If you're talking about Paizo publishing books like this, I must point out this adds over 100 words to the monster description, and space is limited for descriptions on a monster write-up. If you're talking about doing this for your campaign notes, that's another story, as you don't have the space limitations of a published book.
I'll also point out that just as a GM should know how sneak attack works, a GM should know how basic, common spells like darkness and daze work.
I don't see how moving something like fireball or darkness from the Core Rulebook to the UMR section reduces page-flipping... it just means you're flipping pages within the same book rather than having the Core Rulebook open to the right page as you reference the monster. Or you're re-describing those abilities in the stat block, using valuable space to repeat material that's already available, and doing it for multiple monsters.
And it still doesn't address the issue of "a GM should be familiar with fireball and darkness in the same way a GM should be familiar with grab, blindsense, and damage reduction." Repeating that text defeats the purpose of having the UMR in the first place: an easily-referenced listing of common monster abilities that work exactly the same way so you don't have to write it out in the monster description.
I don't think it helps me at all. It just gives me a bigger stat block, but I do have a lot of spell memorized also.
I will also add that looking up the spell and printing it out if necessary is something I don't have an issue with. What I would most likely do is copy and paste the monster's stat block along with the spell description onto the same page. That is what I will do for any monsters that use spells from UM or the APG as SLA's, since I don't know those spells by heart yet.
I'd like it if Paizo put the work in to writing the abilities descriptions into the monsters because if they did, maybe I'd get something better for the money than - Darkness, 3 times a day, CL -14.
Personally, I get far more for my money when Paizo writes it like they do now, since that means I get more monsters in my monster books.
Statblocks are large enough as they are, and consolidating information is definitely the way to go (even though I always manage to miss an aura or something the first time I look over a statblock - that's why I prepare encounters beforehand).
I would prefer the abilities in the stat block. One of the reasons I don't use the Bestiaries, at all, is because I dislike how these wildly different creatures have spells off the wizard list. Its not very magical that they all do darkness and lightning bolt the same way - and the lego block approach to making monsters different by just tacking wizard spells onto them sucks.
But you're okay with bite, claw, poison, pounce, damage reduction, and incorporeal working the same way for all monsters, right? And for a fireball spell working the same way for a Viking wizard and a Maori wizard?
Here is the link to the post at the Alexandrian I mentioned earlier:
Statblocking the Barghest and Balor
That guy's barghest stat block includes 200 words worth of additional text repeating the rules for blink, levitate, misdirection, and dimension door (but doesn't include explanations for darkvision, scent, damage reduction, Combat Reflexes, or grapple, all of which are quite wordy). That means for the barghest to fit on one page, you have to cut either the illustration, or cut 200 words from the barghest entry.
As it turns out, the paragraph of descriptive text ("Said to be fiendish relations of all goblinoid races etc. etc.") and the stat block for the greater barghest are almost exactly 200 words (210, actually). Personally, I don't think a one-page monster entry with no descriptive text (and no stat block for the powered-up version that the monster turns into) is a good use of a page. A monster is more than just its combat stats. Sacrificing a monster's flavor text just to avoid page-flipping for a common ability like dimension door or levitate is unacceptable.
I admit, it's not easy being a GM. Sometimes you have to read up on a monster's abilities before you run it.
One thing I have always disliked about 3.x systems in having to look up the spell like abilities of various monsters, and one thing I did like about 4E was the integration of those abilities into the monster stat blocks.
So, as an experiment, I was wondering how difficult it would be to "fix" Pathfinder monsters by integrating their spell like abilities into their special abilities list. Following is what I came up with for the derro. It seems workable:
** spoiler omitted **
Obviously, you'd have to do the work for...
If you paper clip copies of spellcards into the beastary page your using you can find the monster quickly and know what spells it uses. bookmark and uses the spell like ability.
I don't think bigger stat blocks is the answer. What I do is just print out the stuff I need in advance. There are some creatures, like dragons, that would require their own book. Take a look at how many spells and spelllike abilities they have. The older they get, the worse it becomes.
They're spell-like abilities, right? Doesn't that just mean "as a short cut, we're going to say this ability functions as this spell" ? It's not casting like a cleric. It's not casting like a sorcerer. The action is different. The effect is different visually. There're no components. Mechanically it's the same because mechanics should be simple when possible. If you're GMing and your nuglub uses shocking grasp like a sorcerer would, then I'd say that's the fault of your GMing... not the nuglub's statblock :\
I wanted to chime in here because I completely understand both side's points of view. That said, I'll tell you how I (not really because somebody else designed it) solved that random encounter running things on the fly problem.
It's called Combat Manager. I'm linking the latest posting on these boards, which shows you the latest updates. Kyle Olson has created this unbelievable program with a monster database built in. He even has feats, spells, and other information hot-linked so you can go right to what you're looking for as quick as a click. For those things that aren't hot-linked he has a very searchable database. All of this is done right on your computer (which I'm making the assumption you all have since you're communicating on a messageboard, if that's a bad assumption I'm sorry). I quite literally have not run a session without this program since I first found it. I highly recommend taking a look at it, and seeing if this program doesn't solve your flipping :P problem.
Which do you think is easier for a GM:
Having all monsters that need a weak touch electricity attack:
1) use shocking grasp for them, so that the GM knows exactly how it works because it's standardized--memorize it once, play.
or
2) give each monster its own custom weak touch electricity attack, so this monster's is 1d6 no save, this monster's is 1d6 Fort negates, this monster's is 1d8 Reflex half, this one is 1d4+1, and so on, and spend a few lines of the monster's description explaining how this custom ability works. Don't try to memorize them, because they're all very similar and remembering which is which is going to be really hard, so you have to look it up every time.
?
One thing I have always disliked about 3.x systems in having to look up the spell like abilities of various monsters, and one thing I did like about 4E was the integration of those abilities into the monster stat blocks.
I have thought about this often. Many monsters in the 3.X sysyem, especially higher level ones,have way more powers then they would ever use in a fight. I really like that 4.0 has the monsters boiled down to the essentials of what the gm needs for a fight and not dozens of spells that end up just giving the GM more homework. That said there are also things I still love about Pathfinder. I would like to see a book like what you describe but take away the unnecessary or Redundant powers. Just have a boiled down stat block that is all right there on one page.
One thing I have always disliked about 3.x systems in having to look up the spell like abilities of various monsters, and one thing I did like about 4E was the integration of those abilities into the monster stat blocks.
So, as an experiment, I was wondering how difficult it would be to "fix" Pathfinder monsters by integrating their spell like abilities into their special abilities list. Following is what I came up with for the derro. It seems workable:
** spoiler omitted **
Obviously, you'd have to do the work for...
I used to do this quite a lot for my own monsters, as I am only an ordinary human being and not a superhuman gaming machine like Sean Reynolds, and I cannot manage to get the entire core rulebook plus the Bestiary memorized---or more to the point, I actually have memorized a lot, but I can't necessarily remember it all when I'm in the process of listening to the players declare actions, watch dice roll, check my adventure notes, while also planning my six monsters' next moves, and sometimes in these cases I even blank out on what the radius of a fireball is, as silly as that seems. I know this makes me worthless both as a human being and let alone as a GM, but fortunately my players have forgiven me (to the best of my knowledge, though they may be plotting my demise--to put my poor self out of my misery, of course--as I write this).
This is especially useful for very complicated SLAs like a lot of the alignment based SLAs outsiders have---memorizing daze is one thing, memorizing the table in the blasphemy description may be lower on the priority list (and that's not even close to the most complicated spells in the game, which often take time to read and you don't want to have to look them up mid combat).
Abilities like Change Shape (I can't remember if that's an SLA or Su) also benefit from being spelled out--my god, I hate that ability. You have to reference the monster ability, then reference the spell it mentions, which usually in and of itself references a few other shapechanging spells (e.g., beast shape III is "as beast shape II but... and then of course beast shape II is "as beast shape I... and THEN you have to refer to the general polymorph rules and THEN you have to double check back with Change Shape to see what exceptions it has to the polymorph guidelines. Really, much easier to look up ahead of time--if not actually stat out the monster's changed form--then try to do all that on the fly (at least of course, if you are a minimally capable insect like me; the lords and titans who deign to share this space with me may disagree).
BUT THAT SAID:
I wanted to chime in here because I completely understand both side's points of view. That said, I'll tell you how I (not really because somebody else designed it) solved that random encounter running things on the fly problem.
It's called Combat Manager. I'm linking the latest posting on these boards, which shows you the latest updates. Kyle Olson has created this unbelievable program with a monster database built in. He even has feats, spells, and other information hot-linked so you can go right to what you're looking for as quick as a click. (snip)
This.
I say I "used to" stat a lot of that stuff out, because finding a program which allows you to easily cross reference spells and feats and monster abilities has made running combat--especially at high levels--so very much easier and doable. Not even having the .pdfs on the laptop cut it (the next best thing is referencing the PRD on your laptop, but you need an Internet connection for that which I don't always have, but the Combat Manager is way better).
That said, sometimes very complicated or homebrewed monsters I will still write up my own statblock, with obscure abilities or ones I just don't use very much written out. It's a lot of copy-paste and then simplifying text which takes some time, but it's far more useful than hoping you have memorized every rulebook and can flip to the right page when you need it.
In short, Reynard, there is a use for what you're doing, but digital media also gives us some excellent alternatives.
And heck, while I understand why Paizo abridges and crossreferences their stat blocks --- but those same reasons are also ultimately why my Bestiaries are pretty art books I look at sometimes while I look up my combat stats in Combat Manager or copy paste my own into my own game notes. I don't ever expect Paizo to publish more complete statblocks and know that would be a waste of time and resources for them--but if a 3PP came along and published fuller statblocks for at least some more complicated creatures, I might well buy that (if I wasn't happy with my digital tools).
I admit, it's not easy being a GM. Sometimes you have to read up on a monster's abilities before you run it.
I'm with you, Sean. I'm just going to suggest that really, "sometimes you have to rework campaign material into an organization that works for you."
I actually do expand stat blocks. I don't run much straight from a book if it's mid-to-high level. I copy & paste the basic block, the add anything I expect to reference at the table. I'll throw feat text, magic item text, and spell text where required.
Why?
Because while I know the basic function of most features, at the table it's faster to have complicated things right in front of me.
That's my responsibility. I'm 100% happy with the level of detail Paizo provides right now as I've got the tools to take that digital Lego box and make my own format work.
I admit, I add more information for my own monster stat blocks if I can't remember what an ability does, or if it's an unusual or fiddly ability that I know it'll use in the encounter. Likewise, I include more info for pregen PCs when I'm running a game at a con--I don't expect that a player knows how all of a witch's hexes work, so I include the info on the hexes the PC has.
My inclination is to include more information in order to make it easier to run the monster/character. But we're very strict about our one-monster-per-page format, and when you start re-describing grab, darkness, and fireball, that eats into the essential descriptive text that makes a monster more than just a bunch of numbers.