D&D 5E Issues with the "NPCs" in the MM and HotDQ (SPOILERS!)

[Tormyr]

I thought that as well, but he breaks a couple of the Edritch Knight rules and a MM rule:

1. 7th level - 2 cantrips known, 5 spells known. Borngray - 3 cantrips known, 6 spells known
2. 7th level = PB +3. Borngray PB +2 (based on stat block for longsword +6 melee - +4 from Str, +2 from PB, assumption)
3. MM says HD is based on size. He should be d8.

Any way, I'm not a rules stickler, I've been playing to long to get that bogged down. I mention it because I'm a stickler for consitency. Just a personality trait.

I always liked the disclaimer rule in the back of the original AD&D DMG, to paraphrase - your game your rules. Do what makes sense to you.

Sparrowhawc



Thanks for the reply

Honestly, I think they just made a mistake here or were working off an earlier version of the MM/PHB. They might have been using some weird mix of PC and monster creation rules for him (hence the d10s). Aside from spells known and HD, he seems to follow monster guidelines.

EDIT: I think he gets an extra cantrip from being a high elf.

 

[Sparrowhawc]

I just wanted to weigh in that I hate this line (Sorry, Authweight, nothing personal -- you just happened to be the one to say it most recently). Just because you have a problem with one aspect of a system doesn't mean the system "just isn't for you." You can like, even love, the other aspects enough to compromise on the thing you don't like and still have a really positive experience.

I'm with you on this Boarstorm, I like just about everything else in this version, with the exception of natural healing like I stated earlier. The game seems to move quicker with less big numbers to track. Overall it seems like a good system. But like anything else, it's not perfect and people will disagree on what they think works or doesn't work. Just like any other version, I'll house rule what I don't like and use everything else as is. At least until some crafty player makes a good argument for another house rule.

Sparrowhawc

 

[Sparrowhawc]

Honestly, I think they just made a mistake here or were working off an earlier version of the MM/PHB. They might have been using some weird mix of PC and monster creation rules for him (hence the d10s). Aside from spells known and HD, he seems to follow monster guidelines.

You're probably right. Just pointing it out.

 

[Sparrowhawc]

It's also simple and easy to build some npcs using the PH rules, but there's no need to do that with every npc. And npcs not working like pcs isn't new to 5e (or 4e, or 3e, or...). It goes all the way back. In Basic and 1e, bandits and brigands had their own stat blocks. Heck, in 1e, pilgrims got their own stat block! So to me, this is no big deal.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to build PC like NPCs for evrything in the world - pilgrims, bandits, brigands are fodder like. But for major NPCs, I would normally build out just like a PC. I like my major NPCs, bad guy or good guy, to have the same advantages/disadvantages as the PCs.

Sparrowhawc

 

[Joe Liker]

I like just about everything else in this version, with the exception of natural healing like I stated earlier. The game seems to move quicker with less big numbers to track.

Then I would strongly caution you against trying to use PC rules for NPCs. I'm not entirely sure why you think such a plan is desirable or logical.

A player character is far, far, FAR more complex than an NPC or a monster. It takes a lot of thought and singular dedication to keep track of a PC's traits and abilities. As a DM, your time is far better spent in other pursuits. Moreover, at the table, you will either be playing the character poorly or you will be slowing the game to a crawl as you try to keep track of everything this intensely complicated character is capable of.

To answer the implicit question in this thread: Yes, there is a reason these characters are not built as PCs. It's the same reason you enjoy the rest of the game so much -- simplicity and streamlining. If you want to change that, be advised that you're destroying the thing you love.

 

[Wrathamon]

It sounds like he is use to doing this in other games, like 3e. So I dont think he is destroying anything.

I do think that making npcs like monsters is a better way to make npcs, but if you want to make PC villains then I dont think that is wrong.

Why does the Archmage not have the same progression as a wizard? Easy he is an Archmage and Not a Wizard

 

[KarinsDad]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to build PC like NPCs for evrything in the world - pilgrims, bandits, brigands are fodder like. But for major NPCs, I would normally build out just like a PC. I like my major NPCs, bad guy or good guy, to have the same advantages/disadvantages as the PCs.

Then build them that way. Nothing stops you.

Want a quick one not built that way, pick a slightly off one from the MM. I'm positive that your players will not notice the difference between a perfectly crafted Archmage and the one in the MM.

 

[Authweight]

I just wanted to weigh in that I hate this line (Sorry, Authweight, nothing personal -- you just happened to be the one to say it most recently). Just because you have a problem with one aspect of a system doesn't mean the system "just isn't for you." You can like, even love, the other aspects enough to compromise on the thing you don't like and still have a really positive experience.

That's fair. It would be better stated as, "if the issue is a dealbreaker for you, then you will either need to pick a different system or do a significant rewrite."

I don't mean to kick anyone out of the club - I just wanted to make it clear that the issue is a very deliberate design feature rather than a bug in the game.

 

[Sparrowhawc]

What I was interested in with this thread was to see if any others were concerned with what I percieved as an issue with NPCs and how other DMs may be handling them. I also enjoy honest, non-judgemental response which answer the question posed, "Has anyone else picked up on this? If so, do you find it an issue and how do you plan to fix it in your game?"

I've received several responses to this thread ranging from answering the question with honest, non-judgemental response to questioning why I would want to "fix" something that is obviously not broken, to I think we need to wait for the rest of the rules.

Allow me to clarify a couple of things:

First, I have played this game for a very long time; 30+ years. I've also played a multitude of other games, all the versions of Traveller, Boot Hill, Top Secret, Gamma World, Star Wars, Cortex system, Firefly, I could go on, and the one thing I've always prided my self on, as a DM or GM or Admin, is consistency. That said, that is what I look for in the rules and story lines.

Second, anyone who has played this game as a DM or player for an extended amount of time, over multiple editions of the rules, will probably agree that all the editions have had pros and cons based on their reading and application of the rules, and has probably house ruled something at some point in time.

Third, my style of play has always been to make the primary bad guys the same as the PCs in respect to advantages and disadvantages. An evil NPC 18th level wizard that calls himself an archmage is still an 18th level wizard and should have the same HD, racial benefits, racial disadvantges, and class features as the 18th level wizard that is trying to hunt him down and stop his evil plans. Canned NPC don't leave memorable impressions, a well fleshed out NPC villian does. Let me repeat something here "my style of play". I don't mind a little bit more work as a DM and if come to the session prepared, I find that playing a PC built NPC does not impact game flow.

All that said, I still fall back to the best rule from the AD&D DMG, I'm paraphrasing here - This is your game. Use the rules in this book, don't use them. This is your game, have fun.

That is the rule I always fall back to.

Sparrowhawc

 

[Roger]

My fix to this will be to build out the NPCs in HotDQ using PC rules in the PHB, not the MM, and to develop a way to set an appropriate CR based on rules from the DMG.

Yep, that should work. Feel free to let us know how it goes; there's probably some interest to see your builds over in the Homebrew and/or Character Build subforums.



Cheers,
Roger