D&D 5E NPC / Expert Class

[ccooke]

I was reminded of the 3e Expert Class today and was thinking how something like it would work in 5e/Next. Obviously, not everyone wants to generate NPCs in the same way as PCs, but I always thought the NPC classes in 3e were a really nice touch I've missed a lot in 4e. Now both of my 4th edition games are converting to 5th edition, I've spent a little while doing a first pass of how an Expert might look. Looking back to the 3e Expert, it was designed to be as good as a PC in a narrow set of skills or tasks without any real combat ability. To model that, I've taken something between the Rogue and the Bard in terms of skill abilities (Note: I've only taken it to level 10. Extending would be easy, but I'm curious as to what people think before I do so). I've also ended up with something a lot more general than the 3e Expert class - I plan to use this class and the Noble background to create a few idle noble NPCs. Just adding proficiency with the Rapier and a couple of things works out quite nicely, although martial stuff would really benefit from a different subclass. This could definitely be used for any non-magical knowledge worker, labourer or commoner though.

(This is based on some assumptions of class distributions in 5e: 1st and 2nd level are apprentice levels. Level 3 is where adventurers begin, and will be the most common level for random people the PCs meet. In trade terms, that's Journeyman level - good enough to have a shop or travel selling your wares, but not yet a master. Mastery comes by level 5, and this is the level that the best shops or the expert sages would be. Most of the NPCs good enough at something for the PCs to query them will be levels 4 and 5, with a very few above.
Obviously, all this only holds true for the games I'm running - it's an attempt to translate the class demographics I'm used to in 3e (1st level is the most common, 3rd level for most experts, etc) into 5e.)

Level Prof Class Features
1 1 Apprentice
2 1 Apprentice
3 2 Specialisation: Journeyman
4 2 Ability Score Improvement
5 2 Master
6 2
7 3
8 3
9 3 Ability Score Improvement
10 3

Class Features:
Hit Points: 1d6 per NPC level
Hit Points: 6 + the NPC's Constitution modifier
Hit Points at Higher Levels: 1d6 (or 4) + the NPC's Constitution modifier per level after 1st

Proficiencies:
Armour: Light
Weapons: All Simple Weapons
Tools: None
Saving throws: Choose one from Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Wisdom, Intelligence and Charisma
Skills: None

Apprentice:
At levels 1 and 2, gain proficiency with any one skill, tool, armour or weapon of your choice

Specialisation (subclass):
Expert:

At Level 3:
Journeyman:
Gain proficiency with any one skill or tool of your choice
Gain Expertise (+5) with any mix of two of your skills or tool proficiencies.

At Level 5:
Master:
Choose one skill or tool with which you are proficient. When you make an ability check that involves that skill or tool, treat a d20 roll of 9 or lower as a 10.

What do people think? Am I completely wrong (well, someone is bound to think so) or is this a usable seed idea?

 

[Dausuul]

I think 3E's NPC classes are a great example of trying too hard to shoehorn everything into the PC mold.

Player characters are professional adventurers. Even the bookish wizard sometimes has to dodge a battle-axe to the face, or loose a few crossbow quarrels when the enemy proves immune to ray of frost or shocking grasp. Hence, more experience as an adventurer comes with a bunch of automatic benefits that all classes get--more hit points, improved attack bonuses and saves, et cetera. The same is not true of a stay-at-home scholar or a pampered aristocrat. There is no reason for these characters to automatically get more hit points or attack bonuses for being good at what they do. I think these NPCs should be represented not with "NPC classes" but with standardized stat blocks, with a few guidelines for customization.

Now, I do think there is a place for NPC classes in 5E--specifically, to enable DMs to quickly generate NPC combatants who don't require a lot of bookkeeping. Such NPCs should be on par, power-wise, with PCs of the same level, but they should be very stripped-down, so you can create one on the fly in a matter of seconds if you need to.

 

[ccooke]

That's a good approach, yes, but it's not a universal rule of good system design. Some people prefer to use prebuilt stat blocks, some people like to build npcs.
I prefer a bit of both. For major NPCs who are going to be used many times, I'm much happier with a constructed build. For anything else, pee-made stat blocks are much better.

 

[Dausuul]

That's a good approach, yes, but it's not a universal rule of good system design. Some people prefer to use prebuilt stat blocks, some people like to build npcs.
I prefer a bit of both. For major NPCs who are going to be used many times, I'm much happier with a constructed build. For anything else, pee-made stat blocks are much better.

If you're going to full-out build an NPC with all the bells and whistles, why not use a PC class? What's the point of building an "expert" instead of a rogue?

 

[ccooke]

If you're going to full-out build an NPC with all the bells and whistles, why not use a PC class? What's the point of going to all that trouble to build an "expert" instead of a rogue?

Because, as you said, most NPCs aren't heroes or adventurers. The point of the class above is to replicate the old commoner, expert and warrior classes from 3e - for instance: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/expert.htm

 

[Dausuul]

Because, as you said, most NPCs aren't heroes or adventurers. The point of the class above is to replicate the old commoner, expert and warrior classes from 3e - for instance: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/expert.htm

Then why does the expert get more hit points and better attack bonuses for leveling up?

Having hit points, attack bonuses, and saves increase by level only makes sense in the context of professional adventurers. In fact, "level" itself only makes sense in that context; it is a measure of general adventuring competence. If you want a non-adventurer, it's silly to give that person levels. You're mimicking PC mechanics to no purpose. I'm well acquainted with 3E's NPC classes, I'm saying they were a mistake that shouldn't be replicated in 5E.

 

[Celebrim]

I care deeply about world demographics like this and just won't really get into a system that doesn't support it.

I don't spent a lot of time tailoring the world into zones of equal CR/EL that are suitable for PC's of a given level. Instead, I try to create a world that organically makes sense even without PC's living in it, with the assumption that if ordinary people can survive in such a world then PC's - being extraordinary - should thrive and triumph (provided they aren't overly rash).

Within such a demographic framework, I'm able to assign to any NPC approximate stats (ability scores, class, level) without ever having considered them before, and if I have something like an 'Expert Class' I can then derive as needed all their particular abilities.

I don't really care mechanically much how we get there as long as the end result makes sense. If your prefer a bunch of mini 'monster' stat blocks to a unified class, I'm ok with that provided your monster stat blocks make some sense. First edition tended treat the world that way in its demographics, and it mostly worked fine to have '0th level men-at-arms', 'sages', bandits, berserkers, and merchants as monster entries, and so forth. However, it also tended to create strange power curves that made maintaining armies economically and militarily questionable, questions about the viability of orcs as a species, and left society helpless versus the predations of many things with multiple hit dice - including the PCs.

As for the complaint that NPC classes apply accumulation of BAB, saving throws, and hit points, 3e treated this as a feature rather than a bug. However, if it really bothered you it's not intrinsic to the nature of classes that they do that. You can either design into an NPC class that it has little or no meaningful combat progression, or you can make that an add on trait via the Feat system. For example, in my game I have a handful of Traits that are really designed as much around NPC creation like 'non-combatant'. It's quite easy to generate even 8th or 10th level NPC's that have no meaningful combat ability (CR 1 or less), and such NPC's of so exalted of level would be rare and extraordinary figures in my game. The great mass of 2nd level experts out there that make up the ranks of clerks and scribes and fine craftsman are just simply not the fighting type. On the other hand, the burly men of rougher trades - lumberjacks, stevedores, miners, sailors, teamsters, etc. - might well turn out to be rather fine improvised thugs should it come to a brawl. A team of lumberjacks or a ship of able bodied sailors could easily give a thumping a low level party - they have to be able to as they live and work in 'the wild' as well and aren't unacquainted with its hazards. This is the advantage of NPC classes - I don't have to stat out everything as a 'fighter' by default the way 1e did. The lumberjack doesn't have be comfortable in mail in order to pick up an axe and lay heavy strokes on a foe.

 

[ccooke]

Then why does the expert get more hit points and better attack bonuses for leveling up?

Having hit points, attack bonuses, and saves increase by level only makes sense in the context of professional adventurers. In fact, "level" itself only makes sense in that context; it is a measure of general adventuring competence. If you want a non-adventurer, it's silly to give that person levels. You're mimicking PC mechanics to no purpose. I'm well acquainted with 3E's NPC classes, I'm saying they were a mistake that shouldn't be replicated in 5E.

Okay. That can all be true for your preferences, but those preferences are noy universal. They are subjective, and it's possible for me to disagree with you without either of us being wrong.

This is clearly intended for people who liked the 3e npc classes. Can you allow that this could, for other people, be a valid way to play the game?

 

[Dausuul]

I agree that it would not be a bad thing to have a system for "building" NPCs. I just want that system to avoid having the NPC's core competency and combat prowess march in lockstep. That's a PC thing which exists for the purpose of ensuring all PCs are able to survive and hold their own in a fight against appropriate foes.

As I said, I do think there is a place for NPC classes designed to produce foes who can stand toe-to-toe with the PCs but are simpler to create and run. You could start there and layer an expertise system on top. I'd just say the DM has official permission to give modifiers of +2, +5, or +8 to an NPC's skills to reflect that NPC's particular specialty.

So, to take your example of a team of lumberjacks, their class would be something like Brute; a rough-and-ready customer who doesn't have much in the way of formal combat training, but does have years of experience in tavern brawls and a nasty attitude. Most would be level 1 or 2, with maybe one 3rd-level guy who's got a reputation as a man not to be messed with. Then on top of that you give them a +5 bonus to Survival, +2 to Nature, and +2 to Animal Handling. On the other hand, a sage with no combat skill at all would use a 0-level noncombatant "chassis" and just add a ton of skill mods.

This way, level means the same thing for everybody. A 6th-level Brute and a 6th-level Fighter are equally effective in battle; the Brute is just less complex. At the same time, you don't have wizened old sages whose great wisdom just naturally comes with the power to thrash a low-level player character in combat.

 

[Celebrim]

Then why does the expert get more hit points and better attack bonuses for leveling up?

Because it is meant as a wholly generic class. In some cases, it does make sense for an expert to get more hit points and better attack bonuses for leveling up. The expert appeals to DM who doesn't want every expert cat burgler to be a high level rogue with all that entails, doesn't want to make the burly blacksmith or lumberjack a full fighter with all that entails, doesn't want every guide, sailor, and otherwise skilled NPC to be a full adventuring class but who does want a certain measure of well rounded competence - including some measure of self-defense ability. And to the DM that wants all these things, but hates pulling stats completely out of the air without some justification, consistency and forethought.

Having hit points, attack bonuses, and saves increase by level only makes sense in the context of professional adventurers.

No, of course it does. It makes sense in the context of everyone whose experience translates to increased ability to defend oneself whether they are 'professional adventurers' or not. BTW, in my game world 'adventurer' is a term that means the same thing as 'tourist' in our world. PC's that expect to be paid for killing things are mercenaries, hunters or assassins, and not adventurers. Does it make sense for adventurers (that is tourists) to have hit points, attack bonuses, and saves increase by level? Well, depends on the sorts of adventures they are having.

In the context of fantasy, fairy tales, and comic book logic it makes even more sense for anyone who is somebody to be also somebody that can kick butt when needed. In the world of comic books, fairy tales and fantasy anyone worth giving a name can have a shining moment of awesome and NPC's level up simply by appearing regularly on the pages of the story.

If you want a non-adventurer, it's silly to give that person levels. You're mimicking PC mechanics to no purpose. I'm well acquainted with 3E's NPC classes, I'm saying they were a mistake that shouldn't be replicated in 5E.

I'm saying you are not merely giving an opinion, but flat out wrong. There are contexts in which it makes sense for NPCs to be narrowly competent in a particular field without having general competency in the face of hazards, but their are equally many contexts where that is not true. The concept of an NPC class allows for both, simply by playing around only a small amount with things like STR, DEX, CON and feat selection. To the extent that you find that too complicated, fine, I understand that - but the alternatives end up being equally complicated however much simpler they may seem at first. The alternatives involve whole monster manuals of NPC stat blocks, and just as much need for customization. We can produce such things using the concept of NPC classes if we like, but what we can't from the concept of monster stats blocks do is describe a stat block generator.