D&D 5E DM's: How Do You Justify NPC's Having Magic/Abilities That Don't Exist in the PHB?

[Bill Zebub]

A world in which all powers/abilities are things that can be understood and maybe even acquired by the PCs seems horribly boring to me.

I’m thinking of the original REH Conan stories, and all the creepy supernatural things his opponents did. Now imagine that Conan was all, “Yeah that’s just a 4th level spell. Not impressed.”

 

[Hussar]

/snip?

I think it just makes the game better when there are answers to these questions that are more involved than "that's just how the game is".

And yet I just ran a lengthy adventure featuring a lot of monks whose stat blocks in no way resembled classes the pcs could take and it was glorious.

I have zero interest in forcing dms to spend gobs of hours rebuilding pc classes as monsters. No thanks. Dming is hard enough.

And frankly, in 3e where you actually did build monsters that way, it just meant I never used classed monsters or npcs.

 

[James Gasik]

And yet I just ran a lengthy adventure featuring a lot of monks whose stat blocks in no way resembled classes the pcs could take and it was glorious.

I have zero interest in forcing dms to spend gobs of hours rebuilding pc classes as monsters. No thanks. Dming is hard enough.

And frankly, in 3e where you actually did build monsters that way, it just meant I never used classed monsters or npcs.

I'm not saying to go back to 3e, if you notice, I point out in my post that you quoted that I'm specifically not saying that. But I don't see how having an explanation, if it comes up, isn't better than a shrug and "that's the way it is".

 

[jgsugden]

Monsters and NPCs can have different abilities. If a PC wants to learn it, you can make it a plot point.

Also, Project Image gets you most of the way to what you want. If you want to take it the rest of the way using core rules, you just need a way to deliver a fatal blow at an incredible range. One method I've used before was Otiluke's Freezing Sphere or Delayed Blast Fireball handed to a familiar that was then teleported to a location to go boom. I also had a bad guy voice his displeasure with a general by using Meteor Swarm on his entire army. These are just a few of many options for long distance murder under RAW.

 

[Hussar]

I'm not saying to go back to 3e, if you notice, I point out in my post that you quoted that I'm specifically not saying that. But I don't see how having an explanation, if it comes up, isn't better than a shrug and "that's the way it is".

But that’s just a deep dark rabbit hole. Every explanation, particularly if it appears in a published book, becomes yet another rallying point around which folks will gather to endlessly kvetch about and obvious examples of the lack of creativity on the part of the publisher.

We see it now. Any time WotC actually does even hint at a reason, you get endless bitching about it.

Far better for WotC to just remain silent and not feed the fire.

 

[Micah Sweet]

A world in which all powers/abilities are things that can be understood and maybe even acquired by the PCs seems horribly boring to me.

I’m thinking of the original REH Conan stories, and all the creepy supernatural things his opponents did. Now imagine that Conan was all, “Yeah that’s just a 4th level spell. Not impressed.”

It's pretty much too late for that, what with how D&D magic works.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But that’s just a deep dark rabbit hole. Every explanation, particularly if it appears in a published book, becomes yet another rallying point around which folks will gather to endlessly kvetch about and obvious examples of the lack of creativity on the part of the publisher.

We see it now. Any time WotC actually does even hint at a reason, you get endless bitching about it.

Far better for WotC to just remain silent and not feed the fire.

I would still prefer answers. Opaque game design bothers me.

 

[James Gasik]

But that’s just a deep dark rabbit hole. Every explanation, particularly if it appears in a published book, becomes yet another rallying point around which folks will gather to endlessly kvetch about and obvious examples of the lack of creativity on the part of the publisher.

We see it now. Any time WotC actually does even hint at a reason, you get endless bitching about it.

Far better for WotC to just remain silent and not feed the fire.

Interesting. So keeping silent is a better example of creativity and preventing people from complaining than actually saying something? As we're in a thread where some people are complaining that they didn't say anything?

I don't follow, sorry.

Anyways, I'm not saying it's up to WotC; why can't the DM make an explanation that makes sense for their world? And please don't respond with "The DM shouldn't have to, they have enough to do", this isn't exactly difficult. Here, how about this:

The apprentice frowned, unsure of how to frame her question to her master. "I don't understand, you say that, as a wizard, we can unlock magical secrets from beyond the walls of our world, and yet, some creatures can use magic that is walled off to us?"

The older man sat back a moment. "I once asked the same questions you are asking now. What I can tell you is what my master said to me, and my own studies in the matter. You are familiar with how some priests are invested with powers by their faith, or how some unfortunate souls, desperate for power, will broker contracts with powerful, alien entities for a measure of magic? Long ago, before the races of Elf, Dwarf, and Man rose to prominence, the world was a much more savage place than it is now. This was the era where monstrous beings were born.

The Gods, having begun the process of creation, were now populating the world with beasts of their own design. Each more powerful than the last. Seeing their creations being overrun by newer, stronger, and perhaps stranger entities, the Gods imbued them with powers. In those times, there were no limits to the abilities one could give a creature, and so trolls gained their power to recover form virtually any injury, dragons gained the powers of flight and to exhale elemental power from within, and so on. These abilities are certainly magical, in their way, but they do not function as spells do. No learning or enlightenment is required to achieve them; they are innate to their being, though perhaps some training is required to master them.

Eventually, however, the Gods realized the destruction they were causing, and they made an agreement; new races were created, with the ability to use tools, and the power to acquire powers through hard work and discipline. The scope of these powers were given distinct limits, so that one could not acquire the power to level mountains without great dedication, so that when they gained such powers, one would hope they had acquired the wisdom to know when, and how, let alone if they should be employed."

"But Master, why not take away the powers from the monstrous beings? Wouldn't that make it harder for the younger races to survive?"

"Whoever said survival was meant to be easy? The Gods willed that this would be a world where power must be earned. But they are not in the habit of stripping away what they have given. We have the potential to become masters of this world, by taming the Great Beasts. But we have to work for it, it won't just be handed to us. Now that having been said, there are ways to replicate the ancient powers, but remember, there is always a cost to one's body, mind, and soul. For example, a spell could transform you into a dragon; but while the spell is in effect, you would become a dragon. You would think as a dragon does. And you would no longer be a wizard. These are the rules of the world, and while they can be bent, or occasionally circumvented, they were not meant to be broken. I urge you not to attempt to break them; the results may very well be...catastrophic. Now, fetch me my book, Lysander's Theorems of Applied Sorcery, volume VII, if you please."

 

[Hussar]

Meh. Simply don't care.

Why can those monks break spells? Because they are Spellbreaker Monks. Can you learn to do it? Nope.

I have zero interest in that level of world building, either as a player or a DM.

But, I was specifically talking about in published books - as in what the game designers do, since that is something that's been brought up multiple times and even @Micah Sweet specifically responded to with "opaque" game design.

It's not opaque at all. It's perfectly easy to understand. The monster can do X. Why? Who cares? How? Doesn't matter. Why can dragons fly? How do they breathe fire? Again, that's just what dragons do.

And the second that WotC actually does come out with an explanation, you get the typical response that they are being "disrespectful" to canon or the original creators, or they've ignored some 30 year old Dragon magazine article or a thousand other things that people will bitch about whenever WotC actually does come out with any sort of explanation. Endlessly and over and over again.

I'd much, much prefer they just keep silent. Then all people can do is complain that there is no lore. That's an easy thing to fix, as you so rightly put it. Write your own that works for your table if you need to.

I'm just so unbelievably tired of listening to the endless bitching about every single thing that WotC does that I would much, much rather they stay silent and not feed the trolls.

 

[pemerton]

And you stop and go "wait, why can only Bugbears do that?". Surely anyone with powerful upper body strength should be able to garrote someone?

In 4e D&D, this is what p 42 of the DMG is for.

A Kobold who gets advantage attacking something one of his buddies is standing next to? Seems dubious (especially now that PC Kobolds have lost this ability!). Surely anyone could train to work together as a team?

Why does the kobold ability represent training?

Big chunks of 4e stat blocks are not intended to represent training. They're there to drive the fiction. Eg Hobgoblins on their own are tough to defeat, but in phalanxes are near-unbreakable: that's a decision about the fiction, not a conjecture about the capabilities of Hobgoblins.

You seem the same thing on the player side too. STR paladins have Valiant Strike, ie a bonus to hit when outnumbered by foes. This isn't a prediction about or model of how the paladin fights. It's function is to make paladins valiant, by giving the player a reason to have their paladin PC hurl themselves into the fray.

It is these features, on both the player and GM side, that make 4e the most colourful, vivid version of D&D as far as combat is concerned. (It mostly uses different mean out of combat.)