D&D 5E (2024) NPCs, and the poverty of the core books

[nevin]

...what else would High Difficulty mean? If the encounter is guaranteed to kill off your PCs then it's not high difficulty, it's impossible.

In some systems High difficulty means it could kill off the entire party.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I’m unclear why people want to create more work for themselves by building NPCs like PCs.

Need a Nth level wizard? Use the Mage stat block from the MM, add/subtract some HP and a spell or two (or three). Done.

Need a Nth level X class analog? Pick the stat block from the MM that gives the flavor you want. Then, as needed, add/subtract some HP and/or add/subtract an ability or two as you see fit. Close enough and in a fraction of the time.

 

[nevin]

For AD&D, that would totally work. I just don't see how that would work in 5e. What are you improvising it based on? There's no Level 6 Wizard in the MM, and as noted above, the capabilities of PCs are quite different than NPCs in 5e.

Works just fine. 8 just make notes of what he did that session and if we meet him again he gets a bit better fleshed out with each encounter. Some of my best NPCs grew that way

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, I mostly agree with @Lanefan. There could be rare cases where conditions of being able to acquire the capability are so specific, that it would be unlikely* that a PC could be able to repeat them, but such things should be extremely rare. We are talking about basic stock opponents, those should not be super special unique things.

* Though I agree with Lanefan, that at least in theory, it should be possible. Then it is another matter whether we keep following the adventures of the PC once they become a lich or something like that.



No. Like this is not even hard. Many 5.0 NPCs used same spells than the PCs. They were still less complicated than full PCs. Like your argument is an utter non sequitur.

Yup. I literally do this with NPCs all the time. What @EzekielRaiden is saying makes zero sense to me.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't think 5E is intended to have NPCs with PC classes, at least not PHB PC classes.

Sure it did. It just didn't intend that to be the default. You don't provide for something you don't intend to be a part of the game, and the 5e DMG provides for NPCs with PC classes.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So what you're saying is, no one ever can discuss anything. Because, since the only thing we know is always our own experiences, we cannot ever talk about anything other than that experience, and that experience is so utterly unique to each individual person it means absolutely nothing.

I'm saying you can't speak for other people as though what you say on their behalf is in fact true. Because that isn't "discussing" things, it's just more or less white lying.

You know your opinions on a subject. You can and should give your opinions on a particular subject, because indeed that is where the "discussion" comes from. People discussing their opinions. But there is ZERO reason why you (or anyone) should be speaking on behalf of other people who they do not know and whose opinions and feelings they do not know, all in an effort to make it seem like their opinion "has more weight". If one's opinion is really that strong, no one should need to artificially create back-up for it by suggesting there's this vast sea of humanity that agrees with it.

Now, can one suggest that they think other people might possibly agree based on what has or has not happened or what they have or have not seen done or any other evidence they can give? Sure! I do that all the time myself. Heck, I guesstimate on what I think WotC does and does not think or what their feelings are on a particular subject based upon the results that I have seen. But I never state that what I'm saying is in fact true, it's merely my opinion based on their actions. When someone makes a point about some random X and I come back and say that based upon previous things WotC has said about "Rulings, Not Rules", that that's probably why X hasn't been done... I don't know if that is in fact true or the actual reason why we haven't seen X occur... but it's just my best guess on it and adding to the discussion. I'm not even saying I'm right... merely why I think I might be right.

You have a lot of what I think are good opinions on things (and many things I disagree with)... so stand tall with those opinions on their own. You don't need to make it seem better or more right by faking this idea that other people agree with you. Because quite frankly if your opinion is in fact better or more right, other people are going to chime into the thread as well to support it. And that's a stronger argument than making something up like "3/4ths of the playerbase don't want X!" as though you actually know what 3/4ths of the playerbase actually believe.

 

[Maxperson]

That is not the same as being impossible. If you have a fight that is actually balanced against the PCs the PCs would have a 50% chance of winning (probably with some deaths but still winning) and a 50% chance of a TPK.

That has never been what balance is defined as in RPGs. In RPGs, balance has and will always mean a range of balance, not perfect balance.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Well, they need someone to tell them.

I disagree. Because I do not think in this day and age we can assume new players are that stupid.

First of all... I do not think most new players are going to have nearly the same sort of issues with "NPCs look like PCs" that so many of our veteran players here are so annoyed about. THEY want the 5E24 MM to have different things because apparently they don't want to bother spending their time making the game "work" in the manner they want. They seem to prefer the game to just be "plug and play".

New players? I do not believe they will ever see this issue the same way as all the veteran players here, because that only really comes from actually playing games that had things differently and then being able to compare-and-contrast. IE: 5E14 had NPC spellcasters with full spell lists, 5E24 does not-- and if I want my players to be able to pick up that spellcaster's spellbook I now have to go through the effort of "creating" one myself. I'm now "worse off" using 5E24 than I was using 5E14.

But new players have never experienced 5E14! So they have no idea how much "worse off" they are, nor do they probably even think that this sort of thing is an issue because they are learning the game this new way that doesn't take the PCs gathering the enemy's spellbook as a normal thing to do. So there's nothing gained or lost for new players, because their games are so much different than the veteran players here.

Unfortunately though... this is something we get a whole lot of people here on these boards always doing... which is speaking on behalf of the "poor newbs" out there who are not getting something they "obviously need" because the speaker is the one who actually wants it it and thus if they need it then of course new players need it too! Like the 5E24 DMG "telling new players they can use outside sources from the three core books if there are things they want to have in their game that the three core books do not provide" as though they couldn't possibly come up with that idea themselves.

The irony of course is that in this particular case... it is veterans who do not need to be told something still wanting that information made available in the books for other players for... reasons. They will SAY it's because they are trying to look out for the little guys... but if I had to make a "wild assumption", it's because those veteran players can't stand the thought of Wizards of the Coast possibly producing a game that doesn't match their expectations of what a proper Dungeons & Dragons game should be. It's as though the owners of D&D are tacitly telling us that how we run our games is wrong. Now I don't believe that's in fact true... but it's the impression I get from a lot of people here on EN World. But I for one do not have my ego so fused to this game that I give a rat's ass how WotC or anyone feels about how I run my game. So there's zero need for any of these books to ever match my expectations or desires. It's too bad more people don't feel the same way, because I think they'd all be a lot happier.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure it did. It just didn't intend that to be the default. You don't provide for something you don't intend to be a part of the game, and the 5e DMG provides for NPCs with PC classes.

But not the 5.5 DMG, so it's clear that their intentions have changed.

 

[SkidAce]

It seems like what some folks want is a set of tables or formulae to calculate what the CR of creature should be based on its abilities - or able to reverse engineer a creature from a chosen CR. The problem is that any such calculation requires the designers to decide AC16 = 1 point = Con 18 = one 2nd level spell = 4d6 lighting damage breath weapon in a 30’ cone. The amount of effort needed to do this is off the charts, and even if you did do it every ability, and then adequately took into account the multiple combinations then party mix would change the variables again because a party of X doesn’t play the same as a party of Y.

3e/Pathfinder 1e arguably needed a CR calculator with specific ranges and stats because it lacked bounded accuracy. Getting this wrong could easily kill your players or leave them whiffling impotently against ACs or saves beyond their ability. You know what… it still didn’t work very well because of the aforementioned party variables.

That isn’t the case in 5e. If you boost an NPCs AC up or down by 2 it likely isn’t going to make a dramatic difference. Similarly if you add an extra spell per day. Or even a spell of one level higher than they could previously cast. 5e is a forgiving game. The DM should feel confident to mess about with things without needing to follow formulae.

Poverty? There are more NPC stat blocks in 2024 MM than in any previous Monster Manual. 46 in 2024 compared to 22 in 2014. Dozens and dozens of examples there of NPCs to show you how to do it. Of more detail and varied levels than ever before too. I love how you can see higher level versions of the same type of NPC.

The best advice on creating new creatures for new players… Take an appropriate stat block and adjust it. Folks have creating monsters for games for about 50 years now without a set of formulae. Do we really need to have them published in the core book now?

I liked this post and quoted it for truth. I wish I could praise it more.