d20 needs different rules for NPCs

[Numion]

To compare villain encounters to movies or videogames, they never feature a quick bad guy defeat. Never. Because the pacing of a good story requires some dramatic fighting, and stuff. And maybe a monologue.

I mentioned the BBEG Vampire incident in which the BBEG was disintegrated before his first action. It wouldn't make sense for me to artificially fudge or include rules to the contrary - that would only mean that in the long run the party wizard would zap the BBEGs with Magic Missiles for a couple of rounds with an asking look on their face "May I now bring in the big guns?".

I like the more surprising nature of D&D gameplay compared to videogames. Comparison to books is besides the point - a good thing novels is generally not a good thing in RPGs.

 

[reanjr]

I would like to see a product like this, but with many more than 4 archetypes. The following would be useful archetypes

Necromancer (with undead followers that scale with him)
Skilled swordman
Brute (in Medium, Large, and Huge sizes)
Sorcerer (focusing on AoE spells and such)
Enchanter (charms, illusions, and such)
Flying beasts (Large sized and up)
Hulking beasts (Large sized and up)
Pack animal
Delver (burrowing beast of Medium size an up)
Sneak (Small and Medium sized, assassin type)

Also, see Fiendish Codex for Demon roles (and presumably FCII)

There are plenty of others that would be very useful

 

[Fenes]

There's always Jami's NPC Generator, 3.0E there, with a link to a 3.5E Generator.

 

[Mercule]

As long as the product was just a shortcut or shorthand method of acheiving roughly the same results, I'd be fine with it. I don't mind a bit of DM fiat in this area, either.

I don't like the idea of truly different potentials for the PCs/NPCs, though. It may not be easy, pleasant, or fun for the PCs to do what certain NPCs have done, and that's fine, but all roads should be theoretically viable.

This is, of coures, assuming relatively similar starting points. Things that gods, dragons, etc. can do by virtue of being gods, dragons, etc. aren't really part of the equation unless the scope of the game allows PCs to be gods, dragons, etc. Going down that path is really just a strawman.

So long as it changes the chicken scratches on the paper, but not the end result in game play, I'm okay with it. If it makes it so that NPCs can do things that PCs can't (even in theory) do, then it's going down a path I'm not interested in.

 

[Gundark]

1) My personal preference is for LESS databasing of my work, rather than more.
2) Also contingent in this is a desire for fewer stat references. In my opinion, if NPC stats were perfect as-is, WotC would not have tinkered with them three times in the past five years, and continually experiment with different ways to present NPCs and monster to game masters. I feel it's because the more stats that have to be referenced, the slower a DM is to respond to players' in-game tactics. I have NO trouble at all with 1st through roughly 9th level characters. It's those NPCs from 10th to 20th level that drive me batty.

I don't need the level of detail the players do, for an NPC that's going to spend all of five rounds on the battlefield, and the players have never cared whether he had a fort save that was 1 point off, because they never knew it. Even if they died as a result, my players have never questioned it or insinutated they had less fun. In fact, I hear more grumbling about rules-lookups than I do unfairness. (Admittedly, its from the other gamers in the group who are DMs, but... )

QFT

I don't know how to add on to the above quote. It sums up what I was trying to say.

 

[Janx]

QFT

I don't know how to add on to the above quote. It sums up what I was trying to say.

Henry's points (which I agree with) basically mean that all the handy NPC generator software doesn't solve the real problem. I do use such tools (like Jamis Buck's tools). I can generate with 5 minutes of work, a full NPC wizard of 20th level. The problem is, there's so many stats and bits of info that I don't need (or would like to not need) that using the NPC as a bad guy is difficult. Especially if I don't study and completely understand each NPC/monster in the adventure. In fact, auto-generating the NPC decreases my knowledge of the details of that NPC (unlike creating it by hand, which reinforces memory).

 

[Gundark]

I think the poll and the original post clouded what has become a much better discussion topic. I voted Neutral / 3. I am now very interested.

And that is my fault. I thought the extra long drawn out text would clarify my position. It didn't. My point is that NPCs need a different rule set (character generation wise). If the original question was "Would you be interested in a quick NPC generation system?" then things in the poll and discussion here would have turned out different (at least I think they would ).

 

[amethal]

Also, there's a recent Dungeoncraft article where Monte Cook gives some simple math for winging D&D NPCs.

I found that article very interesting, even though I'm not much of a fan of Dungeoncraft.

I'd be happy to see something along the lines of (off the top of my head) :-

"NPC cleric; Fort Save = (level/2)+3, Reflex Save = (Level/3+1), Will Save = (level/2)+6"

or something similar.

I'd be sorry if such shortcuts were viewed as "cheating"!

 

[painandgreed]

It's not even bad design, IMO. Once a BBEG Vampire got disintegrated without a single action - lost init, rolled low on save. Not a big deal IMO. It wasn't a failure for me (the DM). The players had a lot of fun with their awesome defeat of a known very-bad-dude and were very much challenged in other parts of the adventure.

Maybe not bad design, but definatly a case of "Darwin". There are lessons to be learned that every NPC and PC past a level where they need to worry about disentigrate should think about. If an NPC has lived past that point then they should have such things instigated and they would extend beyond the immediate room. Was the vampire on home ground? Were there other obstacles that might have used up party resources? Was the area the vampire in barred by locked door, guards, or other alarms meant to alert him and slow unwanted guests? Was there physical protection for the vampire? Could they have used decoys or illusions to protect themselves from the first round of spell casting? Did they have screening troops with them? Could they have been invisible or otherwise not involved in combat till they had an idea of what the threat was? Did the BBEG know people where in their lair and could they have set up their defences differently? The BBEG will sometimes end up getting disentigrated on the first round of combat, but such results should be due to a long string of choices and actions by the party throughout the entire dungeon, not simple luck of a few die rolls. BBEGs didn't get to be BBEGs by leaving things to chance, but by being smart and capable, and should be given credit of such. If the players had a too easy of time killing off the BBEG, then the BBEG was probably doing something wrong and future BBEG shouldn't be doing the same things.

I think you're missing the point. To some DMs making NPCs as detailed as PCs is time consuming, and ultimately a waste of time as they tend to be short-lived. I've seen suggestions on enworld on NPC making short-cuts, etc. The fact is, the char-gen rules are a drain on DM resources, with little value add to the game.

I don't think I'm missing the point, I think I just had a different opinion. Granted, making NPCs in 3.x is time consuming. I noticed this fairly early in learning the game which began by DMing it. I'd say that reasons for this go to design flaws in the game itself such as expecting advancement of 1-20 levels in a year of play. Char-gen rules are a drain on DM, but I do think they add value to the game. Rather than separate rules to make NPCs easier to generate, I choose other methods. Slow advancement by returning to a more exponential XP scale. I have pregenerated NPCs of various types. And not commiting NPCs carelessly at higher levels.

Heaven forbid that anybody should think that should be the solution for everybody. I have my DMing style, and it's the way I want to play the game for my own enjoyment. My players like it and I admit that some people who used to be my players didn't.

 

[Numion]

Was the vampire on home ground?

Yes.

Were there other obstacles that might have used up party resources?

Yes. Until that point the PCs had found the BBEGs home lair a difficult tread.

Was the area the vampire in barred by locked door, guards, or other alarms meant to alert him and slow unwanted guests?

Yes, yes and yes. The Vampire was aware of the intruders, his lair was protected by three locks with the keys dispersed through the lair under guard by his minions.

Was there physical protection for the vampire?

Well, his inner sanctuary which was eventually breached by the adventurers. He also had a high-ground advantage by flying in his high-ceilinged sanctuary.

Could they have used decoys or illusions to protect themselves from the first round of spell casting?

Yes he could, and did. As he was aware of the intruders he had mirror image and displacement + bunch of other spells up. The whole order of business was: Player A "I delay after player B" Player B "Dispel Magic" *rolls*rolls*rolls* no more mirror images, Player A "My turn, ZZZZAP!!!" A couple of rolls later one dusty vampire.

Did they have screening troops with them? Could they have been invisible or otherwise not involved in combat till they had an idea of what the threat was? Did the BBEG know people where in their lair and could they have set up their defences differently?

The layout of his sanctuary makes it ideal for confronting conventional enemies, but also precludes the use of too much allied forces. They were doing a good job against the PCs elsewhere in the complex. Invisibility at that level is a good try (I don't recall if he tried it) but usually a non-issue.

The BBEG will sometimes end up getting disentigrated on the first round of combat, but such results should be due to a long string of choices and actions by the party throughout the entire dungeon, not simple luck of a few die rolls. BBEGs didn't get to be BBEGs by leaving things to chance, but by being smart and capable, and should be given credit of such. If the players had a too easy of time killing off the BBEG, then the BBEG was probably doing something wrong and future BBEG shouldn't be doing the same things.

It was a pre-made adventure known widely as a meatgrinder. I expected to take a couple of PCs down with the BBEG, so the last encounter didn't lack challenge. As you can see, my players used at least some tactics, so I don't think the BBEG even went that cheaply. Stuffing the sanctuary full of extra troops would've been a likely TPK.