Do NPCs have to follow the rules?

[Kid Charlemagne]

I say no to the first question and yes to the second.

Here's an example: I have an adventure planned in which the party will be in a situation with perhaps 200 people who want them dead.

Now only a few are likely to actually act on that, and of them, only a few could actually do anything.

Should I stat out 200 individual NPC's so that 10 can get into a fight? Or should I just say: 200 Commoner 1, no bonuses, no exceptional skills, hp 5, AC 10, dmg 1d6 (club).

Admittedly that counts as statting them out, to a certain extent, but any time more than that spent on developing them is pointless, IMO

I'll take the time saved to work on story, plot, and the main NPC's. One of the big issues in DM'ing is figuring out what to spend my limited time on.

 

[Storm Raven]

How about creating masterwork armour and shields at 1st level?

Not hard even under the rules.

1st level Human Expert: 4 Ranks in Craft: Armorsmith; Skill Focus (Craft :Armorsmith); Intelligence 14; Masterwork Armorsmithing Tools. Total bonus +10 to Craft: Armorsmithing. Have him Take 10 on his skill check. He can make Masterwork Armor and Shields. Make him a Dwarf and he's even better at it.

And I didn't have to break any rules to do it. And PCs could also do it at first level if they wanted to.

How about a +10 bonus to Jump at 1st level?

Not that hard to get close to this either. 1st level Human Expert: 4 ranks in Jump; Skill Focus (Jump); 18 Dexterity (or Strength, I can't remember which stat the Jump skill is based on). Total bonus +10 to Jump. If you use the various feats from the class books, you can get a +10 bonus without having an 18 stat.

Your example is extreme. Nobody has suggested that NPCs should routinely be able to overshadow the party just because the DM is lazy. However, it's a long way from that to requiring that every NPC should be fully statted out.

Of course, it takes me about thirty seconds to stat out a 1st level Expert, so it isn't that much trouble to go ahead and stat them out anyway.

 

[Storm Raven]

Suppose there's the village wierd guy, with a +20 spot modifier and no social skills. Maybe the guy's incapable of speaking? I'd rather a character that can talk than a mute with big, goggly eyes.

Not hard to get close to without breaking the rules.

1st level Human Commoner. 4 ranks Spot; Alertness; Skill Focus (Spot); 18 Wisdom; 3 Intelligence, below average Charisma. Total bonus +12 to Spot checks. He's human so he can have one other skill, say 4 ranks in Profession: Herdsman or something.

And you don't have to mangle the rules to come up with the 'special case' NPC, just working with the system gets you pretty much where you want to go.

 

[hong]

Not hard even under the rules.

Thank you for making my point.

What _seems_ like a very high bonus at first glance can actually be perfectly legit. Just because a player is suspicious doesn't mean that suspicion is justified.

Of course, it takes me about thirty seconds to stat out a 1st level Expert, so it isn't that much trouble to go ahead and stat them out anyway.

Your point being...?

 

[Storm Raven]

Likewise, and once again, YMMV, but I assume that there's thousands and thousands of spellcasting classes in a D&D gameworld, but only the ones the players may choose from are "balanced" with each other.

So the rules aren't much of a consideration for anyone but the PCs? Like I said, if magic is reasonably consistent, then PCs should be able to make these sorts of deductions. On the other hand, if you just make up stuff as you go, why bother playing D&D at all if you are just going to wing it? You'd be much better off just playing Amber or some other free form game.

 

[Desdichado]

Alcamtar:
I generally state the DC and let them roll their own spot checks. My players are powergamers with one rules lawyer. I have so far resisted deviating from the rules at all, because despite their insistence that I can rule-zero and fudge anything I want, I believe that they will be very unhappy if I ever actually use it. They have told me that their characters should have script immunity from permanent death or getting seriously screwed over, and that I should fudge as necessary to make sure they survive. Their primary interest is fighting and tactics and killing stuff and advancing their characters, but they do a fair bit of roleplaying on the side. They are somewhat loony and don't take the game very seriously, being willing to do anything for a laugh. I do have one 100% roleplayer who doesn't seem to care about combat or fudging, but he only shows up half the time.

Sounds like you're fine. If the players don't know what you rolled, then they certainly don't know what the skill, or other modifier is that applied to your NPC. I wouldn't worry too much about it unless you're doing something really unusual for an NPC that will scream out to the PCs that something is "wrong."

 

[Storm Raven]

Your point being...?

That all this complaining about how time consuming it is to actually work out the stats of an NPC is pretty much wildly overblown from my perspective. Coming up with stats for NPCs is a minor excercise in effort, a trivial enough amount of effort that coming up with any NPC who isn't a high level spellcaster is absurdly easy. Which, to me, means that there is little justification for just ignoring the process of using the rules to make them.

 

[Darkness]

My question is: why can't my PC be a savant or the village wierd guy? If he can, I don't have a problem (that is, no tears). If he can't, I don't know if I like that so much.

D&D is not GURPS, unfortunately...

 

[hong]

That all this complaining about how time consuming it is to actually work out the stats of an NPC is pretty much wildly overblown from my perspective. Coming up with stats for NPCs is a minor excercise in effort, a trivial enough amount of effort that coming up with any NPC who isn't a high level spellcaster is absurdly easy. Which, to me, means that there is little justification for just ignoring the process of using the rules to make them.

If it's so trivial, who cares one way or the other?


Hong "and _I_ have three advanced degrees, two black belts, and ALL THE CHICKS I WANT" Ooi

 

[bwgwl]

On one end is statting everything, on the other end is making everything up. I doubt anyone totally stats out every single creature, although I'm not as certain that some DM's don't just make up everything on the spur of the moment.

when i DM, i stat out everything. full stat blocks, with skills, feats, everything a PC would have. it doesn't really take that long -- maybe a minute or two per stat block. and then i know that the NPCs the party encounters are consistent with the rules.

i *really* dislike the idea of NPCs following a different set of rules than the PCs, especially if that rule is "i'm the DM, so i say so." and i say this from the perspective of a DM, not as a player.

i want my campaign world to be believable and consistent. that means *one* set of rules that everyone uses. no handing out special abilities or weird bonuses to NPCs that PCs can't even dream of getting.