D&D 5E Honor Among Thieves Character Stats

D&D Beyond has published the official game statistics for various characters from the upcoming D&D: Honor Among Thieves movie.

The collection includes stats for Doric, Edgin Darvis, Forge Fitzwilliam, Holga Kilgore, Simon Aumar, Sofina, and Xenk Yendar.

Claim Honor Among Thieves Bundle now! - D&D Beyond

www.dndbeyond.com

 

[DND_Reborn]

So does that reconcile the whole "wildshape into an owlbear" thing? I don't have a DDB account, so I haven't looked at the document, but I'm a little curious.

There you go.

Frankly, I'm disappointed because they did them as statblocks and NOT actual characters.

 

[lkj]

Frankly, I'm disappointed because they did them as statblocks and NOT actual characters.

There's an accompanying video on the d&d youtube channel. They went with statblocks as that's how they anticipate them getting used (people have their own characters). But they started with the character sheets that were developed for the movies. So such character sheets exist! (Though it sounds like the statblocks went through several rounds of revision to make them fit the movie better, so I don't know how well the movie characters stayed true to the character sheets)

AD

 

[Remathilis]

WoTC: Boys and Girls do I have a playtest for you! does a Heath Ledger Joker giggle.

Until the playtest is over, I will assume the 2014 PHB is still in effect.

It does make me wonder if some 1D&D monster design isn't at play here though.

 

[Remathilis]

NPC stats let DMs use them to incorporate them in games. PC stats would allow new players to emulate them.

Maybe a lot of DMs are going to have them wander into adventures now, but I would have gone with PC write-ups, myself.

I think the amount of people who would rather play as the movie heroes is vastly outnumbered by the people who prefer to make their own PCs.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I prefer them in this state, these sheets can be used for other things as well.

Yeah, that's fair. I can't imagine a scenario where I'd use the movie characters, but I can certainly imagine scenarios where I'd need mid-to-high level rogues, bards, druids and so on.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think the amount of people who would rather play as the movie heroes is vastly outnumbered by the people who prefer to make their own PCs.

I didn't say "play as," I said "emulate."

I firmly believe we are going to see a lot of new players showing up in the next few months because of the movie and WotC seems to have not done anything special to make that entrance ramp as smooth as possible.

"Hey, you liked Holga? Here's how to make your first barbarian character work just like her" is what I'd have done with these documents. (I've belabored this point to death over the last few months, not even pausing for the OGL fiasco.)

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I would have preferred to see them as PC builds. If one of them has a feature that's awesome in the movie and can't be replicated on a PC in the actual game then it's time to design a new subclass, feat, etc. to support that, within reason, in play, not shunt them off to being sui generis npcs. Sure an NPC stat block is more manageable for having them make a cameo in someone's campaign, but it also just feels kind of cheap. And if the party recruits one of them to be a party NPC for a while I'm going to want them to follow PC rules.

But then I generally like to stat my major featured NPCs as player characters if there is a suitable class for them.

So does that reconcile the whole "wildshape into an owlbear" thing? I don't have a DDB account, so I haven't looked at the document, but I'm a little curious.

Nope, NPC stat block just says:

Change Shape (5/Day). Doric magically transforms into a Beast with a challenge rating of 3 or less or into an owlbear (see the Monster Manual).

And then it gives general wildshaping rules.

There's no subclass of the monstrosity druid, or feat of chimeric monstrosity wildshaping, or any new content beyond a special rule for a special npc presented without comment.

 

[Clint_L]

Not at all a fan of giving spell casters such limited spell lists as monsters/NPCs. It's why I re-enabled Volo's and Tome of Foes on DDB.

 

[Mort]

I didn't say "play as," I said "emulate."

I firmly believe we are going to see a lot of new players showing up in the next few months because of the movie and WotC seems to have not done anything special to make that entrance ramp as smooth as possible.

"Hey, you liked Holga? Here's how to make your first barbarian character work just like her" is what I'd have done with these documents. (I've belabored this point to death over the last few months, not even pausing for the OGL fiasco.)

Sadly, this is quite in line with WoTCs onboarding of new players.

As in, they don't make it near as easy as they could/should.

 

[ECMO3]

So does that reconcile the whole "wildshape into an owlbear" thing? I don't have a DDB account, so I haven't looked at the document, but I'm a little curious.

They are not real D&D classes so yes it does. It says right in her statblock she can wildshape into a CR3 beasst or an owlbear

 

[Bagpuss]

Interesting Holga is just Medium Humanoid nothing in brackets afterwards, no class (which I assume is Barbarian) and not a dwarf as some suspected.

Did a sensitivity reader have issues with "Barbarian" or did they just forget?

 

[Remathilis]

Interesting Holga is just Medium Humanoid nothing in brackets afterwards, no class (which I assume is Barbarian) and not a dwarf as some suspected.

Did a sensitivity reader have issues with "Barbarian" or did they just forget?

It's a weird thing they started doing with stat blocks: they only list a class if it's a spellcasting class and the description is only to address what magical items the npc can attune to. (Additionally, it's only listed if the name didn't make it clear, such as "Red Wizard of Thay" doesn't need the additional wizard tag since wizard is in the name).

The tags are 95% useless aside from telling you if the npc can attune with a staff of healing or such, it gives no direct insight into the NPCs abilities. Further, martial classes don't have similar tags. (Note Forge doesn't have a Rogue tag). Don't read too much into their addition or omission.

 

[Erdric Dragin]

These aren't "character sheets", these are the stupid 5e monster stats (sorry, 3e had it correct having PCs and monsters use mostly similar rules) for these characters. Along with that insane "monster caster stat block" they're pushing on DMs. The casters should have caster level and spell slots (in case they want to scale their spells, for example) and no Druid with 100+ hp should have a handful of spells to cast. We're implying a Druid of about 15th-level with that kind of hp.

 

[Erdric Dragin]

Well they are not really RAW classes are they. The spellcasters in particular are heavily nerfed.

It's cause they're using the enforced "monster caster" stat blocks WotC recently pushed on everyone instead of the original "caster level and spell slot" one that's WAY more DM friendly.

 

[Erdric Dragin]

So does that reconcile the whole "wildshape into an owlbear" thing? I don't have a DDB account, so I haven't looked at the document, but I'm a little curious.

It doesn't because these "sheets" aren't really character sheets, they're monster stat blocks so anything goes.

Except for magic, cause caster type monsters are nerfed heavily in 5e now no thanks to that Mordenkainen Multiverse books

 

[Bagpuss]

sorry, 3e had it correct having PCs and monsters use mostly similar rules

Nah that was a nightmare as a GM, loads of points stuff you were meant to do to follow character rules, and most of it would never actually come up in play. As it meant any ability you gave to a NPC you also had to allow players to get somehow, which causes all sorts of problems. You big bad needs to be able to fight four to six characters at once, but you give them something to do that and a player get hold of it, it becomes a headache.

So glad they spilt the two up.

 

[Stalker0]

Nah that was a nightmare as a GM, loads of points stuff you were meant to do to follow character rules, and most of it would never actually come up in play. As it meant any ability you gave to a NPC you also had to allow players to get somehow, which causes all sorts of problems. You big bad needs to be able to fight four to six characters at once, but you give them something to do that and a player get hold of it, it becomes a headache.

So glad they spilt the two up.

100% agreed

 

[jhilahd]

Looking these over and they're fun, right. And Simon is a descendant of Elminster... like child or grandchild or great-grandchild?

 

[Ghost2020]

Nah that was a nightmare as a GM, loads of points stuff you were meant to do to follow character rules, and most of it would never actually come up in play. As it meant any ability you gave to a NPC you also had to allow players to get somehow, which causes all sorts of problems. You big bad needs to be able to fight four to six characters at once, but you give them something to do that and a player get hold of it, it becomes a headache.

So glad they spilt the two up.

Same here. That was a nice feature of 4e. I basically need AC, HP\HD, Attack info, special qualities, move. Not much else beyond that.
With 3rd edition, I didn't want to deal with feats for high level bad guys and monsters. They rarely came into play anyway. This was a deal breaker for me getting into Mutants and Masterminds, a wall of feats that I have to double check, in addition to powers.

These are just fine as monster stat blocks.

 

[Thasniayoob]

The seven stat blocks provided run the gamut of races and character classes known to the world of D&D, including Doric the tiefling and Simon Aumar the sorcerer, and even include cartoon art for each character, like Holga Kilgore the barbarian who unmistakably looks like Fast & Furious' Michelle Rodriguez.





watch stories
cc generator