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

[Stormonu]

There's a clear path to Spellfire another person could conceivably follow, once the old wielder is dead.

Yes, but not if the current wielder is still alive (unless, I guess, you're Elminster). That's all the DM has to say to deny you access. And I don't believe that's the only case where something like that may be true. Thinking of folks like Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Usaine Bolt and the like, whose skills or abilities are so far above everyone else that (for their time) they're unique.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, but not if the current wielder is still alive (unless, I guess, you're Elminster). That's all the DM has to say to deny you access. And I don't believe that's the only case where something like that may be true. Thinking of folks like Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Usaine Bolt and the like, whose skills or abilities are so far above everyone else that (for their time) they're unique.

You can only have one King of Kingsland at a time too, pr one Slayer (at first). Unique at the moment does not mean no one else could ever learn this or be this.

 

[Chaltab]

Why would anyone have unique abilities that no one else could have?

Genetic mutation, quirk of magic, chosen by a very picky goddess, made a dumb deal with a demon that nobody else was stupid enough to make...

 

[Crimson Longinus]

NPC can't hit hard enough fast enough NOR take hits enough fast enough using PC rules past CR 5 or so.

Enough for what? And if both their offence and defence are lacking for your purposes, then just make them higher level!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Genetic mutation, quirk of magic, chosen by a very picky goddess, made a dumb deal with a demon that nobody else was stupid enough to make...

I have been told in many threads how it is the PCs that are the super special and unique people, but apparently now it is the other way around, and every basic extra NPC now has some convoluted backstory that grants them special powers!

 

[ECMO3]

. In early versions it was more likely to accidentally kill off players, but if I want a TPK in the current edition it wouldn't be that hard no matter what level the party is. I can always stack the deck.

I agree and a DM can always cause a TPK if that is what we want.

What we are talking about here is a DM who does NOT want to do that, but it accidentally happens, and not because the party makes a bad decision but rather because the DM designed a monster poorly.

I think the rules are forgiving and the default difficulty of even hard encounters is very forgiving, enough so that TPK is not going to happen because of this.

 

[ECMO3]

and then be wrong in some way (or straight up, an encounter that was never meant to be overcome by bashing the door in - or the party pushes on when they should take a rest). Quite often starting with a string of bad rolls followed by stubborn players who refuse to pull back once a PC goes down, thinking if they can hang in just a hair longer, they can turn the fight around.

These are all the things I mentioned that cause a TPK ... and that is not what we are talking about here.

We are talking about the margin being "razor thin" when these things are not the case. When the party is not making poor decissions, when they do not have bad rolls, when they are not low level and just I don't think it is in 5E when designing IAW the guidelines. I just don't think it is, not if we are talking about a full blown TPK.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, but not if the current wielder is still alive (unless, I guess, you're Elminster). That's all the DM has to say to deny you access. And I don't believe that's the only case where something like that may be true. Thinking of folks like Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Usaine Bolt and the like, whose skills or abilities are so far above everyone else that (for their time) they're unique.

That's not a denial of access. That's a challenge to be overcome! (Turns to the rest of the group and begins planning how to kill the current wielder)

 

[Chaltab]

I have been told in many threads how it is the PCs that are the super special and unique people, but apparently now it is the other way around, and every basic extra NPC now has some convoluted backstory that grants them special powers!

Okay, that is certainly one way of interpreting what I said. Not a way I'd consider good faith, but a way, certainly.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Genetic mutation, quirk of magic, chosen by a very picky goddess, made a dumb deal with a demon that nobody else was stupid enough to make...

None if that reads as unique to me, just rare. It's certainly not IMO a good reason to restrict any ability to PC or NPC based on the narrative distinction between the two.