We have a lot of options, but I am still concerned how can I gauge the results, for example how can I estimate the CR or XP of such NPC.
I admit I have neglected the DMG so far compared to the PHB and MM, but I am still confused.
For example, if I would like to make an NPC using the PC rules, and I have a target CR, what character level should it have? It's a simple enough question, is there a simple enough answer in the DMG?
Yes, what's your point?
It's easy enough to make a wizard villain of the wanted level - give them the required AC, HP, DPR, and attack bonus/save DC, and you're done!
As for nobles being CR 15... that's a great thought, but the only way to get such a creature is to level up a 1/8 CR Noble. Right?
XP and HD were the main tools. And monsters weren't as complicated, so it was much easier to judge their "CR".
Back in the day, more people seemed to be on somewhat similar pages re how difficult encounters should be. In 5e there is a HUGE disparity between what people consider to be a proper challenge. Back in 1e/2e days, gamers were more "hardcore' and wanted tough challenges. Nowadays you have more casual gamers used to respawn video games where you dont have to be that careful to get through an encounter.
The problem w/5e's CR system is that it is based on flawed mathematical formulas rather than on real gaming experience. Its like they hired a guy to do the math and assign the ratings w/o having some senior playtesters check it over to make sure it made sense.
And then the decision to make NPCs different than PCs is....bad. In my world, and many, NPCs and monsters are encountered just as frequently as each other, or at least 30% of encounters. There is a 5e MM I can refer to in order to get monsters, but just a few handfulls of pages of npcS. So I have to create the vast majority of them from scratch - that's a time sink. Not to mention then having to figure out their CR
I am aware of that, but I wanted to point out that the DMG explicitly tells you that using PC race and class is one of the three ways to make NPCs suitable for an encounter, the other ways being the "quick way" (minimal stats, basically fixed AC/HP/attack/damage/DC) and the "monster way" (full stat block, built from the ground up). It doesn't tell you that the "PC levels" way doesn't work.
And of course the problem is not in building the NPC. In fact it's about as easy (or even easier) than creating is the "monster way". The problem is that the DMG tools work more for figuring out the CR after the design, while the CR is supposed to be your starting point.
It works fine, it's just less smooth to start with a CR in that case.
It's fair to say that it's hard to start with a CR and get an on-target PC-style NPC, but I think that criticizing 5e for that fails to appreciate that this was likely one of the prices the designers paid for having PC rules that are more flexible.
It might be useful to contrast 4e's ADEU powers system with its strict, granular balance - every power of a given level and usage doing fairly comparable initial damage (before role considerations are brought in), and players locked into taking a certain number of "attack" powers vs. other powers. This system could allow for easy level-to-CR determination - a character of a given level has a certain damage output, HP, AC, attack rolls, etc. that is within fairly consistent norms, so you can say Level 14 is roughly CR 10 or whatever.
But the moment you have the ability to swap mage armor and magic missile for comprehend languages and charm person (or even greatswords and shields for twin daggers) you're looking at a game where character combat capability is not on a tight curve. You can only say that a character of a given level with particular abilities is a given CR. Which means that you need to build the NPC anyway - you need to choose its abilities before you can determine what CR it is. Simple level isn't going to tell you much.
So you have a trade-off: how flexible do you want character creation to be vs. how easy you want it to be for level to be a precise measure of hp/ac/attacks/save DCs/dpr.
With those competing interests, I think flexible character creation is the appropriate winner, given that it is the more exposed mechanic (meaning, everyone who's not just a DM is going to interact with character creation at an early point in their game experience, but only DMs going beyond the MM will need to worry about the CR of classed NPC's). This is especially true with a broad CR range - where if you have to whip up an enemy mage and she's too weak, you can maybe just throw two or three or add some orcs or whatever and it'll be fine.
I'd still appreciate an "MM of NPC's," personally, but I don't fault 5e for not being able to say "A level X character is CR Y" in a simple and obvious way. In order to achieve that, more important goals like character flexibility would need to be sacrificed.
I agree with most of what you say, except that I believe that while it is harder to estimate CRs in 5e than 4e, I still expected the designers to do the work fully and more accurately (and yes that is NOT entirely subjective), rather than leave it for me. inc/anticipating that many many DMs would want PC style NPCs, and they could have inc/a table of CRs for that purpose..
A simple table wouldn't really do the job, since within a class, there's so much variation.
As far as I can tell, the PCs are the only existing adventuring group in the entire world, since, with Monster Manual NPCs, I cannot build a group of their level and classes.
In theory, the CR table for custom monsters include a mention of "Save DC". However if you read the text, there is no mention about what kind of effects you should use. Obviously, the result is not the same if the effect is "impose disadvantage on next attack" rather than "disintegrated"! You wouldn't give a monster a disintegrate ability with DC 13 and expect it's only CR3.
BTW I have posted most of my NPCs here - http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=30915
This is me the DM and me the player speaking here.
What a boring, boring world.
One of the best encounters (random or not) is with that rival band on the same quest as you are, after the same artifact, serving a rival god....
Indiana Jones would never have had his Beloch and Naxi allies, Darth Vader certainly wasn't alone. When Robin Hood met his Merry Men, they were someone else's Merry Men. Frodo and Sam encountered Boromir's Brother and his band in the wild and were captured.
If the rules don't give you guidelines into making opposing groups, or other groups of characters, etc. Then rules be damned.
If the rules don't give you guidelines into making opposing groups, or other groups of characters, etc. Then rules be damned.