Please no monster class levels

[RangerWickett]

No, it isn't.
PCs and Monsters playing by the same rules makes for a consistent and believable world. Something that many people value.

Having them play by different rules means that, like in 4E, the PCs are "aliens" who can never do what the "locals" do, even trivial stuff while possessing powers of their own no one else has.
And I leave that to Sci-Fi games.

I think you misrepresent what we want. We'd love PCs to be able to potentially access any power or ability or combination thereof. And if the game doesn't have rules published yet to handle them, there should be some guideline for GMs to add them. Exception based design cuts both ways; the published rules are just guide posts for you to balance other options around.

But monsters? Monsters are supposed to be scary. A hero who knows how many hit points a troll has and who is wholly prepared and confident in his statistical success is not a hero. A hero is someone who goes into a dark cave to save a kidnapped child, and who doesn't complain when a serpent made of shards of glass rises up and attacks. He has no idea what it can do, how he can kill it, or if he's going to die.

And that's awesome. To me, at least.

 

[RangerWickett]

Caveat to that. The GM should be encouraged not to create NPCs that are 100% better than PCs at the same level.

Whirlwind Attack is (hypothetically) a 4th level ability because it's overpowered before then. So if you let someone lower level whirlwind attack, don't let them have all the same perks a fighter has. Maybe you're creating a dervish who's unarmored but attacks faster.

 

[Derren]

I think you misrepresent what we want. We'd love PCs to be able to potentially access any power or ability or combination thereof. And if the game doesn't have rules published yet to handle them, there should be some guideline for GMs to add them. Exception based design cuts both ways; the published rules are just guide posts for you to balance other options around.

But monsters? Monsters are supposed to be scary. A hero who knows how many hit points a troll has and who is wholly prepared and confident in his statistical success is not a hero. A hero is someone who goes into a dark cave to save a kidnapped child, and who doesn't complain when a serpent made of shards of glass rises up and attacks. He has no idea what it can do, how he can kill it, or if he's going to die.

And that's awesome. To me, at least.

Who is "we"?
I said how I see it. I want the NPC spellcasters to be able to cast the same spells of the equal power level than the PCs can. I want the players to be able to judge the skill of the orc fighter by observing what attacks he uses.

What I don't want is that monsters and PCs have two completely different power sets and that the PCs can never do what leveled monsters or even NPCs do even though it should be easy for them because of gamist "they are build differently".

 

[YRUSirius]

No, it isn't.
PCs and Monsters playing by the same rules makes for a consistent and believable world. Something that many people value.

But what do you gain by consistency in this specific instant?

On one hand you gain total predictability.

On the other hand you gain rules lawyering players who think they get treated unfair because the monsters get an ability they think they should get too. This isn't an arms race between the dm and the players. It's about collaborated story telling. No one gets treated unfair if the dm can challenge the players if he doesn't abide to the same rules in each and every aspect. The dm isn't your opponent. He's just adjucating the story.

-YRUSirius

 

[Janaxstrus]

But what do you gain by consistency in this specific instant?

On one hand you gain total predictability.

On the other hand you gain rules lawyering players who think they get treated unfair because the monsters get an ability they think they should get too. This isn't an arms race between the dm and the players. It's about collaborated story telling. No one gets treated unfair if the dm can challenge the players if he doesn't abide to the same rules in each and every aspect. The dm isn't your opponent. He's just adjucating the story.

-YRUSirius

And in a consistent world, anything a monster of NPC can do, so can the players. Ergo, no need for any rules lawyering or cries of something being unfair.
As a DM, I adjuticate a story that they can believe in. If they can't do something because it's against the rules, why can the NPCs?

 

[Derren]

But what do you gain by consistency in this specific instant?

On one hand you gain total predictability.

On the other hand you gain rules lawyering players who think they get treated unfair because the monsters get an ability they think they should get too. This isn't an arms race between the dm and the players. It's about collaborated story telling. No one gets treated unfair if the dm can challenge the players if he doesn't abide to the same rules in each and every aspect. The dm isn't your opponent. He's just adjucating the story.

-YRUSirius

And what about the next moment? And the one after that? Consistency is not something which can be turned on and off on a per encounter basis. Either you have it by treating PCs and NPCs the same, or you don't by giving NPCs arbitrary powers without explanation.

And predictability? When facing a spellcaster it is a good thing that the PC can compare their power to his (and hope that the enemy isn't just bluffing).
And how can the players predict that the orc does have levels at all? Or how do they know which feats he uses?

And I gain rules lawyering players when I create arbitrary monsters and when the players don't like inconsistent worlds.

 

[Dausuul]

Know how I get a dragon breath weapon or troll regenerate? Play a troll or dragon. Those are races, not classes that are open to everyone.

You know what you don't get to do in most campaigns? Play a troll or dragon. Monsters are not playable by default; it's very much at the DM's discretion. In many cases, it's not even an optional rule--if the monster doesn't have a level adjustment, it's not playable except by extreme DM fiat.

The bottom line is that monsters get to do stuff you don't. You can call it a racial ability or a special ability for a specific sub-race or a PRC with prerequisite: "Dragons only," or whatever you like. The end result is the same, and since the players don't get to see the monster's statblock anyway (at least in my game!), I see no need to spend half an hour justifying why the monster has whatever ability I decide to give it.

Advanced fighting techniques should be learned by advanced fighters, not whoever it sounds cool on. If the PCs have rules they have to follow, so do NPCs and monsters. In my world anyway. I like it to be consistent.

You're free to run your world how you like, and I fully endorse having the option to put class levels on monsters. But in my campaign, players don't get to know every ability the monster could conceivably have. Nor do I regard PC classes as an exhaustive list of possible abilities and skills that NPCs could have. For all you know, that orc is a 6th-level fighter, but he neglected his training in other areas so he doesn't have the hit points or attack bonus he normally would.

 

[Janaxstrus]

You know what you don't get to do in most campaigns? Play a troll or dragon. Monsters are not playable by default; it's very much at the DM's discretion. In many cases, it's not even an optional rule--if the monster doesn't have a level adjustment, it's not playable except by extreme DM fiat.

The bottom line is that monsters get to do stuff you don't. You can call it a racial ability or a special ability for a specific sub-race or a PRC with prerequisite: "Dragons only," or whatever you like. The end result is the same, and since the players don't get to see the monster's statblock anyway (at least in my game!), I see no need to spend half an hour justifying why the monster has whatever ability I decide to give it.



You're free to run your world how you like, and I fully endorse having the option to put class levels on monsters. But in my campaign, players don't get to know every ability the monster could conceivably have. Nor do I regard PC classes as an exhaustive list of possible abilities and skills that NPCs could have. For all you know, that orc is a 6th-level fighter, but he neglected his training in other areas so he doesn't have the hit points or attack bonus he normally would.

Dragons get to do things non-dragons don't.
Trolls get to do things non-trolls don't.

Fighters get to do things fighters don'....OH WAIT.
Not how it should work. A fighter is a fighter. A wizard is a wizard. A rogue is a rogue. They can be built differently, but if a 4th level troll wizard can cast Wish, while a 4th level elf wizard can't, something is broken.

I don't feel the need to justify anything either, because my NPCs follow the rules. I just prefer to play by the same rules and have a world that makes sense. it is a shared world, DM fiat doesn't do it for me when it comes to how the world works if the only distinction is Player vs Non-Player.

 

[RangerWickett]

There's a monster in one adventure. He can slice your face and blind you with claws from his shadow. He can turn insubstantial and phase through walls. He can dual-wield his claw and a pistol, and move 15 ft. between the two attacks.

One of my players -- his PC is a knight -- said, "Hey, how come I can't do what he does?"

I said, "Gain 8 levels, get nearly killed in a horrible magical experiment, and devote yourself to moving fast as you kill people. I'm sure he feels the same way about you, wondering how he can manage to knock someone 10 ft. whenever he hits them, or how to get free attacks whenever you attack one of his allies."

 

[YRUSirius]

Fighters get to do things fighters don'....OH WAIT.
Not how it should work. A fighter is a fighter. A wizard is a wizard. A rogue is a rogue. They can be built differently, but if a 4th level troll wizard can cast Wish, while a 4th level elf wizard can't, something is broken.

Player fighters get to do things monster fighter's don't.

Monster fighters get to do things player fighter's don't.

A monster fighter isn't a player fighter.



-YRUSirius