D&D 5E NPCs/Monsters being able to use PC classes.

[Weather Report]

The npc's of the world don't need a full character build, just a couple powers to use in the fight.

It doesn't matter if the elf wizard has knock or detect magic, only if he has charm person and fireball.

Yeah, they pitched that approach when 4th Ed was coming out, short screen time, blah, blah.

 

[Paraxis]

Yeah, they pitched that approach when 4th Ed was coming out, short screen time, blah, blah.

Does it matter what edition or when it was pitched, the simple fact is it is faster and easier on the DM and it works.

Here is an example from 13th Age that uses the same type of system.

Hobgoblin Warmage
Normal 5th level
Caster Humanoid
Initiative: +6

Warstaff +8 vs. AC—15 damage

R: Fireblast +10 vs. PD (up to 2 nearby enemies in a group)—10 fire damage (or 20 if used against a single target), and the target loses its next move action

C: Concussive blast +10 vs. PD (all enemies engaged with the warmage)—10 force damage, and the warmage pops the target off of it
Natural 20: The target is also dazed (save ends).

AC-20
PD-14
MD-19
HP-70

Simple sweet to the point, you don't need anything more to run any monster or npc.

 

[zoroaster100]

This one is a deal-breaker for me if they do it in a way that makes monsters overcomplex. The reason I quit playing 3rd edition was because it was a nightmare of complexity to run high level game opponents with multi-page statblocks. I'm ok with some of the game design of 4th edition being stripped away for 5th edition in order to address some of the weaknesses of 4th edition, but interesting yet-easy to use monsters are critical for me as a DM to want to run 5th edition. So going back to a 3rd edition-type approach of adding class levels to monsters is not acceptable to me.

 

[TwoSix]

The farther away we can get from the idea that there is some difference in some in-game mechanics because of who is controlling the character in the real world, the better.

I'm glad to see that months of debate on these topics have honed your points to razor-sharp clarity! No sarcasm, people equivocate often around here.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I'm glad to see that months of debate on these topics have honed your points to razor-sharp clarity! No sarcasm, people equivocate often around here.

Why not skip to the point? This is only one example of a broad-reaching, basic principle.

 

[Storminator]

Yeah, they pitched that approach when 4th Ed was coming out, short screen time, blah, blah.

Of course those rules are a lot older than 4e. . .

PS

 

[Weather Report]

Does it matter what edition or when it was pitched, the simple fact is it is faster and easier on the DM and it works.

Here is an example from 13th Age that uses the same type of system.

Hobgoblin Warmage
Normal 5th level
Caster Humanoid
Initiative: +6

Warstaff +8 vs. AC—15 damage

R: Fireblast +10 vs. PD (up to 2 nearby enemies in a group)—10 fire damage (or 20 if used against a single target), and the target loses its next move action

C: Concussive blast +10 vs. PD (all enemies engaged with the warmage)—10 force damage, and the warmage pops the target off of it
Natural 20: The target is also dazed (save ends).

AC-20
PD-14
MD-19
HP-70

Simple sweet to the point, you don't need anything more to run any monster or npc.

I sometimes like more, a lot more.

The D&D universe does not all exist as something to be killed by the PCs in a few rounds.

 

[TwoSix]

Why not skip to the point? This is only one example of a broad-reaching, basic principle.

I'm down. Monsters only need hit points, defenses, and a few cool abilities. Everything else should be handled by genre logic. In general, treat the NPC as a giant aspect that you can tag to do "that-monster" things.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I'm down. Monsters only need hit points, defenses, and a few cool abilities. Everything else should be handled by genre logic. In general, treat the NPC as a giant aspect that you can tag to do "that-monster" things.

If you replace the term "monster" with "character" (of any type), I'd cautiously agree.

 

[TwoSix]

If you replace the term "monster" with "character" (of any type), I'd cautiously agree.

Sure. Since that's pretty much the OD&D model, why not? You can always embed granularity into subsystems as desired. (See FATE's fractal skills).