WotC Rodney and Mearls: custom NPCs so easy

[Sitara]

Gnoll warlock? So monsters will still have classes? And those templates (aka clunkfests) are still in?

@#!@$!

 

[Cmarco]

Gnoll warlock? So monsters will still have classes? And those templates (aka clunkfests) are still in?

@#!@$!

What's wrong with monsters with classes? Gnolls, orcs, ogres, goblins, hobgoblins, giants... they're smart enough to learn how to work with class levels. I don't see a problem here.

Also, I quite enjoy templates. I'd been wondering how the rules for say, deathknights or liches, would work out otherwise. I loved that the human paladin the PCs had met previously would be able to return as a menacing deathknight (but did not have to conform to the specific creature in the MM).

I'm very pleased with the fact that monsters with class levels and that templates have continued into the new edition.

Sounds like this could be really fun stuff.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Gnoll warlock? So monsters will still have classes? And those templates (aka clunkfests) are still in?

Because there is no way they came up with a better way to do templates. And Monsters having class levels added has been confirmed for a while.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

Gnoll warlock? So monsters will still have classes? And those templates (aka clunkfests) are still in?

@#!@$!

Neutral on templates, but for me, Monsters should have the opotion to get classes. Like, a shaman, a chief, a spy...

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

The problem I had with creating 3.x NPCs was the complexity grew exponentially with level. You needed to factor in prestige classes, feats, spells, equipment and all the many synergies. The same law applied to NPC longevity; to give them an extra round in combat, spend twice as long thinking about all the many things the PCs might hit them with. I remember as a player too, it was always kinda sad, if satisfying, so see one die from a lucky Prismatic Spray and poor saving throw. As a DM, I'd often resort to granting important NPCs a 'flexible' equipment list, so that combat was less of a walkover, which could irk some players, but I don't have the time to prepare each character with the detail I would a PC. If the systems governing them are different, then I'm in, sod 'realism'.

 

[Kraydak]

I'm not that impressed. You have to compare the times quoted with creating core-only 3.5 characters (technically impossible, but quite approximatable for the warlock). The only real place to save time is magic item selection (maybe spells, if wizards don't have spellbooks. But then, you aren't selecting special abilities). NPCs don't have enough money to make life complicated though. For the wizard, Boccob's book and Haversack. Blow most of the rest on headband/ring/cloak/amulet of natural armor (still running Mage Armor). Anything remaining goes into 7th/8th level scrolls and partying funds.

 

[Sir Brennen]

I'm not that impressed. You have to compare the times quoted with creating core-only 3.5 characters (technically impossible, but quite approximatable for the warlock). The only real place to save time is magic item selection (maybe spells, if wizards don't have spellbooks. But then, you aren't selecting special abilities). NPCs don't have enough money to make life complicated though. For the wizard, Boccob's book and Haversack. Blow most of the rest on headband/ring/cloak/amulet of natural armor (still running Mage Armor). Anything remaining goes into 7th/8th level scrolls and partying funds.

If you have a one-size-fits-all wizard that you use for all NPCs, good for you. But many DMs want unique NPCs for villians, scouring books for prestige classes or interesting multi-class possiblities, interesting feats, items and spells, which then usually requires double checking skills, BAB, Saves, etc. - especially with your list.

4E will almost definetly save time with determining skills, and even the *types* of magic items are going to save time. There's only the "big 3" to look at for bonuses. No more checking multiple places on the character sheet due to stat boosters.

My guess is there has also been some significant changes to templates - probably more "just add these powers" and no changing creature type, hit dice, or recalculating skill, saves, bab, etc based on the new type.

Also, the "new math" means you don't have to stop and think about different progressions of BAB or Saves for monster hit dice (now levels) vs. the added class levels. They all have the same progression, so you can do it in your head.

 

[Scribble]

My guess for templates is you'll just be swapping out parts, as opposed to changing the math. Kind of like taking racial class levels, or like the optional powers for drow classes in the drow book... It will be much more streamlined because you won't have to change things like the BAB and Saves just because you wanted a different style creature...

 

[Sir Brennen]

My guess for templates is you'll just be swapping out parts, as opposed to changing the math. Kind of like taking racial class levels, or like the optional powers for drow classes in the drow book... It will be much more streamlined because you won't have to change things like the BAB and Saves just because you wanted a different style creature...

And, based on some designer's comments, you can also just increase BAB without worrying about HPs and Saves, or increase HPs without worrying how BAB and Saves increase, etc., within a given range for a level X monster. (This would be in addition to added\dropped abilities.)

Edit: Hmm.. makes me wonder. Do you think undead will have Con scores now, to save recalculation for undead templates? You could just leave it, and still have an undead "immunity package" reflecting what No Con did in 3E.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I just want to know how long it takes to use the online generator we've been promised[1]. I don't want to track every +1 and synergy bonus; computers are better at that anyway.




[1]I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt here and assuming that the generator is actually flexible enough to make a templated Gnoll warlock using only the core rules.