Same rules or different Rules (PC vs NPC)

[BryonD]

I'm having trouble understanding where you're coming from, so let's try a different approach!

What about those mechanics are bland? How would you, in your current system of choice, use the mechanics to create an NPC so that the mechanics aren't bland?

Correct me if I'm wrong: I get the feeling that, when you say "you could take the stat block you just made and paint it differently", you have the idea that the stats I used for those NPCs don't "model" the character. In other words, the mechanics aren't reflective of the fiction (or the game world); the fiction is forced to fit into the mold the mechanics have defined.

Does that address your position?

Pretty much.

Do those stats descend from being a powerful Daemon or do they descend from being a L27 solo?

Why is his Fort 39? Is it because this describes his narrative concept as compared to the the narrative concept of the range of physical threats in the world? Or is it because the meth works for him to fight standard L27 characters?

Is his interaction with the world from a model/simulation point of view soemhow particularly distinct from a L27 solo Storm Giant with a Mace that throws fire bolts?

Why is his AC 41? What happens if he is standing there in his bare chested AC41 glory and his twin brother walks into the room sporting his brand new starmetal mystical full plate and magic shield? What is his AC?

You have taken everything from a look up table and painted the narrative on top. The narrative was irrelevant because the numbers were on the table already. (and no, tweaking a 39 to a 41 or 37 doesn't really help me)

I want to say: Here is an Axe. These mechanics describe how an axe works in this world. I don't know if the axe will be held by a L1 kobold or a demigod. It doesn't matter because the axe is intrinsically an axe. Now, in all likelyhood the demigod is vastly more skilled and capable of producing a lot more damage still building off that same mechanical description of an axe. But maybe not. Maybe this demigod has an immortal grand mastery of arcane spellcasting but he uses the axe because he enjoys it, despite having the strength and skill of a kobold. Obviously I'm free wheeling.

And I'll preempt you with an acknowledgement that you can narrative your way around this. There is nothing I can suggest that you can't. But, either you see the richness and basis in narrative merit over mechanical preconception that I get so much value out of, or you do not. And if you do not the I apologize because I simply am not clever enough to express the spirit of it.

But I want to build everything as a description based on its fundamental nature. You numbers ignore that all all descend from it being a solo 27.

What if I said, "no, no, no! My characters are L25!!!" You could just change the numbers and keep everything else identical. Just speaking personally here, no reflection on the awesome fun of other people's games which I'm willing to concede are beyond my comprehension. But I HATE that. To me the character is what he is. If his narrative description doesn't change then his stats don't change either, PC level notwithstanding. In your case you can COMPLETELY change the narrative (storm giant) and the stats won't waver, but the stats can change completely for the identical narrative.

 

[BryonD]

Of what? I cannot recall anything so far indicating that one of the goals of 5E is to lose all the people who play 4E or that it's just about the people who like 3E.

Where in the world did THIS come from?
I said I want to propose something that supports everyone. I showed how. Then you accused me of saying the opposite it and I pointed out where I rejected it and yet you come back to it again.

I don't think you are even responding in good faith at this point.

So best of luck to you.

 

[BryonD]

Though i love that I can take your statblock and just say that it is a dragon that has a thing for killing gnomes. i love that the stats presented are not locked into a cage of rules that define what it is.

I can see why someone would love that.

But, to be clear, we all agree that mechanically this creature is completely identical to the proposed dragon with a thing for killing gnomes?

LostSoul, do you agree?

 

[herrozerro]

I can see why someone would love that.

But, to be clear, we all agree that mechanically this creature is completely identical to the proposed dragon with a thing for killing gnomes?

LostSoul, do you agree?

I think it's more that the Dragon is identical to the Demon

But with that said, it might not be "identical" I might change damage types, flip around some Defenses add an immunity or two.

 

[BryonD]

I think it's more that the Dragon is identical to the Demon

I switched them while you were reading that other thread.

 

[Aldarc]

Where in the world did THIS come from?
I said I want to propose something that supports everyone. I showed how. Then you accused me of saying the opposite it and I pointed out where I rejected it and yet you come back to it again.

I don't think you are even responding in good faith at this point.

So best of luck to you.

Now it's my turn to say, "Where in the world did THIS come from?" Before rushing off to malign me and assume that I'm not responding in good faith, how about asking whether or not we are having issues of communication? I'm responding in good faith, and I wish that you would show the same courtesy. In this case, I did not follow you below and I have no idea to what you are referring.

Can you offer a reason they would go to the expense and effort of this otherwise?

 

[herrozerro]

I switched them while you were reading that other thread.

Though like I said in my edit, then again they might not be identical, i might switch up one thing i might jsut take a cool power mechanic. this dragon thing might only resemble the original creature in the slightest.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Okay so we both have a bit of a communication issue between us.

Personally im not advocating that an NPCs statblock have only combat mechanics, but rather the question is do NPCs need to be bound by the same rules that PCs are when they are created?

When you create an NPC that is meant to be interacted with by a level 10 party does that NPC need to be built with the same rules that the PCs abide by?

My position is that an NPC really only needs to have stats that are relevant to what the Party needs to interact with.

I think that PCs should only have the mechanics necessary to interact with what they interact with as well. I think that is a significant, but not burdensome amount.

I had gotten into a similar debate with a fellow DM recently, he was designing an encounter where his BBEG was going to gate in, start and attack and then gate out. and he was stressing out over the fact that he couldnt find any way "by the rules" to have his BBEG open a portal and keep it open for the time he needed for him to do the stuff he needed to do.

I told him that he should just have this be a special gate or that he had an artifact that could hold open gates, or he just had an ability that let him do it. But he wanted to "play by the rules".

To me I think it cheapens the game, the BBEG isnt supposed to play by the rules, he supposed to cheat, lie and steal. he shouldn't be limited by the rules the players play by it makes him more powerful or dangerous that certain things just dont apply to him.

Here is a good issue, and one I meant to bring up earlier. We're not talking about presentation of the statblock at this point, we're talking about how we got there.

Sometimes, it's necessary to break the rules and make exceptions, for NPCs and PCs. That being said, in general I think it's necessary that the PCs and NPCs follow the same rules, to give a sense of fairness.

To give an example, I once had a DM who tormented us with an illusive mage who kept disappearing whenever we got near him. It seemed incredibly unfair because his actions seemed like things that no PC mage would ever be allowed to get away with-he wasn't required to roll initiative before acting, for instance. I don't know everything that went on behind the scenes, but it was a negative experience and one that shaped my DMing when I started. In a movie, a mysterious mage with unknown power might be cool, but it's hard to make that work in the game. I've run plenty of powerful mages myself, but I always made sure their actions were possible under the rules.

I think my players would call BS on me if I tried to pit them against an opponent whose capabilities were outside the boundaries of their character creation rules. I think they'd be right to do so. They do sometimes ask how a monster/NPC was able to perform a certain action, and I feel obligated to provide an answer to demonstrate that I am not just making the stuff up or setting the numbers at whatever seems convenient.

To give another example, once I needed to kill a character and make the death final to give a sense of completeness to the campaign. The available spells and feats weren't final enough, so I wrote up an artifact sword on the day of the session and used it. This was a bit cheesy, but artifacts give me a wide range of acceptable options and the game ran fine. I'm not above compromise in the name of a good story. That being said, I've also made arbitrarily powerful artifacts for PCs (far more often, really), so the sense of fairness remains. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

So at the end of the day, I firmly believe that NPC mages should follow the rules for spellcasting, that enemy monsters should get ability increases at the same rate that players do, and that any ability used by a character in the game should be describable under one set of rules (feats, spells, etc.) that apply to everyone.

 

[LostSoul]

Thanks again for the reply!

Pretty much.

Do those stats descend from being a powerful Daemon or do they descend from being a L27 solo?

They descend from him being a level 27 solo.

The big question is why is he a level 27 solo? The answer: because he's a powerful Daemon.

I don't think I've ever dealt with Epic-Tier characters; my experience has been with Heroic. And with Heroic Tier I divide it into Apprentice (1-3), Journeyman (4-6), Master (7-9), and Grandmaster (10). If I were to make a veteran warrior, I'd put him within the Journeyman "Tier Band" (4th to 6th level). The stats that our veteran warrior would have are derived from that level. I'd mix it up a little bit; an archer wearing leather would have a lower AC than a guy in plate with a shield, but for the most part those numbers don't move more than two or three points. There's probably more variance in the Epic Tier.

For instance, Deja's AC is 15 or 16 (high dex + skill), even though she's naked; standard AC is 19 for a 5th level controller. Not a big difference.

[sblock]Let's work out the archer in leather vs. the sword-and-boarder in plate. 4E says the archer's AC is 17, and the other guy's is 21. With PC rules, plate and shield is AC 20, leather is AC 12. Add 1/2 level bonus and you get 22 vs. 14; add in a Dex of 16 and you get 22 vs. 17. If it's a light shield instead of a heavy shield, AC 21 fits.

What I'd actually do is look at the AC that the level table gives me, and then use that to determine what kind of equipment the NPC is carrying. Which means at level 1 the archer is probably wearing no armour, and the sword-and-boarder has chain + shield.

This is hard to do in 4E, but in a new system I'd make sure that this was spelled out. I think you could put all that information in a table.

Hmm, maybe I should do that for my hack. That could be fun.[/sblock]

Why is his Fort 39? Is it because this describes his narrative concept as compared to the the narrative concept of the range of physical threats in the world? Or is it because the meth works for him to fight standard L27 characters?

Narrative concept. He's a demon lord, so he's going to be around the high end of the Epic Tier; the books say that means he's got a massive Fort. Which makes perfect sense to me.

Is his interaction with the world from a model/simulation point of view soemhow particularly distinct from a L27 solo Storm Giant with a Mace that throws fire bolts?

Probably not, though that's because of the guidelines we're working with. I'd probably figure out what the demon lord is lord of, then work out some special abilities from that. If I were to stat up Mammon, he'd have powers that magically brought out people's lust, avarice, and greed. (Which is why Deja's powers focus around those things. Well, lust in particular.) A level 27 Storm Giant - I'd give him the power to conjure storms and direct lightning bolts down from them, to shape the earth (erosion and rock), and basic stuff from being a big guy.

Why is his AC 41? What happens if he is standing there in his bare chested AC41 glory and his twin brother walks into the room sporting his brand new starmetal mystical full plate and magic shield? What is his AC?

Depends on the bonus, but I'd go with +2 or something like that. The reason being that his bare-chested AC 41 glory is as strong as starmetal. He's a demon lord; he doesn't need to wear armour! Putting on another layer of steel isn't going to help much.

If he were an Epic Level human, though, I'd reduce his AC by 10 or more if he were naked. (What's the exact number? 14? Yeah, then I'd reduce it by 14. Which means that you'd want to jump this guy when he's not prepared for it. I like that.)

You have taken everything from a look up table and painted the narrative on top. The narrative was irrelevant because the numbers were on the table already. (and no, tweaking a 39 to a 41 or 37 doesn't really help me)

What I did was take the narrative and use that to determine where I should look on the table, in the same way that one uses the narrative of a glass window vs. metal shutters to determine where you should look on the table to figure out how hard it is to break through. I don't think that's painting narrative on top.

I want to say: Here is an Axe. These mechanics describe how an axe works in this world. I don't know if the axe will be held by a L1 kobold or a demigod.

If it's the axe that's magical, I'd write up the axe and give it to the guy. If the axe were a level 30 magic item, then I'd say that using its lightning power was +33 vs Ref and did a little more damage. (This is one of the reasons I'm not too keen on Epic Tier; I want to say "Here is an axe" the same way you do. I can do that in Heroic Tier, but in later levels the math doesn't work as well.)

Here's an example magic item:

[sblock](21st) Armour of the Dread Golden Dwarf: This +5 wyrmscale armour was crafted by deephold dwarves long ago for their dreaded emperor. Made from the golden scales of Io after Erek-Hus, the King of Terror, killed the god of dragons with his wicked axe, this armour has a dread power: when donned it allows the wearer to read the secret fears and desires of anyone within 5 miles (+29 vs Will) simply by concentrating on that person. The armour bears a curse; it needs to have its wearer hoard away valuables for good (one RMTP of the wearer's level per week, never to be used again) else its effects may fail or be warped.

The +29 is derived from: lvl 21 + 5 magic item bonus + 3 for targeting Will.

RMTP means "random monetary treasure parcel"; you roll on the table in the DMG to determine the exact amount. I wasn't sure if I should have the armour demand a specific value of loot or if it would be happy as long as whoever was wearing it was doing their best to hoard away loot. I went with the latter. Either way makes sense, though I guess I could have gone with a level 17 treasure parcel (level 17 being the first time a level 21 magic item shows up). Now that would be a curse![/sblock]

 

[LostSoul]

Missed this earlier.

I can see why someone would love that.

But, to be clear, we all agree that mechanically this creature is completely identical to the proposed dragon with a thing for killing gnomes?

LostSoul, do you agree?

Yeah, and it makes me wonder if I am completely missing something - if that big wall of text just above is missing the point!

I wonder how much of this depends on system specifics. Could I use a 3.5 Balor as a dragon with vorpal claws and an entangling, whip-like tail? Maybe. Maybe not, though.

Now I am thinking that the inability to easily re-flavour mechanics - mechanics that take on a defined shape so, even if you paint over them, you can't help but see the original form beneath - is one of those things that my myopic RPG vision is keeping me from seeing.