D&D 5E (2024) NPCs, and the poverty of the core books

[Pedantic]

I wonder if folks who insist that PCs should have access to any abilities or spells available to NPCs also play that all enemy NPCs get death saves in combat, just like the PCs?

If you start pulling on the consistency thread, you'll find proponents willing to do away with just about any PC exceptionalism.

 

[Lanefan]

I wonder if folks who insist that PCs should have access to any abilities or spells available to NPCs also play that all enemy NPCs get death saves in combat, just like the PCs?

In my game, death and dying rules work on the same basis for pretty much every living creature.

 

[Lanefan]

If you start pulling on the consistency thread, you'll find proponents willing to do away with just about any PC exceptionalism.

Exactly! That's the whole bloody point!

PCs are (potentially) exceptional because of what they do, not because of what they are.

 

[Lanefan]

Adventurers doesn't mean PCs.

The PCs are adventurers, but not the only ones in the setting; and it's reasonable to expect or even demand that those NPC adventurers are using the same game mechanics etc. as the PCs are.

Never mind that an NPC adventurer one minute can become a PC adventurer the next; I've seen this happen on more than one occasion where an NPC adventurer joins a party and a player then or later takes that character on as a PC.

 

[el-remmen]

I wonder if folks who insist that PCs should have access to any abilities or spells available to NPCs also play that all enemy NPCs get death saves in combat, just like the PCs?

D&D 5E (2014) - "If They Have a Name They Get Death Saves. . ."

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you start pulling on the consistency thread, you'll find proponents willing to do away with just about any PC exceptionalism.

As a strong opponent of PC exceptionalism, I agree with this statement. No PC is, IMO, capable of things beyond what any NPC can do. They simply aren't different creatures based on whether or not they're attached to a player.

 

[Maxperson]

Hence my original point, it is not that important that DMs don't know how to "balance" a monster.

You still need to be able to ballpark it. The line between really hard and TPK is razor thin.

 

[SkidAce]

Because I really think people are debating the extremes, I'm just going to repeat this from previously and then let it be.

"Building NPCs like PCs is too cumbersome, bloats the stat block, and is too much work.

However, NPCs of similar type to PCs should resemble PCs in basic nature, i.e. the framework.

Certainly, special NPCs should deviate, and PCs should not be guaranteed to be able to duplicate all unique powers."

 

[DEFCON 1]

Were I a player and found the spell in the looted spellbook worked differently than the same spell we'd just had cast at us, I'd raise one hell of a stink.

You've got to do that write-up process before the spell ever enters play, be it from an opposition NPC casting it or the PCs finding it in a treasure hoard. Once the spell enters play you're stuck with it as is.

Change those "You've's" to "I'ves" so it's spoken from your perspective and you're good to go. Cause I know I certainly would never bother or care about any of this stuff, LOL!

 

[el-remmen]

D&D 5E (2014) - "If They Have a Name They Get Death Saves. . ."

. I just got sucked into reading that old thread and it eventually takes up the very debate in this thread. Nothing ever changes on ENWorld.