To all the other "simulationists" out there...

[billd91]

But I don't think Tolkien will support any case against one-shotting "name" characters. If Boromir was, say, 4th level, how many hit dice did Smaug have? Or the Nazgul's fell beasts? Or the Witch-King? Because each of those was killed by one or two good shots.
I would say just the opposite. Boromir has many levels of fighter and none of plot-protected hero. He's a great warrior, yet he dies fighting. It's the hobbits who have no levels in any adventuring class -- or who start with no such levels -- but who clearly have many, many levels of plot protection.

I think this helps show that you can only bridge the gap between D&D and some kinds of literature just so far and no farther.

But that doesn't mean that we can't make some observations. Take a look at encounter guidelines for 3E. They suggest some high challenges for the party that become much easier when some "trick" is figured out. Both Smaug and the Witch King are those types of encounters. Very high CR, until the trick is figured out and you nail their Achilles Heels. Plus, Bard had an arrow of slaying with a high save DC. What could Smaug do? He was toast at that point.

Of course, I always considered Boromir's appearance in the book as suggestive that they didn't one-hit that man at all. There are 20 odd orcs lying dead about him and he's riddled with arrows... and he still lives long enough to talk to Aragorn. Even without plot immunity, you couldn't one hit that guy.

 

[billd91]

Or, more in line with heroic literature, most mooks should be characters with no levels, no HPs, and be killed or disabled outright by any physical action taken against them. This not only makes things feel more heroic in terms of PCs outclassing common men but, likewise, makes NPCs with levels appear as the awesome (or at least challenging) opponents they should be, when they are encountered. Or, to reiterrate your point, if every NPC encountered is Boramir, Boramir ceases to be unique or heroic, as being Boramir is the norm.

This used to be the point of the creatures with less than one hit die that fighters could mow through like grass. Kobolds, goblins, and 0 level humans fell in massive sweeps, one attack per level you could get on them.

The trouble with mook rules becomes one of challenging the PCs with regular people. If everyone but named characters is a mook, as in Feng Shui, then how to guards actually challenge the PCs and keep them away from the mayhem they may cause? The PCs become completely unchallengable by the rank and file law enforcement and town protection, unless their offense is way out of balance with their defense... which some games, like Mutants and Masterminds, set up.

 

[jdrakeh]

The trouble with mook rules becomes one of challenging the PCs with regular people.

That's not really a problem if you're trying to emulate heroic High Fantasy fiction (or film) because, in such fiction (and film), named protagonists aren't really challenged by normal people or mook-like monsters very often (if ever), with two caveats that I can think of:

1. Said protagonists are overwhelmed by large numbers of normal people or mook-ish monsters (Boramir's death and Conan's many arrests by legions of armed guards are good examples of this caveat in action).

2. Said protagonists submit by choice when considering the possible social/legal/spiritual consequences of mowing through so many townsfolk like they were expendable resources.

If everyone but named characters is a mook, as in Feng Shui, then how to guards actually challenge the PCs and keep them away from the mayhem they may cause? The PCs become completely unchallengable by the rank and file law enforcement and town protection. . .

Honestly, if you have to use rank and file NPCs to force PCs to act in a heroic fashion, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that your players have some issues that extend far beyond game rules. If they're that determined to act like villainous bastards, treat them that way. Let them cause as much damage as they like in true villainous fashion. . . and then dispatch some heroic and appropriately leveled NPCs to hunt them down.

 

[Celebrim]

But I don't think Tolkien will support any case against one-shotting "name" characters. If Boromir was, say, 4th level, how many hit dice did Smaug have?

Didn't matter. Bard had an arrow of slaying.

Fell Beasts

I think pteradon's are like 3HD IIRC.

Or the Witch-King?

Not many, but he had DR 100/Girls.

 

[mmadsen]

I think this helps show that you can only bridge the gap between D&D and some kinds of literature just so far and no farther.

D&D obviously isn't meant to be a pure Lord of the Rings roleplaying game, but if it can't emulate Tolkien at all -- or Howard's Conan, etc. -- then I think it's perfectly reasonable to look for ways to design a version that can, especially if we can do so without losing elements of the existing game that we like. After all, 4E is already trying to make all kinds of improvements.

Of course, I always considered Boromir's appearance in the book as suggestive that they didn't one-hit that man at all. There are 20 odd orcs lying dead about him and he's riddled with arrows... and he still lives long enough to talk to Aragorn. Even without plot immunity, you couldn't one hit that guy.

I don't think anyone implied that Boromir was one-shotted. Just the opposite. The point is that characters even tougher than Boromir were one-shotted -- or two-shotted, in the case of the Witch-King.

And just because Boromir did face a score of orcs in open combat doesn't mean he couldn't be one-shotted; it just means he wasn't one-shotted by those orcs in open combat.

It's Aragorn and Faramir who would be most difficult to sneak-attack; they're the Rangers.

 

[Remathilis]

It's Aragorn and Faramir who would be most difficult to sneak-attack; they're the Rangers.

And yet Arwen got the drop on him!

 

[Zelligars Apprentice]

I think the only person who is 100% satisfied with any published game, right off the shelf, is the guy who created that game - everyone else will find something, or many things, they want to change.

Actually, this isn't even true. Gary Gygax has stated he put things into AD&D 1e that he himself didn't like, and didn't use (for example, weapon vs. AC adjustments). He said he put them in because other people convinced him to.

 

[Sol.Dragonheart]

I'm not really following why a character should automatically be able to slay an opponent he engages when emerging from the shadows. The post initially made seems to imply that if such an attack is made, the opponent should die without fail. Why? Because the player envisioned his character being able to perform such attacks, on any opponent he manages to ambush?

Well, the character has the potential to slay silently with a strike from the darkness, if built correctly, but he will not always do so without fail, just as a character envisioned as a walking maelstrom of melee death will not always sever the head of his pitiful opponents in one blow, either.

If anything, I feel the initial posts scenario contains faulty assumptions about the nature of the NPC, and what capabilities he should have. If I, as an intelligent and capable villain, assign a man designated to alarm the rest of my tower in the event of an incursion, I would prioritize that assignment based on the chosen mans alertness, combat readiness, and toughness. I would not assign a "mook" who would fall with ease and die before even having a chance to raise the alarm, as that would defeat the entire purpose of giving him the bell in the first place, unless I simply wished to mark him as a target since he slept with my young niece a fortnight ago.

 

[mmadsen]

I'm not really following why a character should automatically be able to slay an opponent he engages when emerging from the shadows.

Perhaps if someone had suggested that a character should automatically be able to slay an opponent he engages when emerging from the shadows you'd have a point. That's not what's been suggested though. The complaint was that it was impossible to slay a level-appropriate foe with a sneak attack.

 

[Zil]

Actually, in dnd 4e the guard on top of the tower could be a minion. In other words, very little hp, so one-shot-killable, and at the same time, minions can do quite a lot of damage.

But it doesn't require anything special to kill a minion. All you need to do is hit? Why bother preparing? All you need to do is have a good attack and win initiative.

In 3.x terms, the guard could just been a lower level warrior.