The Perfect D&D Stat Block Doesn't Exi... 

SUPPORT THE WANDERING TAVERN ON KICKSTARTER: www.kickstarter.com/projects/homieandthedude/the-wandering-tavern?ref=d0ayk6

I think your Goblin Boss stat block is the best of the group, it’s clean and clear. Wake me up when this man misses

One thing I really like in the wordier stat blocks is the reminder text, people often give yugioh text boxes a lot of shit for being wordy and hard to read, and the only actual issue I have with them is that there's no sorting on the text its just a blob of words, but if you've read enough yugioh cards you can recognise key repeated phrases and types of effects and what they mean to skim read a card and know what it does, reminder text and stuff like that in stat blocks is similar, there if needed, but if its well cordoned off, can be otherwise ignored to focus on key information.

ADHD commenter from the last vid! Gotta say having proficiency bonus next to ability scores is such an AMAZING change. As a player, this would make rolling for things like familiars or beast companions SO MUCH EASIER. (my ADHD brain would often lose track of it on the stat block) Love the disposition section as well, it provides a good guideline, especially for newer DMs who could struggle with improv-ing characters. As for the Resistances/Immunities, there's probably no good way to lay those out without it taking up a ton of space, but I'd much prefer the readability of a table over the current list format.

I think the stat block can be changed if it didn’t give Ability Scores, and instead had something like +2 as they pair Ability Modifiers paired with Ability *Saves*. I think there could be a tiny glossary/guide for maybe like just 5-10 terms or formatting shortcuts (such as multiattack, the “basic save” rules like from PF2E, and senses). Enough to speed up reading and saving space while not overwhelming a new GM. That saved space can be used for meaningful text such as flavor, objectives, mindsets or objectives, etc. Also yes! Vastly prefer the table for resistance/immunity/vulnerability. I also wonder if a slot for +Adv/Dis for Conditions can also be set within that Conditions immunities list, like an “Affinities” list like in Fabula Ultima.

Well now I just purchased Flee Mortals! lol

I don’t think you’re an idiot at all. I think that the smaller stat block structures are written with the author’s context implied, rather than directly stated. And the thing about implications is that perfectly knowledgeable people can sometimes miss them, or fail to convey them. That’s a challenge that you have to deal with when publishing stuff for general use. To me, the exercise of taking a large stat block and making it smaller for your own notes will be generally more useful than trying to minimize the size of an official or published stat block. That way you get to decide what you need to have at a glance, and you get to format it however you want. Your disposition and proficiency bonus placements are very clever, btw! I like them a lot!

I love the addition of disposition! Especially for bosses or other names NPCs.

I really like your proposed fix for resistance and immunity. I think the only time it's problematic are when a creature has a bunch of things in one column but no others, like many condition immunities but no damage immunity or resistance. And to be fair, that's already problematic in the stat blocks, so it's no worse

one thing I want them to add is a new term that means 'bludgeoning piercing and slashing damage' so that monsters that resist or are immune to all three of them, which is almost always the case if a monster resists any of them, don't have to have it listed every time. something like 'physical damage'. so the Lich is immune to poison and nonmagical physical damage.

That's not even my revised goblin boss stat block. That was my "regular" goblin. Anyway, my goal was leave out default info. Something which 5e already does in several places on all stat blocks, but people don't notice it or don't question it because they're just used to it. For example, a dnd 5e stat block doesn't say "Speed 30 ft Walk" only "Speed 30 ft" -- is that fly? swim? climb? Is that an inconsistency that a new GM could never understand? No, it doesn't say "walk" because the 'professional designers' just assume that the reader (even a new GM!) knows they mean walking speed without putting it in the block. That's also why a standard 5e stat block doesn't say "to hit: 1d20+3" just "to hit: +3". Again, it assumes that even a brand new GM knows to roll 1d20 to hit. An interesting one though: they give the range of darkvision (which makes no sense whatsoever based on how vision actually works by the way), but they leave out that darkvision is only in black and white, AND that darkvision still means you have disadvantage on perception checks in the dark-- which is a rule even most experienced GMs get wrong all the time! So maybe that should be spelled out on every stat block with darkvision? The point is, you cannot put the whole PHB in every stat block, and while the typical dnd 5e block gets the job done, it's not perfect. My inclination is that new and vet GMs should trust their instincts for what is fun to their players over what a stat block says, every single time. So having a lot of text on a block just gets in the way of that, and it even creates counterintuitive rules like an arbitrarily short cutoff distance for nightvision, or not being able to command an ally that can't see you, even if they can hear you. Ultimately my preference is that D&D comes from imagination (kids having fun playing make believe goblin battles without stat blocks), not rule books.

Shifting Proficiency Bonus to be in-line with the ability scores is a good change. The table of Resistances, etc will never be an efficient use of space unless the number of Resistances, Immunities, and Vulnerabilities are symmetric for each monster. If the statblock is laid out even more like a table instead of a word doc like the MM, I could see merit in moving the column of Condition immunities to the right of the Traits section. Packing that grab-bag of information into a statblock in a good format is really hard. I know the MCDM team strained against the 5e standard statblock for a while until they made the changes you noted (and including getting rid of spell lists in favor of spell abilities and a small Utility Spells section), ultimately the demand to keep most of the 5e natural language style won out. (I'm really happy that Save Ends made it into the Flee Mortals final design, it's so much cleaner as rules text.) Thanks for the video!

Great video! I really like your version of the stat block. A table for damage resistances, immunities, vulnerabilities and condition immunities is a great idea! Though perhaps you wouldn't need to include vulnerabilities column if the creature has no vulnerabilities. Same for the other 3. Just include the columns you need in it? IDK, that's just my two cents. Anyways, I really enjoy your approach to this whole conversation.

The Shadowdark stat block needs more than just commas. It would also need semicolons to replace certain commas so that the new commas don't become confusing. With minimal changes, this is how I would approach fixing it with your comments in mind: AC 14 (Chainmail), HP 20; ATK 1 Spear (close/near), +3 Hit (1d6 Prc); Spd near; S+2, D+1, C+2, I-1, W+0, Ch+1; Algn C; Lv 4 It's slightly longer, but the abbreviations are more clear and the semicolons break up the distinct sections.

I really like your proposed way of listing Damage Resistances/Immunities and Condition immunities. It’s the easiest thing for me to misinterpret or gloss over when I’m looking at a stat block. Well that and spells.

the table for resistances, immunities and so on is an incredibly good idea. i was thinking of maybe also color coding the different columns, so you immediately know where to look for immunities, resistances or vulnerabilities. i was also thinking to maybe include clipart for the different damage types, since that would save space and maybe help people with focus or vision problems to miss a word in a long list. but i feel like those clip arts would need to be established throughout the game.

I LOVE your version of it. Some improvements needed for condition immunities and damage resistances and we're set

Great - like your version for the books - I make a little reference one like bob’s for my notes, but that’s only useful once I understand the basic one

What Bob did was write in short hand with his stat block. The issues with that came up when something new was encountered, enough said.

Love the vid so far! Glad i joined the discord to get notified!

For your steel predator block, I'd cut the vulnerabilities column (as it isn't needed--other stat blocks might want to keep it), and split the condition immunities into two columns to maximize the space used. Otherwise, I really like this design. I also really prefer traits as a subsection, and the prof. bonus on the side.

Liking your presentation and vibes. I'm definitely going to check out the rest of your channel

For Bob's stat block, I think the strength save on the goblins could be clarified not with a comma, but with putting the STR first, since it follows natural language (at least for english), and would become: STR DC 11+X. Also if you are reading it out, it tells the player what information to find while you read out the DC (if you do). Additionally I would prefer if saves was clarified, since DCs also apply to ability checks.

Hello amazing video as always. Hope you reach 10k soon you deserved it.

OO I am LOVING the table approach to resistances. Definitely gonna use something like that if I ever publish stat blocks again

what spells and effects reference ability scores? i'll do a more detailed search but ehhh also though some may argue it adds clutter, icons for resistances and immunities could work in addition to the words.

i just think you could do a lot with symbology, having the quick reference every 2 to 3 pages and just swords and other symbols to convey things like “to hit” “one target” etc.

So am I the only one who wishes "advantage on saves against certain conditions" would be part of the whole, you know, RESISTANCES AND IMMUNITIES TO DAMAGE AND CONDITIONS? Like call it Condition Advantage, or after the immunities, give a semi-colon followed by "advantage against _". I hate that if I have an NPC who is, say, immune to being frightened, that it's listed in a completely different place from if they ALSO had advantage against being charmed.

apparently im first even tho you commented 9 hours ago, but jokes aside thanks for another quality vid that keeps my thirst for content away

I do have some feedback actually. The change to damage resistances being a chart is essentially a change from vertical to horizontal formatting, which is not a significant improvement since stat block information is organized by lines, and switching to columns is weird. However I do appreciate that it makes it clear when enemies don't have resistances or vulnerabilities. It's particularly easy to miss when a creature does have vulnerabilities because they're so rare. For me, I also have a visual problem, in particular my eye muscles struggle to move my eyes so they move very slowly. If the ability scores were sectioned off from each other with vertical lines or further spaced from each other it would be much easier to at a glance put the intelligence score to the listed number. As it is now, when i need to know a creatures int score i look to the right most number and count to 3, even if i find the intelligence number at a glance when the ability scores are so close together i'm not comfortable in knowing that if i look down from the text that says INT that the first number I see would be the intelligence score and not the wisdom score especially in the left page of a physical book which curls up from the books spine. Guidelines are kinda necessary if you ever have to look down to find information since we aren't generally use to reading top to bottom. The proficiency bonus cramping the horizontal spacing makes that problem a bit worse, but the line separating it from charisma means i have no problem starting with my eyes on charisma so if the ability scores were separated off physically it would be much easier For similar reasons, I would always appreciate putting the modifier or the ability scores separated vertically instead of being right next to each other. Especially if there isn't even a space to separate them. If there's not space for an additional line bellow the modifier a subscript would also work. The fact they are only separated by parenthesis and a plus with no space, and visually treated the score as equally important if not more important than the modifier when they're niche use at best is part of the reason why one would consider removing them, if removing them isn't an option there are still potential avenues to make it clearer which is which at a glance with minimal thinking. Like a subscript. Speaking of subscripting information that you can't get rid of but is niche and has to be written next to other information. Armor source could be a subscript, as well as the hit dice to HP, and passive perception, though PP deserves it's own line because it is just not the same thing as everything else in the "senses" line. I appreciate the shift of all nonbolded text before the traits being black instead of red. It really adds a lot more clarity to what you are looking at especially when damage types in particular could appear in one of 3 places. Non bolded red font just isn't that fun to read from a screen if the resolution is remotely bellow average, and having more clarity between labels and info is helpful. The colons are also helpful. In fact, i'd like to see some consistency in the use of colons in the Traits and Actions sections and not just the statistics section.

Thought that I had. Would it be a logical step to move Senses and Languages into the Traits section, as they have more in common with that part of the character then the more stat based information around it? Also, in the way you've broken out immunities, etc, you might be able to put the skill bonus beneath each ability score?

Great analysis. I do like your Damage/Condition Resistances/Immunities section. It's much easier for me to parse a vertical list than one in a block of text. Saving space is a good consideration, but I don't think it's as important as scan-ability and visual flow, in my experience at least. Though I suppose when printing a physical book it's more important... At any rate, I think Saves could get the same treatment, with the save bonus underneath each ability, for example, if it's different. Abbreviated skill names and bonuses could work the same way. Fun topic!

Nice work! I like your stat block. Add a bit for loot and you're golden.

Great video! I prefer stat blocks that are shorter but also with clearly segmented sections that can be easily referenced depending on what I need from them in the moment. As such, I REALLY support the loot section. As for how to make it more clearly evident that a piece of loot is assumed to be equipped, I suggest adding a (e) after the loot it is using.

I appreciate the MM stat blocks (probably the best formatting for stats D&D has used) but my notes that I write for running the game closely resembles Bob’s proposed stat block. It can fit on an index card and everything included is meaningful for me.

I think about one thing about when making a "perfect" stat block is to show how the most complicated stat block would look different. Like, as of now, 5e stat blocks don't list Lair Actions nor Regional effects which are very important when running higher level encounters. I totally agree on the movement of CR and EXP to the top which I've done with all my stat blocks too! No point in putting them their when they don't have an effect within the encounter, this also makes it easier to find and reference when encounter planning as all the CRs are list at the top rather than in the middle! An Issue I think with the table format is that there is a lot of wasted space when there is no data like that empty "Immunity" Column, which is not efficient. As of now, if there is no damage Immunities then it wouldn't be mentioned at all, which is a good design. But I do have to agree it's the part that is most easily skipped and I've run encounters where I completely missed important damage resistances. One of the worst issues with the damage resistances and immunities is "Bludgeoning, Piercing, and Slashing from Non Magical Attacks"... Also, for me at least, I prefer that most monsters to not have a Bonus Action unless they will consistently use them like Nimble Escape or Hide as a BA. It's often forgotten when I play and missing a whole Bonus Action could change the entire encounter.

I *do* like the immunities/resistances more in columns than in lists, I *literally* always glaze over the giant lists, and they're a pain to sort through for the things I want. The only issue is that there are *too many* Conditions! This is more of a game design issue, and not a Stat Block design issue though, so it's not likely to change. In the mean time, maybe two columns for condition immunities?

What i do is just look at the stat block once and guess, its never served me wrong before!

Hey, I was offhandedly mentioned!

I like the table for condition immunities. I think the long form stat blocks should be printed in all the books, one of the selling points is number of pages right? However, digital layouts are easy, we could have, Concise, Expanded, Mixed, or even Custom layouts. There is no reason a digital layout needs to be static, in printed material I would error on the side of cluttered, at least if the content is intended for newer DMs.

I really like the idea of a table based resistance/immunities section. That part always blurs together for me. But alternatively, it is also in the design of the monsters, a vrock has 6 resistances, and I don't see how any of them make thematic sense, they are just kind of slabed on there. Just remove the resistances and give it more hit points.

I wonder if colour coding could help readability instead of headings, i.e. red for actions, blue for bonus actions, green for passive traits. Though then there is the accessibility issue for colourblind people and it would affect design neatness. I would be cool to see stat block reviews and ideas of changes for other games such as Pathfinder, Starfinder, Call of Cthulhu, Vampire the Masquerade, etc. Though I guess D&D gets more views so I don't expect that.

While I genuinely really like what you've done with your stat block, I do see a few visual design elements that could be streamlined or moved. I'm also curious why you removed "Can't speak" from the Steel Predator. I feel like that's important information to have given that a companion creature who can talk is much more versatile than one who can not lol. Disposition - Unsure if this should be a thing. Usually 5e stat blocks in the MM have flavor text below them which helps a DM determine how to run the creature. Even in modules, a creature's disposition is usually described in the scenario of which you find them. Furthermore, I believe alignment may include some disposition elements in it, so I feel like this is adding a line that could ultimately be redundant. CR & XP - Love this addition. There is empty space and now it's being used without crowding anything. I also like the support tag being listed here. This little box could be a great addition if someone were to ever turn monster stat blocks into cards because it helps organize things at a glance. I do think you should relegate a line for CR & XP then tags. I could see a world where having up to 3 tags in their own dedicated space would be consistent without crowding out bigger XP numbers or CR. Prof bonus - The tiniest nit-pick ;P. The attribute section is weird because it's the only part of the block where the text is centered drawing attention to itself. Adding prof off to the right side feels like it disrupts this flow, but given how you've added a similar box for CR/XP, it feels consistent within this iteration of the design. I both dislike and love this, thus am just pointing it out. Conditions/immunities - A table doesn't work. It's visually distracting and breaks the overall flow of the stat block. It also doesn't seem to save much space at the cost of just being readable by line. I do however applaud how you have organized it and appreciate the subcategories. I shudder to think of a world in which condition resistances is added to the current jumble of word salad lol. Any who, I think keeping things as line items is good. It could be slightly improved maybe by taking a note from the attribute section and centering the text into it's own section so the eye is drawn towards how important this information is, but overall I don't know if that's needed. Just removing the words "from non-magical attacks" as the 2024 is hinting towards will save quite a bit of space and could justify using a "justified" formatting to allow the digital nature of the text to give each listed item it's own space and prevent it from being hard to read. Other than that, I appreciate the actions section (including the double post ^_^) and your overall presentation. This was a fun series of videos to binge and I hope they get the attention of WoTC as they prepare to make the new blocks for the 2024 versions. Thanks, and see you around in TM's Discord!

Myself, personally, as someone experienced with D&D I would love a more compressed stat block. Listing abilities such as "Nimble Escape" and "Flyby" without having to describe what they mean everytime. I would also like to see resistances and vulnerability listed with icons to reduce space and put them all in a single line (kinda like BG3 i guess). Alternatively, something that TCGs use, is that they become keywords. Creatures like goblins have their nimble escape trait explained, but creatures such as the goblin boss don't. That way the DM learns while using the smaller more basic monsters, and bigger and more complex monsters get their word count reduced. On digital, those traits could be only the names, while hovering over them would allow to see their meaning.

Why are these goblins always so jacked? They don’t skip any day at the gym.

In defense of the BWB stat block, To hit bonus (weapon damage) has been used as the format for attacks in stat blocks since AD&D.

Since some damage resistances/vulnerabilities/immunities have qualifiers, such as silvers, nonmagical, etc; I prefer to see them written out in plain language, as opposed to the table/chart. The chart doesn't make long lists more readable, and feels like the empty areas become wasted space. Otherwise, I love the layout. I would go on to add a loot listing under the reactions section or above the ability scores (near AC, since some of the loot is usually worn protection).

I think these are pretty minor changes but can still be beneficial. The disposition section would be really helpful for DMs. I often add in a monster and have to think too hard about how they would act. As for the Resistance/Immunity/etc section, why even have a Vulnerabilities column? No creatures have them... (kidding, obviously it needs to be there too even though it'll always be empty). I do think that it makes it look neater and easier to read and quicker to digest. 5e stat blocks aren't really going for concise, so fleshing that area out would make sense. It still feels a little off, but I can't put my finger on it. I definitely like this one better than Bob's for sure, and slightly better than the 5e one, so nice work!

The perfect D&D stat block was in 4th Edition. They actually understood design principles.

I don't play 5E but I own a lot of the books and I'm curious if people love/hate having the statblocks referred to in an adventure module instead of including the statblock in module itself, preferably when the creature is encountered. Seems awkward to pull out the Monster Manual for every encounter. In the old days we'd use the monster manual to provide the information that we'd add to the adventure. So although I like the somewhat overdone 5E statblock I think like it arranged better so I could copy/paste out the necessary lines for combat and refer to the rest (if necessary). That wouldn't be as neat and clean in adventure modules but would be a lot more useful at the table.

I don't know if it'd be helpful or distracting to color code certain things. So for instance any time Fire is listed its in red.

I got some advice for an attack action I want to share that might not have noticed anything wrong with. But it's something that bugs me to no end because attack actions are currently the one thing that fly out of the way of common language, putting stuff in random orders and seemingly making formatting rules that don't follow any rules themselves. Currently the format is *attack name.* _attack type:_ +# to hit, reach/range x ft., one target. _Hit:_ ŷ (nd#+b) damage type damage. And should be changed to *attack name.* _attack type:_ with a reach/range of # ft ; +# to hit ; and does nd+b or ŷ _Damage Type_ damage." To see why this format is just so much better, try reading the old format and the new format out loud. so the goblins attack which currently looks like *Shortsword.* _Melee Weapon Attack:_ +5 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. _Hit:_ 6 (1d6+3) _slashing_ damage. would look like *Shortsword.* _Melee Weapon Attack:_ with a reach of 5 ft ; +5 to hit ; and does 1d6+3 or 6 _Slashing_ damage. There's SO much wrong with the attack formation. The weird period comma thing not followed by a capital even though you had a full stop just seems like a typo, it keeps alternately which side of the the number is the details, to hit reach target quantity and damage aren't in chronological order for making an attack so you don't read it left to right chronologically It can't seem to make up it's mind if they're italicizing the parts that change like weapon attack type, or the format that never changes on _hit:_ or if there's consistent capitalization on keywords like they do for attack type but not for damage type, or even if new details are separated by commas, periods, or a colon. The word one target is literally not ever not there and clarifies information that is inherent to attack rolls even though the rest of the entry assumes you know the rules for attack rolls and abbreviates them heavily. And it's the only part of a stat block that uses literally zero natural language or grammar which is just very jarring. You just just have to get use to where what information is where which is the problem that we're trying to balance with space. All of these things can be fixed and it is just so much prettier

I don’t think there is many issues with the stats for the most part , only annoying things like monk needs more stats then fighter and yet fighter gets way more asis then monk