Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 8731107" data-attributes="member: 20323">5e's desire for consistent/universal design in monsters & NPCs leads to some missed opportunities.For example, there's an entire type of monster which we might call "test/riddle givers" like sphinxes, crypt things, certain types of door monsters (grandfather plaque gargoyles), etc. Giving these kinds of monsters the same treatment as, say, an otyugh or a hobgoblin – while that might be traditionally how it has been done in D&D – doesn't actually reflect the difference in how these types of monsters are used in play. Two basic questions a GM needs answered about a "test/riddle giver" monster are (a) what is the test/riddle? and (b) what are the consequences for answering wrong? Rather than a huge stat block, it might be more helpful if the design focused on answering those two questions first and foremost, and then if there's room place a little stat block there.Similarly there's another type of monster which have the False Appearance trait, maybe we can call them "false monsters", including gargoyles, mimics, awakened trees, etc. The fundamental question for these monsters is, if it can't be noticed through conventional means / Perception, what are the signs of this monster's presence? what creative ways might the players use to detect it? Generally, these monsters don't have very interesting stat blocks – rather, the most interesting part, which is the lead up to and the "horrific reveal" itself, are left almost entirely up to the GM to sort out.Same thinking applies to the presentation of NPCs. I was listening to the Adventure Engineers series with Kelsey Dionne, and the host (forget the gentleman's name) mentioned how the NPCs in Waterdeep Dragon Heist are introduced with a mess of stat blocks and formulaic info that really doesn't help the DM portray those NPCs. That's definitely an issue I've seen in other 5e adventures – often the good info is there, but it's not streamlined or presented front and center (essentially, their writing buries the lead with NPCs).There was a recent interview Chris Perkins gave about the Spelljammer book, and talking about the monster book, he mentioned that Murder Comets came about because of a layout need for a 1-page monster between M and N. While I love the ideas behind the monster, and don't have any criticism there, and I know that layout challenges are real, I do think the top level managerial decision that "each monster must look so-and-so and be laid out such-and-such" is... it's the old model, but it does not (and I would argue never did) reflect/support how certain monsters are actually used at the table.</blockquote>

Verification