My Brainfart

[I'm A Banana]

I'm looking for some help.

I've been wrestling with this for a while now, so its time to come out and say it:

4e doesn't like the way I do NPCs and Monsters.

What do I mean? I mean the advice in the core books largely boils down to "Design them for their intended purpose." This is all well and good and fine and dandy and filled with bubblegum and candy-coated rainbow pieces of deliciousness

...for most people...

...but for me? I don't know what my NPC or Monster is going to be used for before it happens.

I don't know if the angry troll will be a combat, will be an ally, will be some sort of knowledgable sage, will be used as raw materials because he can regenerate and thus feed a village...

I don't know.

Honestly. No clue. Until my PC's do something to it, I have no idea what will be done to it. And I'd like my PC's do be able to do whatever their twisted little imaginations can come up with.

So what I need is a more...robust...system than 4e offers. I can't silo off these world elements like they're telling me to do. It's just counter to all of my training as a good on-the-fly DM. I don't have the narrative thrust for that. I rely too much on the rules to tell me how that poor critter reacts to being used for whatever it is used for. My notes don't say "Billy the Blacksmith is a combat. Edward the Bard is for information. Maggie Gyllenhaal is for lovin'." They say stuff more like "Billy the Blacksmith enjoys fine cheeses. He may react violently if someone moves his cheese. Edward the Bard carries an ornate set of kitchen knives that he juggles as he jogs. He calls this "joggling." He thinks it is very impressive. Maggie Gyllenhaal is a freakin' hottie. But is all an act to get you to go see her movies."

This isn't a thread for bashing 4e for not giving me all that I irrationally demand. This isn't a thread for bashing 3e for being too complex with those rules.

I don't need that jazz in here.

What I need is help. I need help in getting a good, fast, solid system that I can use on the fly to change "Billy the Blacksmith likes fine cheeses" into an NPC that can accomplish any position my PCs throw him in.

Does 4e already have this and I'm just not looking hard enough?

Does 3e give me a way to do this that's transportable?

Does another system have a good solution?

Or will I be forced to either fiat this stuff or spend double the prep time on my own PCs because of this particular playstyle quirk?

Help me, EN Kenobi, you're my only hope!

 

[cangrejoide]

well just do what I used to do for my NPCs in 3.x:

I gave em a pool of points and used that pool to shape em as they interacted in the adventure.

 

[TimeOut]

I am sorry, I can't help you with that. All those descriptions have no rules meaning for me, I normally use rules only for combat and other special things that are defined.

So I would create combat stats for them (as normal people, they should be fairly weak), assign attribute scores and if I feel like it some skill scores. Everything else is improvisation based upon such behavior-rulesets as "likes cheese".

 

[xechnao]

So you have this awesome environment you want to present your PCs with and let them react to it how they like.
What you need to do is design a limited set of acceptable interactions of this environment and the PCs. Each interaction need not be static (it can have variables) and not be unique (be able to lead to all other interactions in no particular order).
Well no commercial rpg system provides this kind of tool I know of atm if not for combat.

 

[Nightchilde-2]

I am sorry, I can't help you with that. All those descriptions have no rules meaning for me, I normally use rules only for combat and other special things that are defined.

So I would create combat stats for them (as normal people, they should be fairly weak), assign attribute scores and if I feel like it some skill scores. Everything else is improvisation based upon such behavior-rulesets as "likes cheese".

Couldn't have said it better myself. I don't need stats for the blacksmith what loves cheese, and if he suddenly becomes important stat-wise in the game, I either improvise stats (let's see, +11 to blacksmithing rolls...) or DM fiat it.

 

[The Little Raven]

It sounds like you prepare next to nothing about what role your NPCs serve and then create stats on the fly depending on what your PCs do. I don't see why this would be more difficult in 4e, especially since monster design is so quick and easy.

 

[Kzach]

I would do what I would do if I were you.

Read the MM cover to cover.

Read all the parts of the DMG that are pertinent.

Make up a whole bunch of my own monsters and NPC's.

By this stage, you are so well versed in the system, that you can make up monsters and NPC's on the fly

Until then, you're screwed. Sorry

 

[I'm A Banana]

I gave em a pool of points and used that pool to shape em as they interacted in the adventure.

Hmm...got an example? That sounds promising...

I normally use rules only for combat and other special things that are defined...Everything else is improvisation based upon such behavior-rulesets as "likes cheese".

I don't need stats for the blacksmith what loves cheese, and if he suddenly becomes important stat-wise in the game, I either improvise stats (let's see, +11 to blacksmithing rolls...) or DM fiat it.

I like to define my NPCs so that they can be used for many grisly purposes, perhaps all at once. For that, I need something a bit more concrete and consistent than my mercurial whim. Scratch that, MUCH more concrete and consistent.

I need to know what "likes cheese" means mechanically, y'know? What does that mean for combat? What does that mean for information-gathering? What does that mean for his potential as an ally? As a long-term contact? Because chances are, my PC's will use him alternately for all of these things and then some.

Figuring out what he is to be used as first and working backwards makes my dice cry.

What you need to do is design a limited set of acceptable interactions of this environment and the PCs. Each interaction need not be static (it can have variables) and not be unique (be able to lead to all other interactions in no particular order).

I'm not much of a fan of that because (a) it'll limit my and my players' ability to improvise if I have a pre-planned list of possible paths, and (b) it takes pre-prep time that I'm not very interested in investing.

By giving me Way Too Many Rules, 3e kind of handled this, but I like how easy 4e is to design for (even on the fly), and I just need it to be a bit more robust for me in this respect. I'm okay with a bit more pre-prep time, but I definately don't want to try and plan out an infinite number of possible scenarios in my head only to have my PCs come up with the one I didn't think of and then be forced to either say NO or fiat my way to Unsatisfying Game Night For KM.

 

[Mallus]

I don't know if the angry troll will be a combat, will be an ally...

Either way, he'll be big, strong, and able to regenerate. Just like in 3e, 2e and 1e.

...will be some sort of knowledgable sage...

So give your 4e troll an INT of 16 and History as a Trained skill. How is that substantially different from making a troll sage in 3e?

will be used as raw materials because he can regenerate and thus feed a village...

This is interesting fluff that isn't directly supporting by rules. So you just decree it as DM.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It sounds like you prepare next to nothing about what role your NPCs serve and then create stats on the fly depending on what your PCs do. I don't see why this would be more difficult in 4e, especially since monster design is so quick and easy.

You're half right. I don't create the stats on the fly. I use what's in front of me to help me judge it. It feels more fair to me, and is more fun for me becuase I'm not worried about numbers and balance and I can concentrate on wacky action and adventure.

I've got bits and pieces scattered allover 4e, I need something to help me unify them and to cover the corners.

With my style, I don't want to get caught up in the moment and say that Bill's love of cheeses makes him enter a berserk rage whenever he's round fine elven munster (because it makes for an interesting combat) and then have that called up again when Bill is being used as an ally or when they're trying to ruin Bill's attempt to forge an unbreakable blade for the orcish warlord only to have to say "No, because that's too powerful."

I need a solidly consistent baseline to take a description and turn it into some sort of simple mechanic that I can apply regardless of what the PC is used for.

By this stage, you are so well versed in the system, that you can make up monsters and NPC's on the fly

Aw, bugger. I'll call that "Plan B."

So give your 4e troll an INT of 16 and History as a Trained skill. How is that substantially different from making a troll sage in 3e? ... This is interesting fluff that isn't directly supporting by rules. So you just decree it as DM.

Fiat is the bane of my fun D&D sessions. It makes the game considerably less enjoyable to me. 3e's Way Too Many Rules solution helped me avoid that, and now I'm looking for a way to do it in 4e that doesn't involve me personally going back to Way Too Many Rules (because I *like* not having to perform calculus to make a critter. ).

So I'm looking for a rule I can apply for the game, not to just make stuff up.