expecting a description in a starter set implies any of us are negative on 5e...... this is s very specific comment, not an over reaction and complaint about all of D&D. As many have said, if there is a description elsewhere, great.
I started playing D&D in 1978 when all we had was a copy of Judge's Guild Ready Ref Sheets; just stats and no flavour text (and certainly no Internet). I remember we were too young to even know what a dervish was. But boy did we play the crap out of it, and I'm still here X years afterwards. Just saying.
IT's a comment that I would like to have a couple of lines of physical description of monsters in the Bestiary that are supposed to be extra monsters that don't appear in the module.
Am I the only one who would be much MORE confused by that?
My initial reading would be something like "Yay, I get to add four! Why is 19 in parenthesis? Is that a max or something?"