D&D 5E What a foe can do rather than what a foe is - humans with punch?

[TheSword]

So the usual go to in 5e for harder foes is the monster - be it basilisk, stone golem, aboleth or dragon. Beasties are 5e’s chief way of providing interesting foes. That makes sense, you can have a lot more flexibility when the foe can be anything and do anything.

What about the humble human though? (or elf, dwarf, orc etc) We have a fairly sparse range of NPC stat blocks in the MM, with a few more humans/humanoids scattered across the remaining books.

What other resources or inspirations are there out their? Any good 3pp splat books of humanoid foes. Or any good supplements for building rules for more interesting humanoid/human NPCs?

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

While Kobold Press' monster books (Tome of Beast I-III, Creature Catalog) are mostly filled with "monsters," each one has a decent section with some new and flavorful human stat blocks for opponents.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Just build enemy humans using PC classes. That's what a bunch of people want anyway.

 

[James Gasik]

Curiously, I don't think PC classes are well-balanced to serve as enemies; certainly WotC seems to think they don't have enough hit points, if nothing else! But definitely the game could use NPC "classes" that you can level up, instead of dozens of individual stat blocks. If they build monsters using some kind of math, there's no reason we can't have an enemy advancement system again!

 

[Stormonu]

While it's mostly full of monsters, @Nixlord's Monster Manual - Expanded series has advanced versions of humans and various demihumans that would be useful. He also has a line of "Monster Talent" books that should provide some variations for human foes and the like - though I haven't purchased the books in that line to be sure.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Curiously, I don't think PC classes are well-balanced to serve as enemies; certainly WotC seems to think they don't have enough hit points, if nothing else! But definitely the game could use NPC "classes" that you can level up, instead of dozens of individual stat blocks. If they build monsters using some kind of math, there's no reason we can't have an enemy advancement system again!

But that would require the unthinkable; using ideas from 4E!

 

[James Gasik]

But that would require the unthinkable; using ideas from 4E!

Oh right, forgot we can't do that. Or go back to a system where monsters and PC's use the same basic rules.

 

[TheSword]

While it's mostly full of monsters, @Nixlord's Monster Manual - Expanded series has advanced versions of humans and various demihumans that would be useful. He also has a line of "Monster Talent" books that should provide some variations for human foes and the like - though I haven't purchased the books in that line to be sure.

I’ve just checked out Monster Talents - that book is freaking awesome! I’m glad I found that in any circumstances.

 

[TheSword]

It’s a challenge to buy books for only a 5-10% slice of content. But I can look into it.

I probably need to come up with some abilities for archetypes and have a good table for calculating stats based on CR.

I remember Paizo did a great book on NPCs which I was hoping a 3pp might have produced.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Make factions.

Human beings are social creatures by nature. We are at our most successful when we collaborate to achieve ends. Factions enable a bunch of stuff that is very useful for antagonists narratively and mechanically:

• A shared identity. This both makes it easier to figure out who you're fighting/how to fight them (though surprises are always good here), and helps the players build an emotional connection to the faction as a group of antagonists.
• Common goals. Instead of the scattershot goals of every random bandit and thug, factions provide something to rally around. They also let you differentiate opponents by method, not just by appearance.
• Inter- and intra-faction politics. TONS of juicy stuff here. Two factions hate each other, so both court the PCs. One faction has a simmering internal resentment the players can leverage to their advantage. Etc. Great stuff.
• Reputation. The factions don't always need to be villainous or even antagonistic. They can be more complicated, and the players may actually want to curry favor with a faction they've opposed in the past (or vice-versa.)
• Long-term potential. Factions outlast individual members. This enables stories that would otherwise end when a given important bad guy dies. Further, the actual defeat of a faction--striking it down so it can't rise again, at least not in the foreseeable future--is a wonderful major accomplishment or campaign capstone.

If you want your enemies to be more about what they can do and who (rather than what) they are, make factions.