NPCs vs PCs

[MerricB]

This was brought up in another thread, but it's a pet peeve of mine so I'm splitting it off.

One of the things I really hated about 3E was how NPCs were weaker than PCs. It didn't look that way - they were both built using the same system, after all - but the default was to give them much weaker equipment and stats, and this often translated into greater problems at the table. It didn't help that the Challenge Ratings system for 3E (and going forward into PF) were often a joke when applied to NPCs.

This also applied, in a different way, to 4E. 4E did solve the problem of "too many +1 swords" which the earlier approach to NPCs gave, but at the expense of having NPCs and PCs working off different systems - which really was a problem when you wanted ambiguous characters, who could work with or against the PCs. (I liked Companion characters, but they weren't good opponents).

My preference for NPCs is that they should be the (potential) equal of PCs in every way.

Any thoughts?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

This was brought up in another thread, but it's a pet peeve of mine so I'm splitting it off.

One of the things I really hated about 3E was how NPCs were weaker than PCs. It didn't look that way - they were both built using the same system, after all - but the default was to give them much weaker equipment and stats, and this often translated into greater problems at the table. It didn't help that the Challenge Ratings system for 3E (and going forward into PF) were often a joke when applied to NPCs.

Pathfinder fixed that part fairly well. Not entirely; an NPC caster only needs to face one encounter per day. The CR was reduced, and if you give the NPC PC wealth then they really are worth their CR.

This also applied, in a different way, to 4E. 4E did solve the problem of "too many +1 swords" which the earlier approach to NPCs gave, but at the expense of having NPCs and PCs working off different systems - which really was a problem when you wanted ambiguous characters, who could work with or against the PCs. (I liked Companion characters, but they weren't good opponents).

My preference for NPCs is that they should be the (potential) equal of PCs in every way.

Any thoughts?

The different systems don't bother me. In an adventure I'm running, the PCs befriended a Viking captain, but had instructions to murder him at the end of the journey. I simply made a companion version and an elite version of the captain. When the PCs fought him, they found him more dangerous than expected, although they still quickly killed him.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I much prefer B/X or OD&D for NPCs. They are the same as PCs in every way, and just as easy to create.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I agree. The problem is often that PCs are minmaxed (because players like to build characters that are effective), and the NPCs are not minmaxed (because scenario designers like to build characters with stats that make sense).

 

[MerricB]

The different systems don't bother me. In an adventure I'm running, the PCs befriended a Viking captain, but had instructions to murder him at the end of the journey. I simply made a companion version and an elite version of the captain. When the PCs fought him, they found him more dangerous than expected, although they still quickly killed him.

It does come to one of the issues: How much work should a NPC be to create?

(How quick was it for you? Curious!)

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

It does come to one of the issues: How much work should a NPC be to create?

(How quick was it for you? Curious!)

In 4e? Hardly any time at all. Only solos take me a long time, because solos require a lot of work to avoid being overly controlled, knocked prone, flanked, etc.

I've made companion versions of all my PCs for the game I'm running, and am now doing that for the game that I'm playing in. That takes a bit longer time, because usually NPCs and companions I make belong to classes I'm familiar with. For the game I'm running, we currently have a fighter, rogue, cleric, sorcerer, invoker and swordmage. For the game I'm playing in, we have a control wizard using only PH1 and Essentials 1 powers (me), drow thief (the only issue was hunting down Essentials companions, found a couple of modron fighters that told me how many thief moves to use), monk (there's no official NPC rules and full discipline is a little confusing), warden (I wasn't too familiar with this class, but it's simple), bravura warlord (had to learn the bravura stuff), archer ranger (easy!) and ... halfling runepriest. Not only is the runepriest really complicated, but it's in the PH3 so there's no NPC or companion rules.

(The Viking captain was a thaneborn barbarian. I just nerfed macetail's rage to be an encounter power for the companion, and recharge when first bloodied for the elite brute.)

I much prefer B/X or OD&D for NPCs. They are the same as PCs in every way, and just as easy to create.

IME this was not the case. NPCs rarely had the full stat array (and so less opportunity to have good stats). Of course, their class abilities were the same, and their gear was whatever the DM wanted them to have...

 

[ExploderWizard]

IME this was not the case. NPCs rarely had the full stat array (and so less opportunity to have good stats). Of course, their class abilities were the same, and their gear was whatever the DM wanted them to have...

I'm a bit confused. What full stat array would this be? I rolled up stats for NPCs. Sometimes they were decent and sometimes not so great-just like PCs.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I'm a bit confused. What full stat array would this be? I rolled up stats for NPCs. Sometimes they were decent and sometimes not so great-just like PCs.

I'm thinking of 1e adventures. I've only played (and run) 2e, but in both cases NPCs might just have one high stat and maybe an Intelligence score. (Captain Campion might have Strength 17, Int 13, Charisma 14, for instance. No Dex, Con, or Wis stats at all. I guess you assume a 10 for whatever isn't listed.) You rolled all homebrewed NPC stats?

 

[Celebrim]

My preference for NPCs is that they should be the (potential) equal of PCs in every way.

Any thoughts?

I often have no idea what people are talking about in half the threads these days.

NPCs are whatever you want them to be. Are you the DM or are you just the assistant DM and the real DM is a text block in some book somewhere?

There is a big difference between guidelines and rules. How you create an NPC has nothing to do with proposition, fortune, and action resolution. It's a not a rule. It's a guideline, often to be broken. It's there just to help new DMs have a basis for getting started before they learn the system well enough to be able to really shape it as they need to.

Exactly when have NPCs not been the potential equal of PCs in every way? What edition did that stop being true in?

In my current 3.X inspired game, the BBEG is known to be at least a 17th level wizard. What level are the PCs? Sixth. The PC's cannot remotely be said to be the BBEG's equal. The BBEG has minions more powerful than the PCs. The PCs are a hated thorn in his side at this point, to be sure, but they aren't remotely his equal.

On the other hand, the PC's are truly special. At 6th level they are massively more powerful than most of the worlds inhabitants. Even at 1st level, they were collectively quite a force to be reckoned with. So in a difference sense, most NPCs aren't the potential equal of the PCs.

As far as equipment goes, by the standards of my game world, the PC's are very well equipped. They have a few magic weapons between the six of them, and some of them even have magic armor. But of course, they aren't very well equipped compared to His High Majesty the Hurin, Farmanus Karahal IV, King over Talernga, or The Honorable Lord Edhelhard, or in comparison to the Dwarven High Thane. There are plenty of individuals far wealthier than the PCs. Quite a few are much poorer as well.

Way off in the recesses of my homebrew world, there are NPC's like Jace Merlkin the Dragon Hunter or The Lord of the Mysterious Isle who are mightier than even the BBEG. Heck, even the BBEG isn't necessarily the mightiest NPC around locally, as there is a Lesser Slaad Lord and a being called the Prelate of Submission waiting in the wings among many other things.

I guess I'm saying I'm really really confused. I create NPCs according to what ought to be in my campaign world, according to the vision I originally set down when I conceived it and my continuing revelations as I explore it. How do you do it?

I will say that I've seen radically the opposite situation far more often than the one you complain about. It's not at all unusual to see gameworlds - published or homebrew - where PCs can never match the potential or power of NPCs. Consider Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms. I consider that to be a worse situation. It's possible in reaction to that sort of thing that the 3.X guidelines were written.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I'm thinking of 1e adventures. I've only played (and run) 2e, but in both cases NPCs might just have one high stat and maybe an Intelligence score. (Captain Campion might have Strength 17, Int 13, Charisma 14, for instance. No Dex, Con, or Wis stats at all. I guess you assume a 10 for whatever isn't listed.) You rolled all homebrewed NPC stats?

Depends on the NPC. Regular folk were just assumed to have average stats (9-12). I didn't roll stats for every guard or shopkeeper in the campaign. NPCs that play more of an active part in play such as henchmen, rival parties of adventurers, and potential antagonists I roll stats as if they were a PC.