Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ColonelHardisson" data-source="post: 199837" data-attributes="member: 363">I'm not denigrating anyone's views, but it seems easy enough to figure this all out.On one hand, major NPCs like a 20th level wizard (or a 9th level one, for that matter) should have more work put into them. I've been a player and a DM, and to simply assume that an NPC wizard has any spell the DM wants him to have is a good way to get players to squawk. I've been on both sides of the screen for just this situation. I was DMing back years ago, and had an 18th level wizard NPC who was foiling some of the player's plans. Now, I'd planned out all his spells, but had him do some dispelling of magic he couldn't have done under the rules (long story). Anyway, I was immediately called out on it; the players could tell I was being arbitrary. It really kind of ruined the session, and messed things up for me as DM for a long time afterward. Some of the players involved really disliked having the DM pull the &quot;because I said so&quot; or &quot;well, that's just the way it is&quot; routine. So I learned to always stick by the rules, or to have a well-thought-out justification for any rules-bending I might do. That is, create a house rule that I'm consistent with using after that session.So, I guess my main point here is that it's always good to have exacting stats for high-level NPCs, that define their parameters.On the other, minor NPCs (city guards, thugs) are generally so easy to create (especially with any of the free generators) or to find elsewhere (Enemies &amp; Allies) that it seems you'd be better off just creating them completely rather than using short-hand stats that may not match a NPC created by the rules.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ColonelHardisson, post: 199837, member: 363"] I'm not denigrating anyone's views, but it seems easy enough to figure this all out. On one hand, major NPCs like a 20th level wizard (or a 9th level one, for that matter) should have more work put into them. I've been a player and a DM, and to simply assume that an NPC wizard has any spell the DM wants him to have is a good way to get players to squawk. I've been on both sides of the screen for just this situation. I was DMing back years ago, and had an 18th level wizard NPC who was foiling some of the player's plans. Now, I'd planned out all his spells, but had him do some dispelling of magic he couldn't have done under the rules (long story). Anyway, I was immediately called out on it; the players could tell I was being arbitrary. It really kind of ruined the session, and messed things up for me as DM for a long time afterward. Some of the players involved really disliked having the DM pull the "because I said so" or "well, that's just the way it is" routine. So I learned to always stick by the rules, or to have a well-thought-out justification for any rules-bending I might do. That is, create a house rule that I'm consistent with using after that session. So, I guess my main point here is that it's always good to have exacting stats for high-level NPCs, that define their parameters. On the other, minor NPCs (city guards, thugs) are generally so easy to create (especially with any of the free generators) or to find elsewhere (Enemies & Allies) that it seems you'd be better off just creating them completely rather than using short-hand stats that may not match a NPC created by the rules. [/QUOTE]

Verification