D&D General Are NPCs like PCs?

[Lanefan]

And how do you model that in game terms ? Or are you just saying to the players "he is a good merchant, so you cannot get good prices from him" ? Do you roll checks, maybe persuasion ? What bonus do you ascribe ?

Everyone in my game has a proficiency at whatever their trade is, on an open-ended d10. A "master merchant" would at minimum be a 9, so if it came to a roll (which it likely wouldn't if freeform role-play could carry the situation) I'd roll a d10 and try to get 9 or less.

Of course not. Henchmen have always been NPCs, why should they have all PCs abilities ?

Three reasons:

One, I let players run their own henches. Two, henches very often end up graduating to become full PCs in their own right if-when the boss retires or is killed or if the player simply finds the hench more interesting/fun to play than the boss. Three, the only difference betwene a hench and a boss is level; henches are classed and levelled adventuring characters.

Note that I'm not talking about basic hirelings here e.g. the commoners a party might hire to look after their horses while the party's up in the mountains for a week. I'm talking about adventuring henches. I'm not sure offhand whether 5e even supports the concept (I think it does) but you'd have seen it in 3e as the "cohort" that came with the Leadership feat or in 1e where henches were an assumed fact of adventuring life.

I'm a bit lost there, why then do you need PC mechanics ?

Mechanics are there to abstract that which cannot be done in person at the table.

As most of this bodyguard's uniqueness is coming from his personality, which can be played out in person at the table, mechanics aren't required.

The thing is how do you create the NPC ? How do you assign abilities to him that make him a master merchant which is certainly not an adventurer ? Don't you need a +7 or more in persuation or deception ? How do you do this with PC rules without giving him levels ?

Start with a commoner. Give him decent Int and Wis scores and very good Cha. Give him a high to very high number on his merchanting skill (the d10 I mentioned upthread)*. Give him a personality that reeks of understated but obvious success, perhaps just a tiny bit overbearing but clearly internally strong, self-confident, and good at what he does. Give him some signs of wealth e.g. well-dressed but not flashy. Then roleplay the hell out of him if-when he meets any PCs.

* - even this can be skipped; it's a houserule system I use for PCs as well, to roughly determine how good they were at whatever they did before adventuring.

 

[Reynard]

Sure. Why should an NPC have a trained or granted power that a PC who chose the right background and character concept couldn't aspire to theoretically reach. Why should it be gated off?

Because PC abilities serve an entirely different purpose than NPC abilities, because PCs and NPCs are different orders.

 

[Lanefan]

For the below, NPC in all cases means NPC member of a PC-playable species. Monsters need not apply here.

I'm also talking about powers/abilities/spells that others can learn; innate monster/creature abilities e.g. Elvish night-sight or Umber Hulk confusion effects are NOT part of this.

It feels like there are several different arguments going on in this thread.
1) Do all NPCs need a PC class?

No, but all healthy NPCs in theory have the potential to pick up a class if they're willing to put in the time and training (or work).

2) Do all NPCs need to have a regular class structure?

Yes, if this means what I think it means: NPCs use the same classes as PCs. That said, I'm very open to there being non-adventuring classes or quasi-classes geared mainly toward NPCs (Artificer being a good example); a player could make a PC one of these but it'd be nearly useless in the field.

3) Do all NPCs need to roughly try to model something that could fit into a world where certain skillsets are modeled by the PC classes and others could be modeled by NPC classes I guess if anyone had the time for that?

I don't understand the question.

4) Do powers NPCs have need to be gainable by the PCs right now.

If the powers are of a suitable level for the PCs then they should have been gainable by appropriate PCs all along. Adding them in now is a rather clunky retcon.

5) Do powers NPCs have need to be gainable by a new starting PC if they did the appropriate things to get it, including possibly forgoing other powers or playing an NPC class (which might not have existed in written form until it was needed by the player wanting to do these things and convinced you they would do it if you wrote it up)?

Yes, I think, if I'm understanding the question right.

I don't think conflating these helps anything. I'm voting yes for 3 and 5.

How am I saying the Merchant has a PC class? I am not invoking 1. Has anyone in this thread invoked 1?

The 3e designers did, I think, long before this thread came about.

@Lanefan , is there something you feel the above list is missing? Which are you arguing for? (And thanks for any feedback!)

One thing: it all works in reverse as well. PC powers and abilities should be gainable by appropriate NPCs.

If being one of the sacred chosen of nameless deity requires training since 6 months old... then a player who wants that power needs to have in their background that they started at 6 months old and everything that comes with that. How does that undermine anything?

Agreed. My only point about those sort of things is that overusing them can very quickly come across as contrived.

 

[Cadence]

Because PC abilities serve an entirely different purpose than NPC abilities, because PCs and NPCs are different orders.

Say, the NPC's "pack attack" (or whatever) ability might have a "daily" or "encounter" power that is only that way because it was thought of for book keeping purposes to make the DMs life easier. Would you keep the power the same if the PCs wanted to recruit the NPC as a henchmen? Or would you modify it to make it work like it would for a regular party member? In either case, why couldn't that idea then be used for a new PC if one of the characters and the henchmen died, say?

 

[Lanefan]

Why? Bodyguard is not a PC class. If there was one it may have abilities very different from existing classes. Why would you restrict what a bodyguard can do / be for really no reason I can see?

Bodyguard is not a class for PCs or NPCs. If it was, it'd be a (probably sub-optimal for adventuring purposes) sub-class of Fighter and available to all.

 

[Lanefan]

Trying to insert simulationist "sensibilities" ionto D&D is an object lesson in futility.

I've never really found it to be so; but then I'm not trying to do it with a WotC-era version which are generally more gamist.

If you prefer a simulationist standpoint, other games (like GURPS, so I'm told) do it far better. D&D and games based on its chassis are a bad fit for a simulationist mindset, and this is something that has been noted since nigh the beginning.

As written the fit might not be great but a little kitbashing can go a very long way here.

 

[Reynard]

Say, the NPC's "pack attack" (or whatever) ability might have a "daily" or "encounter" power that is only that way because it was thought of for book keeping purposes to make the DMs life easier. Would you keep the power the same if the PCs wanted to recruit the NPC as a henchmen? Or would you modify it to make it work like it would for a regular party member? In either case, why couldn't that idea then be used for a new PC if one of the characters and the henchmen died, say?

If a NPCs ability was designed specifically to work like a PC ability, that's a different situation. That's unlikely to be the case in 5e, but I'll grant it's possible.

I also want to reiterate what I have already said: I absolutely don't have a problem with a player finding inspiration for an ability or spell or whatever they would like as a PC ability. The idea that I am arguing against is the idea that just because I give an evil wizard a unique spell or an assassin a unique attack for the purpose of creating a fun and interesting encounter, that I am somehow obligated to make that thing available to PCs and as such balanced for PCs. No, you can't have access to Darkfire Tentacle Swarm (or whatever).

 

[Lanefan]

And what if it's not learned ? The Death Knight did not learn his abilities, but neither are they racial.

Yes they are "racial", as in something inherent to the creature simply because of what it is; just like a 1e Vampire's level-drain attack is an inherent ability of the creature.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Bodyguard is not a class for PCs or NPCs. If it was, it'd be a (probably sub-optimal for adventuring purposes) sub-class of Fighter and available to all.

What?! The game has never tried to place every possible NPC in a PC build. That is just ridiculous

 

[Cadence]

If a NPCs ability was designed specifically to work like a PC ability, that's a different situation. That's unlikely to be the case in 5e, but I'll grant it's possible.

I also want to reiterate what I have already said: I absolutely don't have a problem with a player finding inspiration for an ability or spell or whatever they would like as a PC ability. The idea that I am arguing against is the idea that just because I give an evil wizard a unique spell or an assassin a unique attack for the purpose of creating a fun and interesting encounter, that I am somehow obligated to make that thing available to PCs and as such balanced for PCs. No, you can't have access to Darkfire Tentacle Swarm (or whatever).

It makes me sad that you won't let me go on an epic quest to find a copy of the necronomican, train during my down time for 10 years, and pledge my soul to the great outer void, so that I can have that sweet sweet Darkforce Tentacle Swarm to use against the final BBEG.