Style guide
Re: Style guide
That was fixed last month with R3. Re-downloaded PDF just to make sure.
- Clever_Munkey
- Posts: 288
- Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2015 12:08 am
- Location: Central California
Re: Style guide
Before too long I'll likely add an entry concerning creature/opponent stat-blocks, covering the standard stats (and which can be left out for humanoids), how to notate them, etc. We've recently started listing XP values at the end as well (either "XP xx" for a single monster, and "XP xx ea." for multiple monsters).
- Solomoriah
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12515
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: LaBelle, Missouri
- Contact:
Re: Style guide
A pet peeve:
Do not say "players" unless you mean players. If you are writing about things the player characters may do, say "player characters." Or switch it up, using "the party" or "adventurers" or similar expressions.
Do not say "players" unless you mean players. If you are writing about things the player characters may do, say "player characters." Or switch it up, using "the party" or "adventurers" or similar expressions.
My personal site: www.gonnerman.org
Re: Style guide
R4 sent to Solo. Added paragraph about whether referring to players or the PCs. Also added a section on monster stat-blocks.
Re: Style guide
Can we have a set of rules here for monster stats in full entries, when they look like this:
I want to know the correct way to format these, in particular the 'No. of Attacks:' and 'Damage:' fields when there are multiple attacks.[/color]
Re: Style guide
R4 uploaded. This includes a section on monster/NPC stat-blocks, and whether referring to the GM, players, or player characters.
Coldrage, I'll let Solo and Smoot chime in first, as they have far more experience on that area than me.
Coldrage, I'll let Solo and Smoot chime in first, as they have far more experience on that area than me.
- Solomoriah
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12515
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: LaBelle, Missouri
- Contact:
Re: Style guide
I'm not exactly sure what you are asking. I will say that we had a discussion about this in the Field Guide thread some time back. The way I have always done number of attacks and damage is the way your suggested statblock does it.coldrage101 wrote:I want to know the correct way to format these, in particular the 'No. of Attacks:' and 'Damage:' fields when there are multiple attacks.
#At: list all attack routines, connected with or
Dam: list attack routine damage with slashes, connecting routines with or
However, if I remember rightly, Smoot prefers this format:
#At: as above
Dam: list damage with descriptive words for the attack form; connect routines with or
So my way would look like your sample. In Smoot's approach, damage would look like this:
Dam: 1d6 toot/1d4 bang/2d8 clash or special
There are reasons to like Smoot's way, but I tend to still do it my way. If you submit a monster formatted either way, well, I won't complain, Smoot might change the layout. Either way you choose to do it will be fine in the long run.
My personal site: www.gonnerman.org
Re: Style guide
Solo is right about my particular preference, though I dont get very wound up about how it is done so long as it is easily understood.
If I get fully into the editing of the fg2 project alongside Chiisu, then yes I would probably make edits according to the best judgement or consensus so that we have consistency of the entries.
If I get fully into the editing of the fg2 project alongside Chiisu, then yes I would probably make edits according to the best judgement or consensus so that we have consistency of the entries.
Is it really the end, not some crazy dream?
Re: Style guide
I'm also fine with either, but agree with Smoot about keeping it consistent for either style within each document.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 63 guests