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

[Lanefan]

Or you have to have an explanation for the abilities.
Osteomantic Shield spell doesn't work as well for you, because you're a living being, not an undead like the Bone Death Wizard you just fought.
Phil's Phlebotomy only does 4d8 damage when you cast it because you're not a vampire. If you were a vampire, it'd do 6d8+cha mod damage. Willing to give up on a suntan forever?

Those I'm fine with. Undead and Vampires aren't PC-playable and thus could well have non-standard abilities.

Burst of Magic Missiles doesn't work as well for you because you're a Conjurer, not a Force Missile Mage specialist.

This, however, I'm not fine with unless Force Missile specialist was an available option for players to choose for their PCs during roll-up (or as a later feat or ability or whatever).

But if it is chooseable, then I'm fine with giving up the extra missile oomph in return for the benefits I get to my conjuring.

 

[Lanefan]

Within the context of 5e, the PCs are the PCs - the rules for players are generally for the players, not for NPCs. NPCs are typically built under a different framework from the PCs. So a PC adventurer and an NPC adventurer could look completely different based from the standpoint of how they were created.

A notion I outright refuse to subscribe to, whatever the edition.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The issue there is not Arcane Burst, but that the Archmage can cast it 4x per round. I think WotC made some bad choices with spellcasting creatures in 5e24. That is not how I would do it.

Yeah I’m lucky that my players don’t care about the mechanics being treated as the physics of the world.

If they did, I’d have to explain NPC abilities and remind them often than only someone who trained in the same tradition of sword fighting as the fighter can do the manuevers that the fighter does, and only wizards with certain specialties and training can do spell shaping that the party Evoker can do, and that NPCs are the same way.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Those I'm fine with. Undead and Vampires aren't PC-playable and thus could well have non-standard abilities.

This, however, I'm not fine with unless Force Missile specialist was an available option for players to choose for their PCs during roll-up (or as a later feat or ability or whatever).

But if it is chooseable, then I'm fine with giving up the extra missile oomph in return for the benefits I get to my conjuring.

Why? Why can’t there be things in the world the players do not know about until they meet it, that would require years of training under a master of that technique in order to be able to do?

Like it can’t be realism because IRL there are things like that, so what is the reason?

 

[Reynard]

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.

What? Lol. "The GM is not allowed to adjust thing for balance because the players deserve to have the unbalanced thing too!"

No.

The thing that works for a single use encounter is not necessarily a thing that works for a PC.

But then, I avoid this by not giving PCs access to these things at all. Ever. They are ancient lore long lost to time that the crypt thing know sonly by virtue of its tangled memory. No, Lanefan, you may not have that spell.

 

[TiQuinn]

A notion I outright refuse to subscribe to, whatever the edition.

You do you.

 

[ECMO3]

I agree with you that poor decision making, low level and bad luck can all play a part. That's not the problem. What you are missing is that it takes a LOT of that stuff to turn a moderate encounter into a TPK. It takes very little to turn a very hard encounter into a TPK, because the line is razor thin.

I don't know what you consider "very hard" but a "High Difficulty" encounter using the 2024 rules or a "Deadly" encounter using the 2014 rules will need a lot of that stuff to result in a TPK.

In those encounters, the line is relatively thin for killing a PC. The line is not thin at all for killing ALL of the PCs (i.e. a TPK).

If the line was thin for killing every PC; then one PC would almost assuredly die with average play in those encounters and that does not routinely happen, even in what I would call very hard encounters.

 

[ECMO3]

4. One key thing going wrong that starts a cascade of problems that eventually wipes out the party.

This is true, but I think it usually is either is because of one of the other things I mentioned, or it is to be combined with one or more of the other things.

Even in the example you gave the party got a string of bad rolls in a row, first with the fighter failing the save and then following it up by hitting and killing another PC every single round.

I do agree though it usually is an avalanche once something really bad happens.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't know what you consider "very hard" but a "High Difficulty" encounter using the 2024 rules or a "Deadly" encounter using the 2014 rules will need a lot of that stuff to result in a TPK.

In those encounters, the line is relatively thin for killing a PC. The line is not thin at all for killing ALL of the PCs (i.e. a TPK).

If the line was thin for killing every PC; then one PC would almost assuredly die with average play in those encounters and that does not routinely happen, even in what I would call very hard encounters.

Those encounter difficulties were thresholds, not hard numbers. At 1st level medium isn't 50. It's 50-74. Deadly isn't 100. It's 100+. So a deadly encounter by the 5e rules could easily result in a TPK. This is especially true since encounters were so easy the DM had to go past the thresholds by a significant margin to actually challenge a decent group.

That means proficiency with encounter creation and the ability to recognize when you are approaching that razor thin line are a must if the DM wants to challenge a decent group and not TPK them.