SC2.0 Style NPC Generation For Modern

[Michael Silverbane]

Just chiming in to express how ninja-riffic this is... And to hope that someone does do some additional D&D-izing of it (since I've recently started using SC for my modern gaming needs, and won't likely get to use this in a Modern game).

Later
silver

 

[Pbartender]

...average NPCs are only allowed 5 feats.

Out of curiosity... Why?

I don't recall any such rule in the Spycraft NPC system. Removing that limitation, and not requiring prerequisites (I'm fairly certain the Spycraft system doesn't require them) would elimiate many of your potential problems.

 

[Byrons_Ghost]

This does look cool. I've been wanting something like this for D20 for quite some time.

One thing I'm curious about... in Spycraft, I never really got a good rule of thumb as to how many numerals should be divided between the different categories. I didn't see any guidelines here, either. Sure, with the 1-20 ACL everything is more or less scaled to level, but there still seems like there'd be some difference between an ACL 5 with 10 numerals in the categories, and one with 20 numerals in the categories.

I realize that this adds an extra level of granularity to the system (people can be more or less competent within a given ACL), but what do people consider a baseline? At what point does a strong ACL 10 become the equivalent of an ACL 11?

 

[Committed Hero]

Could you make feats worth more in CR as their number increases? +0.1 additional for each one over the norm?

 

[Morgenstern]

You could just say "The critter/NPC is proficient with any equipment it is listed as having."

That's pretty standard for D&D and Spycraft 2.0.

 

[Pbartender]

One thing I'm curious about... in Spycraft, I never really got a good rule of thumb as to how many numerals should be divided between the different categories. I didn't see any guidelines here, either.

It doesn't matter. The roman numerals you plunk in, the tougher the NPC is going to be, and the more experience points the PCs with from encountering him.

Look at it this way... If the Threat Level Grade is the gross indicator for NPC power, then the base XP reward is the fine tune. Both of them put together are roughly equivalent to D&D's Challenge Ratings.

So... If you look at the Sample Standard NPCs in the Rulebook, you've got a wide range of base XP rewards:

Bystander - 0
Tool Pusher - 9
Cult Follower - 19
Zombie - 36
Guerrilla Fighter - 43
Android - 57
Police Officer - 62
Terrorist - 70
Ninja - 87
SWAT Team Member - 93
Cyborg - 103
Special Forces Trooper - 114

So for any given Threat Level, these different NPCs should provide approximately the same challenge for characters of similar level.

That is to say, a TL20 Bystander should be just as much a push over to 20th level characters and a TL1 Bystander is to 1st level character, and by the same respect a TL20 Cyborg should be just as tough for those 20th level characters to beat, as a TL1 cyborg would be for 1st level characters.

The other thing to remember is that those base XP rewards in SC aren't just a function of the roman numerals, but also any gear and qualities you build into the NPC. There's no explicit rule of thumb, simply because it all boils down to... "How tough do you want this NPC to be?"

But... if you read through the sidebar on page 442 of the SC 2.0 rulebook, it does say:

"If the GC wants to build NPCs who are roughly on the same power scale as the player characters, he should assign grades of IV to VI in each numericla statistic and choose gear and class abilities comparable to the PCs' gear and class abilities. He should recognize, though, that any well-built team is destined to make quick work of even a few NPCs with this construction."

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

What he said.

Essentially it comes down to this ...

I sucks. Across the board. X is usually better than the PCs can do before equipment, across the board.

It SHOULD work that if you give an NPC a I in everything and a X in Hit Points, he's going to be just as much a push over as if you gave him IIs and a III in everything. I.E. each of the stats should be about equal (though, in general, I would say competence and resilience are on the low end of equal and Damage Save/VPWP/Hit Points are on the top end of equal).

IV, V, and VI do give PCish numbers ... VII and VIII give rather optimized PC numbers. IX and X average a bit higher than that. I would give III, II, and I only to people you want to be "poor" in those areas. I should be "abysmal".

Thus the "bystander" is abysmal at anything remotely adventurish ... Init, Atk, Def, etc ... but he's a guy that does something, so his Competence is up enough that he could probably make some sort of skill check.

I gave the Dragon above a low Init and Def rating because I wanted it to be "clumsy and lumbering". Instead of lowering the Dex and having to refigure those numbers, I just started low on the charts. Judgement call. I gave it huge Hit Points and didn't mess with Constitution, because I wanted it to have lots of hit points.

It SHOULD work that if you give them mostly low numbers they'll be easier ... and the numbers will add up to a lower CR adjustment and thus the overall CR will be "easier", even if one or numbers are quite a big higher.

--fje

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Out of curiosity... Why?

I don't recall any such rule in the Spycraft NPC system. Removing that limitation, and not requiring prerequisites (I'm fairly certain the Spycraft system doesn't require them) would elimiate many of your potential problems.

Actually that IS in Spycraft.

To which I thought: "Why?".

Then some testing showed that at the lower end of the ACL spectrum, large numbers of feats inflated the difficulty beyond what the CR adjustment from the feats suggested. You can get 10 feats for +2.0 CR, but those feats can allow some pretty powerful things, especially with melee combat feat chains and the like. 5 seemed "about right" to me, apparently seemed about right to the SC2 designers, so I figured if we both liked it, it was golden.

There are several SC2 NPC qualities that basically sum up to "important NPC" that up the cap to 10 for that NPC.

I suppose I could change the wording to "rule of thumb" type.

--fje

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Could you make feats worth more in CR as their number increases? +0.1 additional for each one over the norm?

That's an idea.

Feats are a hairy problem. They're about equal in cost, though at low and high ends of the ACL spectrum they have an inverse relationship ... a perfect costing system would take that into account as well as increasing the price slightly after 5-6 feats.

I wanted to keep the system as super-simple as I could, while maintaining "balance", so it comes down to where there's more value for the GM On The Go.

--fje

 

[Jim Hague]

That's interesting (and good) work, Heap. While I'm no fan of D20 Modern, I can see that becoming very useful for D20M GMs; anything that cuts down on prep time is a good thing, IMO. However, I'd like to see how you came to some of the conclusions vis a vis the costing and balance in your conversion. I'm working on a similar project involving the Sc 2.0 Agency generator, and aqn outside perspective is always useful.

As an aside, have you thought of approaching Adamant with this work? I think it'd slot in well with their product line, and IMO good work deserves some sort of reward.