Confused about NPC/Monster generation

[Kraydak]

Weapons and armor do matter for NPCs and monsters that use gear, IIRC. I think we did a pass on the MM to make sure that the critters were using armor and gear from the PH. Thus, if a monster is described as wearing chain and it somehow loses that armor, you know how much to reduce his AC.

The same goes for weapons - I believe that we standardized damage expressions to match the weapon that the creature carried. If you swap the ogre's club for a sword, his damage foes change. Now, YMMV whether that's enough of a change, but the change would be there.

The key is that, with the baselines, you know where that puts the monster with respect to the average critter.

Is the Pit Fiend wearing a breastplate? The fluff says yes, the equipment list says no, the presumable resources of a Devil lord says he should fill out every freaking magic item slot, no questions asked.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

(I deleted some things to avoid over-quoting; I left just the parts I wanted to address...)

OK. I've run into the 'loot the bodies' problem in my own games (gods, have I!), but abstracting out equipment to a vague 'NPC bonus' just slams right into my willing suspension of disbelief. It also leaves me with issues regarding equipment-affecting spells, abilities, and tactics -- if I just describe an ogre as "Wearing a battered breastplate", and someone removes that somehow, his AC ought to go down, and if the MM entry for "Ogre" likewise includes "assumed equipment", I don't know how much is breastplate and how much is ogre hide. "Wing it!" says the peanut gallery. Yeah, I can, but today I decide it's +3 and tomorrow I forget and it's +4, and that kind of inconsistency IS noted by players and further handwaving about "Uh, these are the rare ironhide ogres of the northern passes, yeah..." just muddies the waters more. 3x's wall-o-numbers that broke down every factor in AC, to-hit, damage, etc might have been overwhelming, but they were damn useful in real play.

I much prefer "Featower Attack" to "building power attack into his stats", at least if that's not somehow made explicit. I understand you don't want to give monsters feats in 4e, but mechanistic systems like "Trait:Wild Attacker. +2 damage/-2 to hit", as something I can bolt on to any monster (and which is explicitly noted as pre-bolted to the Ogre) works better for me.

I suppose my confusion is about whether, in game terms, equipment is "flavor text" or "real". That is, if I say "Monster X does Y damage", it doesn't matter if I describe him as having a greatsword, a maul, or a rabid weasel on pole; it does Y damage. But for the PCs, in turn, the weapons DO matter (i'm guessing...). If a PC is "expected" to do 10 points of damage/round at his level but decides he wants to use a rusty dagger, he will, I'm guessing, do less damage than anticipated.

Who is to say that the Goblins sword deals the same for a Goblin as for a Human. Or even better, an Ogre wielding a club vs. the Human using it. Some weapons and Armor might not be transferrable between species at all, and sometimes not even between different wearers.
If an opponent switches to a different weapon, you could make a general rule of "this reduces its damage by half".

In cases where the stats are not given in detail, but just by "fluff" (wears Armor X), you could go this way:
Let's assume a normal Breast Plate grants +5 to AC. If, say, the Rogue manages to steal the Pit Fiends breast plate while he was showering, this reduces its AC by -5. It shouldn't be hard to keep this stuff consistent, since you know what these items usually do for PCs.

 

[Shroomy]

Is the Pit Fiend wearing a breastplate? The fluff says yes, the equipment list says no, the presumable resources of a Devil lord says he should fill out every freaking magic item slot, no questions asked.

However, according to the 3.5e MM, the pit fiend does not come equiped with a full complement of magical equipment.

 

[Incenjucar]

Good point, Mustrum.

After all, who's to say that the stats from items aren't based largely on class features and feats?

Perhaps Pit Fiends have great AC because they're trained in armor use like fighters are.

You could even give them abilities that say that, because they have a class ability that effectively enchants their equipment for them, actual magic equipment would be redundant.

 

[rkanodia]

However, according to the 3.5e MM, the pit fiend does not come equiped with a full complement of magical equipment.

Boom! Headshot.

 

[I'm A Banana]

However, according to the 3.5e MM, the pit fiend does not come equiped with a full complement of magical equipment.

What better time to fix this than at an edition change, right?

 

[FourthBear]

I think it's also worth noting that from what we've seen in the magic item articles in 4e, the component of AC that is due to magical items is going to be drastically reduced in 4e. There appears to be precisely one, count it, one magic item whose magical bonus adds to Armor Class: the armor enhancement bonus. Even shields no longer have an enhancement bonus to AC (they will apparently fend off danger in other ways). No more rings of protection, amulets of natural armor and half a dozen other gewgaws that were there to explain that final AC 45. Therefore, the significance of magical item loss on NPCs AC will be much, much less. What that means to the likelihood of a Saga-like Defense bonus to characters is left to the reader. It does mean that PCs should not be shocked by the lack of magical armor on a foe with a high AC, unless they are shocked by +1 to +3 in total bonuses in the Heroic to Paragon tier.

 

[DandD]

For once, I'm inclined to agree to Lizard and other anti-4th edition-posters regarding all this hand-waving stuff, at least to some point.
I really hope that Mearls and co. have come out with a really good NPC- and Monster-creation-rule, but I somehow get the vague feeling that it won't be that good as I hoped.
I dunno, it's just some feeling. I hope to be wrong.

 

[rkanodia]

What better time to fix this than at an edition change, right?

I strongly suspect that if you are hoping that 4E will emphasize bringing more PC-creation folderal to more types of non-player entities, you are going to be sadly disappointed.

 

[Kraydak]

However, according to the 3.5e MM, the pit fiend does not come equiped with a full complement of magical equipment.

The pit fiend comes with standard coins/double good/standard items. If the DM doesn't gear him up, thats his problem. In the same way that an PC classed NPC (generally) has gear totalling up to a set value based on level, NOT a set list of gear based on level.