D&D 5E DM's: How Do You Justify NPC's Having Magic/Abilities That Don't Exist in the PHB?

[Micah Sweet]

"Extra damage" isn't a thing in the fiction. Hit points aren't a thing in the fiction. There is just fighting. Both can fight. Both can kill an opponent dead right quick.

But the extra damage matters to the combat, and the combat matters to the fiction. You can't escape it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think the usual point of answering "Because PCs are PCs and NPCs are NPCs" is not because the answerer can't come up with an in-story reason. It's because that the story-based reasons are effectively INFINITE. We'd have to know exactly what story is being told to even bother to start coming up with a story reason, otherwise we're just spitballing generic reasons (which might not sound all that good, and wind up being argued with because of some minutia that doesn't work out of context).

The ultimate reason IS "because PCs are PCs and NPCs/Monsters are NPCs/Monsters." BUT every single actual instance of that has its own story. Its own UNIQUE story.

Any story that DM (and their table) wants it to be.

Yeah, and if the question comes up in game, I want an in-universe answer to it.

 

[TwoSix]

Except one does extra damage for no good reason.

If character A does an extra 2d8 weapon damage on a hit, and the other character has Extra Attack, do you think that automatically correlates with a difference in the characters’ fictions?

For me, I don’t really assume a character with Extra Attack is actually making 2 attacks every 6 seconds. It’s just a game abstraction to prioritizes some ability and spell choices over others to provide a more compelling game layer experience.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

There were far too many arguments along the lines of, "how are those fish being knocked prone?" For me to enjoy the game.

That's a strange one to argue about. They were being knocked sideways or upside-down, exposing their vulnerabilities and making it so that they'd have to spend some effort to get themselves back to their most comfortable/defensible orientation. "Prone", like all other game terms, is just a one-word sample of the stories it can represent.

In 4e, as I posted, the fiction does drive the mechanics. The fiction is that Hobgoblins are near-undefeatable in phalanxes. So there are mechanics that give effect to this. The fiction is that paladins are valiant. So there are mechanics that give effect to this.

Of all versions of D&D, I think 4e is the one that is based most purposefully on a conception of what the fiction should look like, and then building mechanics to help ensure that that fiction is part of gameplay.

I think you're probably right, but as you can see by your first response, this is not a commonly held view.

 

[TwoSix]

If it was just damage math they would just have put in 2d12 in the stat block instead of giving the gladiator a learnable ability called Brute and having that ability grant extra damage. It's similar to Battle Masters gaining superiority dice which do extra damage as an ability.

I haven’t looked at that particular stat block, but I imagine it’s so the damage expression scales properly if the gladiator uses a different weapon. (And a gladiator using multiple weapons would be a pretty common event in-fiction for most depositions of gladiators I can think of.)

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Yeah, and if the question comes up in game, I want an in-universe answer to it.

Even if your character would never find out the answer? That seems demanding.

 

[pemerton]

think you're probably right, but as you can see by your first response, this is not a commonly held view.

I agree it's not commonly held. But the person arguing with me about 4e ( @Micah Sweet) is also asserting that "extra attack", "extra damage" and the like are all parts of the fiction. Which strongly implies that hit points are all parts of the fiction.

That creates a fiction so absurd I can't take it seriously. Hence why I follow Gygax's approach to attacks, hp and saving throws in his DMG. Which takes me back to 4e, which is the best-realised version of those ideas in my view: having a prior conception of what the fiction is meant to look like, and then configuring the mechanics so as to produce it.

 

[jasper]

Two questions deep? I’ve never heard this phrase before but I think I understand what you mean. Could you expand on this please?

John Scalzi Author of interdependency trilogy, Redshirts, and Old Man's war Quote. At Dragon Con 2021 when he was asked about why his world building is so light. And it was also a jab at "The Authors in the Basement" which were David Weber, John Ringo, Larry Correia and others. His further said his world building is just enough to move the story forward. So in this case.
The Weave is responsable for NPC having different spell list. The Weave is controlled by the Gawd of Magic.

 

[Maxperson]

I haven’t looked at that particular stat block, but I imagine it’s so the damage expression scales properly if the gladiator uses a different weapon. (And a gladiator using multiple weapons would be a pretty common event in-fiction for most depositions of gladiators I can think of.)

The gladiator in the MM is using a spear which does d6 damage, 2d6 in his hands. If he then gets disarmed and picks up a greatsword that is lying in the sand, his damage goes up to 4d6. The damage isn't scaling properly at that point, because double damage isn't included in the CR. Double damage is the effect of the ability, though. He doesn't suddenly only do 2d6 with greatsword in order to keep damage at the proper level.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Even if your character would never find out the answer? That seems demanding.

Generally, I'm the DM, so I would come up with the answer if needed. If it mattered to my character, I would ask the DM and hope that they came up with something. It doesn't have to be prepared ahead of time. I just don't want an answer founded in gamism, as I mentioned above.