Why no monsters in boxed text?

[Narl]

Why are obvious monsters not described in boxed text? For example:

DM: "Gigantic skeletal arms clasp immense doors of dark metal, but whether they are holding the doors closed or stand poised to open them is unclear."

Player: "I check the door for traps."

The DM pauses, scanning the paragraphs below.

DM: Oh wait, there are also two huge knights in tattered armor. They attack you!

Yeah, I know, it does not go quite like that, but it would be helpful to have boxed text that included what is in most cases the most important thing in the scene. I mean, in some cases we get a full description of a cavern, and the boxed text fails to mention there is an undead cleric leading sixteen zombies in a ritual!

I think the great room descriptions should be expanded to include great monster descriptions, so that the DM does not have to navigate through another page of text to fully lay out the scene. After running two APs, I really have to wonder why there is an aversion to describing monsters.

[Azten]

Maybe because the monsters sometimes have a chance to hear the players coming and leave? Thus has bothered me before too.

[Elegy]

Here's an explanation from 2011 from a freelance writer.

Neil Spicer wrote:

As freelance writers, we're actually instructed to avoid including the creature descriptions in the read-aloud text for a location. And with good reason. It's entirely possible the PCs may have done something elsewhere in a dungeon that prompts changes to a certain location in terms of whether a monster might have relocated (i.e., gone to investigate all the noise) or gone into hiding or retreated elsewhere or called in more monsters to be there with it. You also don't know how PCs may come into a room. For instance, are they viewing it remotely via clairaudience/clairvoyance? What if they do that and there's no light source in the room to reveal the monster? What if they use passwall or teleport and happen into a room from a different direction than the monster might otherwise be visible?

The bottom line is you don't want to make assumptions about the presence of the monsters or their positions as viewed from a single perspective. That's because perspectives (and PC actions) can always change that situation. So, the read-aloud text focuses just on describing the room itself. That's because the only thing you can reasonably rely on is the PCs have the means to view the room...hence, you describe the room. What you can't anticipate (or assume) are the situations under which they might be viewing that room. That's where the GM has to get involved in preparing his game and the encounters of an adventure location.

As such, the "Creatures" paragraph following each read-aloud text for a location is there to call to the GM's attention to the fact that the room also has monsters. He (or she) can then tailor or paraphrase the description of the room based on that and the circumstances in which the PCs are able to view the room. Only at the time of running a game can the GM really know what would be present or not...i.e., whether a monster heard the PCs approaching and engaged a Stealth check...called in reinforcements...fled the scene, etc.

So, as writers, we leave that part to the GM. And, if he needs to describe the creatures, he can either consult the read-aloud text from a creature's Bestiary entry, or he can show them a picture of the creature from the module...and so on. The bottom line is that we can't anticipate the perfect read-aloud text for you. It's primarily there as a guide for you to use while paraphrasing. If it just so happens that the text perfectly matches the situation, great! Use it as straightforward read-aloud text. But if the PCs have tipped there hand, the GM needs to interpret each encounter location and make changes to whatever he tells the PCs while adapting the read-aloud text to the situation.

My two cents,
--Neil

[Liz Courts]

What Elegy quoted.

[Gorbacz]

Also, monsters, their appearance, abilities and number are the most oft changed parts of a module. Imagine reading aloud the room description that says "3 mean hobgoblins", only to remember 5 seconds later that due to having 5 players you meant to actually put 4 hobgoblins and a worg there. Instant confusion.

This is not as much of a problem with non-encounter elements of a location, because the amount of chairs and the color of tapestries in a room very rarely gets changed :)

[Jadeviper]

Also, these AP's are not simple modules and really should be read at least a couple of times before you run them. that way you can make notes on what is in the room and or any changes you have made. That way you don't run into the problem that Gorbacz mentioned above.

Also, you need to be aware of the over all story and scope of the AP, its a campaign not just a module. I have run several of these and I tend to completely prep the first book before the game begins, that way I can be working on the next book of the AP while running the first. It is important to realize where the players are heading, as GM you need to keep a more longitudinal view of the campaign.

Another reason I like to stay one book ahead is that after running several of these AP's some of them are, imho, horridly stingy with loot, while others are very generous, so you can adjust as needed, I don't usually take a way loot, more times than not I add helpful items.

I don't like to force players to have the "perfect adventuring group"; i.e. Fighter, Mage, Cleric, and Rogue. I want players to play what is fun for them. Currently I am running Legacy of Fire and I have Monk, Rogue, Druid, Ranger, and Witch. None of the casters are dedicated healers so I am adding curing wands and things of the like to the mix of treasure even though so far Legacy of Fire has been pretty generous on loot.

All of the things I mention above are in a small notebook one of those that secretaries use to take notes and kept with the AP.

Anyway, that is my suggestion, happy gaming.

Mike