15 Minute NPCs

[chaotix42]

Or you can just throw some seeds down and see what happens. Sometimes the simplest of gardens produce delicious fruit.

Unfortunately the fruit and veggies are often wilted or ridden with bug-chewed holes, causing your dinner guests to turn their noses up in the air or just downright throw the dish away in favor of dessert.

 

[Storminator]

Didn't ask for point buy or stat selection. I will do that. And please only these classes:

This always happens. People say they can do this stuff easy-peasy, but then when I ask for something I really want, I get a restricted list.

OK,

I want a bounty hunter. Fighter/Paladin/Ranger. 32 point buy, 2 level bumps in INT. CR 16. I want to explore if I want one class dominant (and if so, which one), or balanced levels. Stat the warhorse as well, and the animal companion. Again with an eye towards different level combos.

PS

 

[kennew142]

I completely disagree.

IME, some players (including me) can feel cheated if the world, including NPCs, are generating using meta-game knowledge. If they are built organically using tables and charts they may not always be 'optimized' but they are just as much fun to play and run because they feel natural.

What you are talking about is not organic design - it is random design. Anyone can make random NPCs if they don't care about the result. In order to make NPCs that are interesting and fit the backstory of the campaign world, it is necessary to choose the attributes of the character.

It is the time spent on mechanical fiddling in 3e that I resent.

I also dispute that random NPCs feel natural. They feel random. AD&D had tables for randomly building dungeons, complete with treasure and monsters. I know some GMs who used them, but I don't know anyone who would make the argument that the scenarios created with them were more organic and natural.

I probably spend about 45 minutes to an hour on each NPC. Since my campaign is mostly about NPC enemies, this is a considerable investment in time for each story. The storyline in my campaigns is very important. Random NPCs do not work any better than random scenarios would.

Yes, I have tried the tables in PHB2. The results were, from a narrative viewpoint, unsatisfying (to say the least).

 

[grimslade]

Sure, you make a random NPC fast. You can also use straight monsters from the MM or crib NPCs from published adventures. Or use the DMG NPC classes. No customizing necessary. The DMG1 had charts with premade NPCs of all classes with magic items, even quicker.

To create specific campaign adversaries takes time. A lot of it has to do with the play style of your group. If you have a group of rules savvy, power gamers, you are going to have to log more time building your NPCs. Both to account for a greater challenge and to meet their level of detail. Nothing bogs combat down more than adding up synergies, enhancements and spell effects to an NPC and getting called out by a player. Obviously, the more options allowed the more complex the NPC beast becomes. PrC pre-reqs, feat optimization, spell choice all increase exponentially with more splat.

Take a mid level druid. Its a nightmare. Make him a summoner with an animal companion and his stat block will take several pages. And this is a straight shot druid, no multiclass, no PrC. Cleric is almost as bad but no alternate forms or animal companion.

Even staying stringent CORE takes more time than the NPC will exist in the game. The NPC might get two or three chances to do anything for even 15 minutes of work. It is bad RoI.

 

[Mercule]

Didn't ask for point buy or stat selection. I will do that. And please only these classes:

....

If you want a prestige class, please nothing psionic or from Tome of Magic or Bo9S or Incarnum.

So, it's fast, within limitations, then.

The major enemy IMC is psionic. They have elan. And undead. And ardents. Psi-warriors are as common as fighters or warblades. It takes about 60 minutes to build a significant NPC. A 10th level command team (fighter, ardent, telepath, evoker), including equipment, took most of my prep time for two weeks (I have four kids, so I don't get an hour at a shot).

I will agree that PHB2 is a huge help and has dropped my times significantly. But, it's PHB2, not PHB. If you need a table like that to bring down the times, there's still something wrong.

By comparison, turned out six encounters (only classed character was a warlock) in one rare, four-hour block by using the tools from PHB2, Dungeonscape, and MIC. I'd actually credit the latter two with being more beneficial. It sounds like both have indicators of the 4E thought process, too. I'd consider that a good thing, especially if the PHB2 table is no longer necessary.

 

[xechnao]

To the same extent? Or have they actually addressed the problem proactively, as they claim to have done, and have reduced the impact of complexity on NPC and monster design?

Your point was about time needed to make "interesting" NPCS. The only advantage of 4e is that it has addressed game balance issues regarding options overall -or at least they say so. But this will be till the splatbooks come or it gets proved at some point that not enough playtesting investment was done.

Generally the more options to choose the more time you will need and furthermore the more options to choose the harder it will be to balance something in a d20 game and again the more and more time you will need.

 

[takasi]

12th level wizard NPC, specialist (your choice). Gnome. Assume he's the big bad NPC at the end of the module and he's ready to fight the PCs!

Here's what I would do, very quickly of course:

Milweather Shallowshadow
Male gnome illusionist 12
N Small humanoid (gnome)
Languages Common, Gnome, Elven, Sylvan
--------------------
AC 18, touch 12, flat-footed 16
hp 67 (12 HD)
Fort +7, Ref +5, Will +5
--------------------
Melee mwk dagger +5 (1d3-2 / 19-20)
Base Atk +6; Grp +4
Spells (CL 12th, ranged touch +1)
6th (2) - 2 Heightened Shadow Evocation
5th (3) - Heightened Phantasmal Killer, Heightened Shadow Conjuration, Shadow Evocation
4th (3) - Greater Invisibility, Phantasmal Killer, Shadow Conjuration
3rd (5) - Displacement, Haste, Fly, 2 Dispel Magic
2nd (5) - Invisibility, Mirror Image, Alter Self, Levitate, See Inivisibility
1st (5) - Charm Person, Color Spray, Silent Image, Disguise Self, Magic Missile
0 (4) - Detect Magic, read magic, disrupt undead, mage hand
Specialty Illusion; Banned School Necromancy
--------------------
Abilities Str 6, Dex 13, Con 16, Int 17, Wis 12, Cha 10
SQ summon familiar, speak with burrowing animals
Skills Concentration 15/+18, Spellcraft 15/+18, Decipher Script 15/+18, Knowledge (arcana) 15/+18, Knowledge (the planes) 15/+18
Feats Spell Focus (illusion), Scribe Scroll, Greater Spell Focus (illusion), Spell Penetration, Heighten Spell, Improved Counterspell, Empower Spell
Possessions masterwork dagger, bracers of armor +4, headband of intellect +2, amulet of natural armor +1, ring of protection +1, 1450 gp, spellbook

 

[takasi]

I will agree that PHB2 is a huge help and has dropped my times significantly. But, it's PHB2, not PHB. If you need a table like that to bring down the times, there's still something wrong.

Why?

Why if you need tables does it make something wrong?

The solution IMO is to make more tables as new splatbooks come out.

I also think the issue has more to do with gamism vs simulationism, again. Gamists are going to take much, much longer to make an NPC. Why? They are metagaming. They are building something that's mechanically cool and a fun challenge.

A simulationist doesn't care about the metagame. He just wants to generate something organically using the ruleset. That's where better tables are useful, like the PHB 2.

 

[WhatGravitas]

I also think the issue has more to do with gamism vs simulationism, again. Gamists are going to take much, much longer to make an NPC. Why? They are metagaming. They are building something that's mechanically cool and a fun challenge.

The problem is, if you're a game designer, you have to put both together - the NPC must be a fun challenge AND fit the theme.

And why had your gnome wizard never a bump in his intelligence score? And only two 6th level spells? 2 from wizard, plus one from being specialist! And only five 1st level spells? That should be 4 (wizard) + 1 (specialist) + 1 (Int-bonus). And where is his spellbook? And the headband of intellect isn't factored in. And synergy bonuses are missing.

That statblock is neat and usable, but it's missing a lot. Sure, it's a very quick version, but still - it should be that fast without missing stuff if possible.

Cheers, LT.

 

[takasi]

The problem is, if you're a game designer, you have to put both together - the NPC must be a fun challenge AND fit the theme.

That doesn't mean agonizing over a stat block for an hour and a half picking 'the perfect combo' though. And if you think 'faster' isn't 'better', then why tout 4th edition's speed?

Personally, I prefer a more organic, non-tailored and metagamed series of stat blocks.

And why had your gnome wizard never a bump in his intelligence score? And only two 6th level spells? 2 from wizard, plus one from being specialist! And only five 1st level spells? That should be 4 (wizard) + 1 (specialist) + 1 (Int-bonus). And where is his spellbook? And the headband of intellect isn't factored in. And synergy bonuses are missing.

That statblock is neat and usable, but it's missing a lot.

The bump in his intelligence score is there (from 15 to 17) but I did not factor in the headband.

I also missed the specialist stuff, but (just an excuse I know) I was on the phone and not ready to do this until 10 am, but did it anyway for fun.