Forum

[ashockney]

Good analysis, StalkerO. Thank you!

I have run across a couple of weirdness issues with npc's, but IMO these have more to do with the verisimilitude. The difference between npc's from 3e to 4e is marked. Unleashing DM's from the 3e design constraints to me are the single biggest win (#1 issue) in the new edition. My biggest concerns were in time, both time to play and time to prepare. The new design parameters for npc's with 4e allow for significant improvement in both of these categories, but especially in preparation. It is unbelievable how easy it is to develop new innovative, and cool, npc's or monsters.

I have two distinct examples of the challenges I've experienced. The first, was with an npc from the FRCG, a rogue npc named Zark. This guy is essentially a level 4 rogue, who is leading a low level lieutenant in a crime ring in the starting town of Loudwater. When the pc's finally uncovered Zark's nefarious crimes, and confronted him, it was clear a battle was to ensue. On the spot, in about 5 min, I whipped up his base stats to that of a "solo" encounter, so that it would be a "good fight". Zark suddenly, unexpectedly, went from a generic npc rogue with about 30 hp to a solo "boss" fight with over 150hp. What a horse! From a story perspective, it flowed great, and the pc's determined what came next with their ACTIONS. From a design perspective, I was able to adapt the encounter COMPLETELY on the fly, which was VERY DIFFICULT in 3e. From a combat perspective, the party was duly impressed with Zark's abilities, and used sound tactics in the encounter to defeat him. From a verisimilitude perspective, what is Zark, exactly? He's not a rogue like the one in our party, although he used some of the same abilities. He's not a fighter, like the one in our party, although he was able to withstand far more damage. If Zark was this tough, what's his boss going to be like???

The second issue I had was in describing 4e to a group of friends. They've never played the new game, but were quite proficient with 1e, 2e, and 3e. I was describing how in the last module, the party fought and defeated an "Elminster" type npc in the starting town. What??? Didn't you say they were 3rd level? Well, yeah. This npc was, you-know, the one sage in the town that everyone turns to for information. He was the classical wizard profile, who had a bunch of information (arcana and history skills), and had a couple of wizard powers. So, in 4e, 3rd level characters can defeat Elminster? Well, no, but they can defeat an npc, who turned out to be a traitor in our story, and so I just made him a 3rd level elite controller... with wizard powers. They literally couldn't get their heads around it, and I had some trouble explaining it.

These are two examples to help illustrate the challenge I've encountered. As PC's I think it's difficult to DEAL with a world in which anyone you encounter could have 20hp or 2000hp. How do these changes to the infrastructure of the game, change the voice of the story? I think that most rpg's can deal with these differences within the context of the story, but at this point in development, we don't have the language, experience, and tools we need to answer these questions and explain these differences. In many ways, I'm sure people dealing with hit points, or critical charts for the first time had the same challenges.