D&D 5E NPC / Expert Class

[Dausuul]

To the extent that you are right, this isn't a hard problem to fix. I do it with a very simple advantage/disadvantage system. It would be a trivial matter to have a 20th level commoner with a +0 attack bonus just by taking the 'noncombatant' disadvantage. I do similar sorts of things when I want clerics that have spent more time studying and less time fighting than your typical PC crusading type. But, for that matter, nothing in the rules stops you from slapping "Fairy God Mother's Gift (ex): This character was granted at birth supernatural insight into weaving by a powerful supernatural figure, and get a +5 luck bonus and a +5 insight bonus on all Craft (Weaving) checks." on your low level NPC and calling it a day. Are you the DM or aren't you?

So you have a set of rules that tells you how to build an NPC. And then you have another set of rules that tells you how to override the first set of rules when they yield inappropriate results. This by you is simple?

It's not at first. The problem comes with trying to be fair about all those fiat decisions. I hate winging it. Often as not, I may only write only something like Exp3 in a stat block and slap a skill modifier on the NPC if it ever comes up. Attack bonus often gets a similar treatment, and justify it retroactively if I need to.

Fair? What do you mean by "fair?" The NPC is not a party member and does not have to be balanced against the PCs. The NPC's stats are whatever you feel it's appropriate for them to be. You can go through a lot of rigmarole to justify those stats, but then you invent stuff like "noncombatant" and "Fairy God Mother's Gift" when the numbers don't come out the way you want them, so why bother?

The thing is that as DMs, we generally know what we want by way of output. We know what we want the NPC's capabilities to be. But using 3E's approach requires a lot of poking at multiple inputs to get the output to come out right, and in the end we may still end up applying random made-up modifiers when we can't get the values where we want them. It would be much simpler just to say "I want an NPC who is X good at combat and Y good at weaving." And the system gives you a set of combat values suitable for X, and a set of skill modifiers suitable for Y. Then you can fill in the ability scores and other details with whatever seems appropriate.

 

[Celebrim]

So you have a set of rules that tells you how to build an NPC. And then you have another set of rules that tells you how to override the first set of rules when they yield inappropriate results. This by you is simple?

Both feats and classes are part of the same system. By this logic, isn't 'Weapon Focus (longsword)' a rule that lets you over ride the first set of rules when they yield 'inappropriate results'? What do you imagine the alternative actually is? I've used skill based systems in the past; you won't get easier and quicker results going down that route, and you still have the same overrides (specializations and finer grained skills).

Fair? What do you mean by "fair?"

I mean, if the PC's out of the blue say, "I want to rob this bank.", I don't want to decide whether or not they can do that. If I'm picking numbers based on outcome, I'm basically deciding the outcome of the scene.

So, no, I'm not strictly outcome based in my DMing. Outcome sometimes is considered when I use DM force to direct the story, "You are attacked by a band of orcs.", requires some consideration of whether there is an interesting outcome to that, but outcome is rarely my primary consideration compared to verisimilitude. If out of the blue the PC's decide to rob a bank, the defences of the bank will be set by common expectations about the demographics of the setting and not by the fact that the PC's abilities or my desired outcome. I don't know what we want by way of output. The PC's know what output they want, but my hands are too powerful to be allowed to steer the wheel like that because they would be irresistible. The only person getting their wishes would be me.

You can go through a lot of rigmarole to justify those stats, but then you invent stuff like "noncombatant" and "Fairy God Mother's Gift" when the numbers don't come out the way you want them, so why bother?

I think I've answered the 'why bother' question above, but you misunderstand. I don't find the need to do things like ''Fairy God Mother's Gift" because I'm not having results I don't want. I was making a suggestion to you since you are the one unhappy with the results of how the rules are actually more flexible than you are suggesting.

It would be much simpler just to say "I want an NPC who is X good at combat and Y good at weaving."

Maybe for you, but that's not what I want. What I want is a system that gives me a value when I say, "I want to know the bonus is in this situation of an average urban craftsman." or, "I want to know what the abilities would be of an elite Templar serving as a doson in the basilica of the goddess of love and beauty." or in the case of the example above, "What abilities does a bank guard normally have?" and be able to derive that from first principles of the setting demographics.

 

[Celebrim]

The seamstress who practices sewing 8 hours a day for the last 50 years is really good at sewing. They might also be 70 years old, frail, and incapable of holding their own in a fight, using a weapon or surviving even one sword blow.

Meanwhile the 30 year old seamstress who personally brings her wares from city to city to sell them and show them off might fight bandits and monsters on a regular basis and can hold their own in combat.

Both are good at sewing. Both aren't the same at combat. Using a class with a formula in order to generate all "experts" creates cookie cutter NPCs who aren't very realistic.

I find this a hugely strange objection. Are you asserting that a fiddly system like 3.X D&D creates and indeed even imposes greater uniformity when you stat out characters than the alternative? Isn't the alternative in this case just as stat block that says 'seamstress'?

Or is the alternative here a skill based system, in which case how is that less fiddly and time consuming? I've used skill based systems. It's not. You can't fill in the blanks in a skill based system by inference. If you try to set limits and demographic assumptions or even try just to be balanced, you end up having to calculate the amount of points you've spent building the character. That's not trivial.

What is a trivial exercise is showing that any two characters with the same background or profession don't need to have the same combat ability in 3.X D&D:

70 year old seamstress: Com4: HD: 4d4-16 (hp 4); Str 3, Dex 3, Con 3; Feats: Skill Focus (Craft)...

30 year old seamstress: Exp4: HD: 4d6+7 (hp 24); Str 12, Dex 14, Con 12: Feats: Dodge, Toughness...: Equipment: Masterwork padded armor, razor sharp sheers (treat as masterwork dagger), poisoned needle

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Stop for a moment, please.

I said, "Why is it all or none? Why isn't there room for having someone in the middle of the road?"

I want to know how you get from that to, "This should be used for all experts".

Intentionally or not, I believe you've created a strawman here, and I'd like to torch it before we continue in misunderstanding.

Sorry. I thought the point of the thread was "We need classes for NPCs, so we can follow the 3e philosophy that all NPCs are created using a class the same way that PCs are. Here is my suggestion for an Expert class so that we can accurately represent Experts in D&D Next." and that you were agreeing with the OP.

I don't disagree with some guidelines or even some rules on how to create NPCs. I just don't think they need classes and levels.

 

[ccooke]

Sorry. I thought the point of the thread was "We need classes for NPCs, so we can follow the 3e philosophy that all NPCs are created using a class the same way that PCs are. Here is my suggestion for an Expert class so that we can accurately represent Experts in D&D Next." and that you were agreeing with the OP.

I don't disagree with some guidelines or even some rules on how to create NPCs. I just don't think they need classes and levels.

See, I'm pretty sure that what I actually wrote was that *some* people like to generate *some* npcs using class rules, and here's a first attempt at creating a generic class to do so.

Not all npcs.

Not all games.

Not all GMs

I'd have hoped it was pretty clear, but apparently not.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I find this a hugely strange objection. Are you asserting that a fiddly system like 3.X D&D creates and indeed even imposes greater uniformity when you stat out characters than the alternative? Isn't the alternative in this case just as stat block that says 'seamstress'?

Yes, because a rules system will always create more uniform results than a non-rules system.

Here's the alternative:
Old seamstress: Dex 14, Con 8, Str 8, all other stats 10. +19 proficiency bonus in Sewing. 4 hp. AC 10(she doesn't get a Dex bonus to AC because she's not a PC and doesn't have to follow their rules, but she's good with her hands and fine manipulation of items so she has a high dex). +0 to hit for 1d4 damage with sewing needle
Young seamstress: Dex 16, Con 14, Str 14, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 12. +15 proficiency bonus in Sewing. 22 hp. AC 14. +5 to hit for 1d8+3 damage (longsword)

Or is the alternative here a skill based system, in which case how is that less fiddly and time consuming? I've used skill based systems. It's not. You can't fill in the blanks in a skill based system by inference. If you try to set limits and demographic assumptions or even try just to be balanced, you end up having to calculate the amount of points you've spent building the character. That's not trivial.

Wait, why would I have to calculate the points spent building the character or set limit or demographic assumptions? I just needed a seamstress to act as an NPC in my game. I just came up with 2 of them off the top of my head just above. I didn't follow any rules at all. I just set what looked right for the character I was thinking of. It took about 5 seconds.

What is a trivial exercise is showing that any two characters with the same background or profession don't need to have the same combat ability in 3.X D&D:

70 year old seamstress: Com4: HD: 4d4-16 (hp 4); Str 3, Dex 3, Con 3; Feats: Skill Focus (Craft)...

30 year old seamstress: Exp4: HD: 4d6+7 (hp 24); Str 12, Dex 14, Con 12: Feats: Dodge, Toughness...: Equipment: Masterwork padded armor, razor sharp sheers (treat as masterwork dagger), poisoned needle

That was trivial? You've created a 70 year old seamstress who is not just old but extremely feeble and barely able to get up and move around. She's really bad with her hands and manual dexterity, precisely what she needs to sew. Her stats should all be close to 10 as she's fairly average and I'd like her to be able to carry large bundles of supplies back from the market. Also, I meant she was REALLY good at sewing. There's no skill ranks listed at all, so I don't know what her bonus is. Even if we assume we're using 3.5e and she has max ranks, it means she has +10 total in craft. To make masterwork items every time, she'd need another +9, so she'd need 9 more levels(please don't fix this with stat mods, she isn't especially smart). I don't want her to have more than 4 hps though. She should be able to be killed by one strike with a dagger.

Meanwhile, you've had to look up and find the description of two feats: Dodge and Toughness which the NPC will never use or care about since this NPC will never get into a battle and is just here to be a seamstress. You had to roll or figure out the average of the hitdice to figure out her hitpoints, you didn't list her AC so if I do have to use her in combat I don't know what it takes to hit her. If I wanted to figure it out I know have to look up the AC of Masterwork padded armor which I likely don't know off the top of my head. I then have to add the Dex bonus. When I use her in combat, I now how to look up Dodge again to figure out what it does.

Also, I'd like her to be nearly as good as the old seamstress at sewing but her combat skill should be about where it is now, as a 4th level character or so. Don't change her stats. She's good. Also, I'd like her to have no feats at all. She never learned any. But don't break the rules.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

See, I'm pretty sure that what I actually wrote was that *some* people like to generate *some* npcs using class rules, and here's a first attempt at creating a generic class to do so.

Not all npcs.

Not all games.

Not all GMs

I'd have hoped it was pretty clear, but apparently not.

Either way, I disagree that an NPC class is ever needed for the reasons I stated in my first post: Combining abilities together in a package of some sort virtually guarantees that the character gets some stats or abilities that don't fit the specific character you are building.

 

[ccooke]

Either way, I disagree that an NPC class is ever needed for the reasons I stated in my first post: Combining abilities together in a package of some sort virtually guarantees that the character gets some stats or abilities that don't fit the specific character you are building.

Nice.

There are no absolutes. Your opinion is only that - an opinion. One. Not a universal truth.

At every point here, I am acknowledging that your preferences matter in your games. Can you, perhaps, allow that other people with different opinions might like different things and that this is not a threat to you or your games? Please?

 

[Celebrim]

Yes, because a rules system will always create more uniform results than a non-rules system.

A non-rules system.... So basically you are advocating no rules? Ok.... The thing about a 'no rules system' is its really easy to provide you one, but maybe you shouldn't get an opinion as to what the rules are since you aren't going to use them anyway.

Here's the alternative:
Old seamstress: Dex 14, Con 8, Str 8, all other stats 10.

Even a 70 year old feeble grandmother has a dexterity probably higher than any of my current players and is certainly on par with many a 40 year old nerd in overall health?

AC 10(she doesn't get a Dex bonus to AC because she's not a PC and doesn't have to follow their rules, but she's good with her hands and fine manipulation of items so she has a high dex).

In D&D sewing is a craft skill and as such has nothing to do with Dexterity. I suppose this is another rule you aren't following. But I really have to ask here, why she needs stats at all? What purpose are they really serving you, since they aren't markers for anything in particular? She has a dexterity score that normally increases initiative and AC, but apparently in your case it isn't. Meanwhile what it doesn't do is make her a better sewer. So what in the world is it for? Is it showing she can dodge fireballs? Which rules are you going to follow and if you aren't following the rules to get the outcome you want, why should the players trust you?

+0 to hit for 1d4 damage with sewing needle

1d4 damage with a sewing needle? A sewing needle??? That's a really big needle. You know, there is something to be said for verisimilitude at times. We're dealing with something about 2 size classes smaller than an ordinary dagger, dealing comparatively enormous damage (1 stab potentially kills your character).

Young seamstress: Dex 16, Con 14, Str 14, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 12.

That's what, 34 point buy? Your young seamstress has better attributes than any of my PC's. Indeed, that's a better stat array than any NPC I've introduced into the game in 3 years of regular play. My BBEG isn't so completely well-rounded. Why the heck isn't she saving the world instead of the PC's? Stat arrays like that just scream DM's pet.

You've got no consistency at all and you seem to take pride in that. How in the world do you expect your PC's to get proactive and make plans if it isn't possible to predict how your world is going to behave?

Wait, why would I have to calculate the points spent building the character or set limit or demographic assumptions? I just needed a seamstress to act as an NPC in my game. I just came up with 2 of them off the top of my head just above. I didn't follow any rules at all. I just set what looked right for the character I was thinking of. It took about 5 seconds.

Which is about how long it took me to jot down my two examples. So yes, that was trivial too. As for why I don't like to arbitrarily assign stats, I've already answered that several times. I feel your examples just reinforce my points.

That was trivial? You've created a 70 year old seamstress who is not just old but extremely feeble and barely able to get up and move around.

Most 70 year old women aren't exactly spry, and you are the one that explicitly described her as 'frail'.

She's really bad with her hands and manual dexterity, precisely what she needs to sew.

No she isn't. According to the rules, Craft is an Intelligence based skill and so provided she has skill ranks in Craft (Sewing) and continues to have a reasonably sharp mind in her frail body, there is no reason why she can't be a fantastic sewer. As a 4th level human, she has access to 3 feats to boost her skills, 7 skill ranks, and probably a point or two of bonus from her intelligence. Depending on which sourcebooks you use she could easily get a +14 bonus to her Craft (Sewing) skill checks, and probably more. In mine she'd take Skill Focus, Skill Aptitude, and Craftsman for total bonus from feats of +7, granting her like a +16 bonus. Throw in some masterwork tools, and that hits +18. I've spent virtually all her resources on sewing. She's a narrowly focused character who excels the PC's in sewing, but in virtually nothing else. She's balanced within her universe, and there is no power creep, no stat inflation, no reason for the PC's to be jealous of the NPC's because the DM's characters can break the rules or receive benefits and coolness they never possibly could attain. No one can accuse me on the basis of the stats of impartiality, of favoring my plots and my characters over the PCs.

Her stats should all be close to 10 as she's fairly average

A ten is average only for a young adult, or at least the population as a whole. A 70 year old on average does not have a 10 strength and a 10 dexterity. A 70 year old woman who is as strong or nearly as strong as an average young adult male is not average.

and I'd like her to be able to carry large bundles of supplies back from the market.

Which implies she's not really 'frail'.

Meanwhile, you've had to look up and find the description of two feats: Dodge and Toughness...

No I didn't.

which the NPC will never use or care about since this NPC will never get into a battle and is just here to be a seamstress.

Then why does the seamstress need stats at all? I'm never going to bother with stats unless I think they are relevant. But again, I don't know what NPC's are 'here' for. The character could end up anything from a paramour to a foil, or an ally, or a ward to be rescued, or a friend whose murder I use to hook the PC's into plot thread. I might not have particular plans when the character is first introduced. It could be the character was originally just furnishing and color, and became important because the PC's focused on her and enjoyed the resulting spontaneous role play.

You had to roll or figure out the average of the hitdice to figure out her hitpoints

No I didn't.

you didn't list her AC so if I do have to use her in combat I don't know what it takes to hit her.

No, but it's pretty easy to figure out if I wanted to figure it out. I didn't jot down everything about her because it was an example I spent 5 seconds on.

If I wanted to figure it out I know have to look up the AC of Masterwork padded armor which I likely don't know off the top of my head.

Then you should be learning the rules then.

I then have to add the Dex bonus.

That's not hard.

When I use her in combat, I now how to look up Dodge again to figure out what it does.

Maybe you do. I don't.

 

[Sadras]

This thread is hilarious! I'm gonna run the village of Hommlet in our next session, so I just want to thank you both as I have 4 seamstresses to choose from