Level of a full-blown NPC

[James McMurray]

Does anyone know what the effective level adjustment would be for a full-blown NPC? That is, one that was made using the PC rules instead of the truncated version most NPCs get. I'm thinking maybe +2. They'd have fewer hit points, but would have a lot more powers to choose from, making them much more versatile.

 

[IncompleteUserNa]

The reason creating NPCs is abbreviated is so that they take less time to prepare and are manageable in a combat where the DM is also controlling a handful of other monsters, not because giving them more powers (from lower levels, no less) makes them too powerful. I'd recommend against adjusting their level at all, but not before I'd recommend just doing things by the book. It's probably not worth the effort no matter how much of a precious flower you think your NPC is going to be. He'll be just as dead at the end of the combat.

 

[James McMurray]

Ah, but I've got 3 hours of train ride every day to fill up, and making NPCs can be part of that.

I wouldn't do it for everyone, and definitely won't do it at all until I've got more experience GMing 4E under my belt, but I would like to throw a few wildcards like that into the mix every now and then.

I think it does increase their power level. Or at least it will if you make synergistic choices in multi-classing, powers, etc. For instance, most default NPCs won't have access to multiple ways to avoid attacks (Shield, Blur, and Invisibility for example). Giving them all the powers due their class and level gives them more combos to pull.

 

[Dreadite]

I think it does increase their power level. Or at least it will if you make synergistic choices in multi-classing, powers, etc. For instance, most default NPCs won't have access to multiple ways to avoid attacks (Shield, Blur, and Invisibility for example). Giving them all the powers due their class and level gives them more combos to pull.

Multiple defense powers gives me flashbacks to Baldur's Gate 2 with mage fights, where you practically had to memorize an entire array of breach, dispel magic, and other fun things in order to hit anything. Obviously 4th isn't so cruel as ADnD 2nd was, but still.

I'd be pretty wary about giving them a true PC level HP total too... at equal levels, PCs are pretty good at one shotting each other, and that's no fun. Long gone are the days when defensive magic abilities made you a god, from my (admittedly limited) testing of the system. I think it might be better to consider what extra abilities you want on your NPC, adding a touch of exp to him and just tacking those abilities onto his monster template.

 

[Jhaelen]

Does anyone know what the effective level adjustment would be for a full-blown NPC? That is, one that was made using the PC rules instead of the truncated version most NPCs get. I'm thinking maybe +2. They'd have fewer hit points, but would have a lot more powers to choose from, making them much more versatile.

What is level adjustment?

I'd double the npc's hit points, give him an action point and make him Elite.

 

[Snotboy]

The reason creating NPCs is abbreviated is so that they take less time to prepare and are manageable in a combat where the DM is also controlling a handful of other monsters, not because giving them more powers (from lower levels, no less) makes them too powerful. I'd recommend against adjusting their level at all, but not before I'd recommend just doing things by the book. It's probably not worth the effort no matter how much of a precious flower you think your NPC is going to be. He'll be just as dead at the end of the combat.

I am brought back to one of my first 3.0 games, where my half-orc's Opportunity Attack critically hit a careless npc leader, killing him in one shot. The DM's head sank as he said, "He had a name and everything."

 

[spinmd]

I think if you made a NPC with the PC rules, you wouldn't add the NPC Level bonus (pg 187 DMG) and then there would be no "level adjustment".

 

[Syrsuro]

Does anyone know what the effective level adjustment would be for a full-blown NPC? That is, one that was made using the PC rules instead of the truncated version most NPCs get. I'm thinking maybe +2. They'd have fewer hit points, but would have a lot more powers to choose from, making them much more versatile.

Mu (or Wu)

Carl






http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wú_(negative)

 

[David Sid]

Does anyone know what the effective level adjustment would be for a full-blown NPC? That is, one that was made using the PC rules instead of the truncated version most NPCs get. I'm thinking maybe +2. They'd have fewer hit points, but would have a lot more powers to choose from, making them much more versatile.

This is a really problematic question. I like the idea and wouldn't mind using it for a major character, but it really runs contrary to the game's design.

Issue #1: Too many magic items. Put five level 30 PCs against one level 30 NPC-PC with the same amount of treasure, and the PCs will probably get a bigger haul than all ten level 30 treasure parcels.

Issue #2: As you said yourself, NPC-PC's wouldn't have enough hit points. The fight would be very quick.

Issue #3: Too easy to shut down. Without a general save bonus (except a +1 for a human), a single NPC-PC could be completely shut down for several rounds by the combined powers of five PCs.

I can't say what the ideal solution would be, but here's one possibility:

1. Construct the NPC-PC using the "truncated" rules for constructing NPCs.

2. Set his hit points to be the same as a solo of his level. You don't want him going down in the second round, before he has a chance to use at least most of his best powers.

3. Give him a solo's +5 save bonus. This will help him to avoid being shut down all the time by the orb wizard.

4. Expand his power list to be the same as a PC of his level.

5. Give him the trained skills and feats of a PC of his level.

6. Reduce his level bonus to equal his magic threshold. Since he has a full list of powers, feats, and skills, the level bonus only needs to account for the magic items we're not giving him.

7. Give him 1 action point. If he's like a PC, he could gain more with milestones, but he can't use more than 1 per encounter.

8. Give him one or two magic items and some monetary treasure, all drawn from the party's treasure parcels for their current level. This is a major villain, so the party that defeats him deserves major treasure. (As usual, subtract the magic threshold from any enhancement bonus before applying it.)

9. Mark him as a Solo. I think that's about the power level he'll have if he's constructed in this way. He's got the durability of a solo, the treasure of a major NPC, and the versatility of a PC.

 

[James McMurray]

I think if you made a NPC with the PC rules, you wouldn't add the NPC Level bonus (pg 187 DMG) and then there would be no "level adjustment".

That makes insane amounts of sense. Thanks!

This is a really problematic question. I like the idea and wouldn't mind using it for a major character, but it really runs contrary to the game's design.

That's me: a maverick.

Issue #1: Too many magic items. Put five level 30 PCs against one level 30 NPC-PC with the same amount of treasure, and the PCs will probably get a bigger haul than all ten level 30 treasure parcels.

I'd make him with the "starting at higher levels" treasure, and count it against the parcels.

Issue #3: Too easy to shut down. Without a general save bonus (except a +1 for a human), a single NPC-PC could be completely shut down for several rounds by the combined powers of five PCs.

That's true of all sorts of singular monsters, especially if there's an orb wizard in the party. He would almost certainly never be caught in the open without friends around.

2. Set his hit points to be the same as a solo of his level. You don't want him going down in the second round, before he has a chance to use at least most of his best powers.

Good idea. I'll either do this or make sure he's got access to a good amount of self heals and/or temporary hit points. The campaign would fit very well with clerics, warlords, or warlocks as BBEGs so that shouldn't be a problem.

Thanks all!