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

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think it's a mistake for anyone to look at this and take them too seriously. They are meant to be fun, and a bit of nice thing to have, similar to how when the D&D cartoon came out in a boxed set, there where character sheets included. Anyone looking to take these too seriously is going to be disappointed.

Also, the junior novelization of the movie calls out Simon's heritage too (as well as his failed wooing of Doric).

 

[sevenbastard]

I can't wait for the movie to come out so we can be hit with a 1,000 posts about how charachter X couldn't do this or that because of "rules".

It's going to be a fun ride.

 

[Clint_L]

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

Agree. As a DM, I hate that spell lists are removed from spellcasters. Hate it with a passion. It hugely dumbs down their tactical options and makes them way less interesting to run and challenging to fight. The worst offender of this new breed of stat block is the new version of Vecna, who is now barely a wizard and more a teleporting stabby guy.

This is simplification gone too far, for me.

 

[Stormonu]

I’m mixed on the abbreviated spellcasters. In an active encounter, it makes them easy to run, but I’d like the option presented to use full-blown spellcasting. Like demon summoning, I‘d like to see them present a “suggested“ spell list in a green note block for dedicated casters for extended use bad guys and such.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

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.

For folks who want that level of simulation, 3E is a much better choice, as it was the last time WotC tried the idea that all characters in a game world use the same rule system.

 

[Magister Ludorum]

Agree. As a DM, I hate that spell lists are removed from spellcasters. Hate it with a passion. It hugely dumbs down their tactical options and makes them way less interesting to run and challenging to fight. The worst offender of this new breed of stat block is the new version of Vecna, who is now barely a wizard and more a teleporting stabby guy.

This is simplification gone too far, for me.

Quoted because this says what I've been thinking.

I can no longer use any NPC stats in any books. Since D&D doesn't provide NPC write ups that are useful to me and I have to rebuild all the NPCs to give them character classes anyway, I've mostly stopped GMing D&D. I've been running Fantasy HERO instead.

My kids and I are working on a D20 Fantasy game combining our favorite parts of each edition. We'll have more time over the summer.

We want fewer hit points, more lethality and less gonzo character class abilities. But we don't want to use an earlier rule set without updating it to include the best of later editions.

A lack of PC/NPC transparency makes the game less fun for me as a player. And as a GM I feel that it reduces NPCs to a gamist bag of too many hit points and monster abilities.

YMMV but that's how most of my gaming group feels. If an NPC uses a magical ability, they want to be able to learn the spell, and if an NPC martial does something cool, they want to be able to learn how to do it.

 

[Magister Ludorum]

For folks who want that level of simulation, 3E is a much better choice, as it was the last time WotC tried the idea that all characters in a game world use the same rule system.

We ran 3e for years, but we disliked open ended ac and attack bonuses, and that's the version that inflated hit points to unreasonable levels. Also nit-picky fears that did little other than plug slots in a feat chain.

 

[Demetrios1453]

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.

I completely agree. I see a lot of posts here that bemoan the loss of all the extra stuff, but there are a lot of people who are glad the complexity is gone and we now have foes that are simple to run and don't bog down combat.

 

[mamba]

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.

If by ‘DM friendly’ you mean ‘requires more work and offers more potential to screw up for newer DMs’, then I’d agree

Realistically, pick the 5 spells you want the monster to have for thematic reasons and do not worry about spell slots at all, done.
The new block is closer to that than the old one

 

[TwoSix]

Agree. As a DM, I hate that spell lists are removed from spellcasters. Hate it with a passion. It hugely dumbs down their tactical options and makes them way less interesting to run and challenging to fight. The worst offender of this new breed of stat block is the new version of Vecna, who is now barely a wizard and more a teleporting stabby guy.

This is simplification gone too far, for me.

He’s Vecna. Whatever plot level magic or special ritual I need him to have, he’ll have. That’s not something I need spelled out in a stat block.

 

[Alzrius]

He’s Vecna. Whatever plot level magic or special ritual I need him to have, he’ll have. That’s not something I need spelled out in a stat block.

This sounds suspiciously akin to the Oberoni Fallacy.

 

[TwoSix]

This sounds suspiciously akin to the Oberoni Fallacy.

Eh. More that I believe that D&D just works better ad hoc, and I only really need the stat blocks to provide some base expectations. They're a starting point, not what I'd actually use in game.

The base stat blocks work fine for mooks and filler encounters, but important NPCs are elements that depend on the creativity of the DM to match the needs of the narrative.

Not that I think that NPCs should be built like PCs! If anything, I think PCs should be built more like NPCs. Come up with a concept, and then assign some abilities that fit the concept, ad hoc and improvise as needed.

 

[Remathilis]

If by ‘DM friendly’ you mean ‘requires more work and offers more potential to screw up for newer DMs’, then I’d agree

Realistically, pick the 5 spells you want the monster to have for thematic reasons and do not worry about spell slots at all, done.
The new block is closer to that than the old one

I have two issues with the current system: it's far harder to reverse engineer stat blocks now and the line between PC and npc abilities is more arbitrary. It might not have been a good system, but I felt the old one gave a little structure to what level a "mage" or a "druid" npc represents. It might not be the same 1:1, but the old mage was a 9th level wizard and I could use that to scale up or down it's spellcasting and then adjust the rest of the stats to make an appropriate npc. I don't know what level Simon is supposed to be, so scaling him up or down feels arbitrary.

What would be nice is clearer rules on how to build NPCs (in general and spellcasting ones in specific) or to have a wider selection of generic NPCs (for example: currently, there is two druid NPCs, one is CR 2 and akin to a low level druid and the other is CR 12 and is akin to a high level druid; more generic druids in the mid CRs would be nice or better rules for advancing their cr).

 

[Ghost2020]

Quoted because this says what I've been thinking.

I can no longer use any NPC stats in any books. Since D&D doesn't provide NPC write ups that are useful to me and I have to rebuild all the NPCs to give them character classes anyway, I've mostly stopped GMing D&D. I've been running Fantasy HERO instead.

My kids and I are working on a D20 Fantasy game combining our favorite parts of each edition. We'll have more time over the summer.

We want fewer hit points, more lethality and less gonzo character class abilities. But we don't want to use an earlier rule set without updating it to include the best of later editions.

A lack of PC/NPC transparency makes the game less fun for me as a player. And as a GM I feel that it reduces NPCs to a gamist bag of too many hit points and monster abilities.

YMMV but that's how most of my gaming group feels. If an NPC uses a magical ability, they want to be able to learn the spell, and if an NPC martial does something cool, they want to be able to learn how to do it.

I can totally agree on your goals (fewer hit points, more lethality and less gonzo character class abilities. But we don't want to use an earlier rule set without updating it to include the best of later editions).

Almost wondering if Fantasy Age might be more what you're looking for? The new 2nd ed should tick off a lot of that.

 

[Krachek]

I think some beginner would be interested to play those characters in an adventure.
They are actually quite potent and can make interesting PC, with an easy and manageable character sheet.
A new trend in character creation?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Interesting that for Doric, she can wildshape into any CR3 or lower beast (2014 rules) but her HP remain hers (Playtest Rule). Oh, and of course specifically an owlbear

Aside:

In my upcoming Film Reroll of the game, my Doric player has decided on a combat form of triger (three-headed tiger) instead of owlbear. I don't expect that change to hurt anything--the owlbear is only in two scenes anyway.

I do expect the player to enjoy RPing the triger's Bloodlust [-10], Short Attention Span [-10], Laziness [-10], Curious [-5], Callous [-5], Impulsiveness [-10], Bully [-10] and Stubbornness [-5] enough to remind everybody of why some people hate cats. But in a fun way.

E.g. Curious will make it very emotionally difficult for Doric not to open doors even when there could be guards or monsters on the other side of them, and difficult not to press a button in a dungeon just to see what it does. Bully + Callous will mean she pushes others around (while in cat form) just for amusement value. Etc.

But Owlbear didn't have that much impact in the movie. Movie Doric was mostly about insect form, bird form, and small mammals.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

In my upcoming Film Reroll of the game, my Doric player has decided on a combat form of triger (three-headed tiger) instead of owlbear.

Is that a Dungeon Fantasy monster or something you made up? It has a nice classic feel.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

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.

My players for my upcoming Film Reroll have the option to make fresh PCs (using Dungeon Fantasy RPG rules), but the two PCs I've seen so far are nevertheless Holga and Doric, even to the extent of Holga choosing a two-handed axe over axe + shield because that's more faithful to movie Holga (even though the player realizes full well that shields are important for keeping you alive when you've got fewer HP than in 5E).

Clearly there's at least some level of attraction to literally recreating the movie characters.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Is that a Dungeon Fantasy monster or something you made up? It has a nice classic feel.

It's an official DF monster, from the Dungeon Fantasy boxed set.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

My players for my upcoming Film Reroll have the option to make fresh PCs (using Dungeon Fantasy RPG rules), but the two PCs I've seen so far are nevertheless Holga and Doric, even to the extent of Holga choosing a two-handed axe over axe + shield because that's more faithful to movie Holga. Clearly there's some level of attraction to literally recreating the movie characters.

That's why I made the other thread!