D&D 5E Your PCs have Character Classes/Levels, and no one else does!

[Reynard]

I agree. Yet if an NPC has class levels, that makes these anomalous too, the same way the player characters are anomalous.

There can easily be a setting where: class = superheroish. Including supervillainish.

I really like the idea of running a setting like that, where there is a clear distinction between PC types and everyone else and XP is a real thing that exists in the world. I just haven't had the chance.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I voted "no" because I have created NPCs that were built using the same rules PCs do, but as time has gone on running 5E I do it less and less - and do not miss the 3E days of making full stat blocks everything.

While I reserve the right to create an NPC with class/levels should I feel like it, I find it too tedious and pointless to do so 99% of the time. Especially after experiencing years of 3.x, I'm thrilled that 5e doesn't default to doing so.

These. (Minus the 3.x references, I suppose, as I missed everything between 1e and 5e...)

NPCs truly do not need to follow PC generation rules. With limited prep time, I've found it more efficient to just to take a monster stat block and add a thing or two (spells, PC abilities, other monster abilities) that might add to the flavor I'm going for.

 

[aco175]

What @Azzy said above with reserving the right to make classed NPCs, but I have never needed or wanted to spend the time in 5e to do that. Sure, there are bard schools and druid circles and those NPCs may have most of the features of a PC bard or druid, but they are still not. I may allow my head 'druid' master to shapechange into an owlbear or the 'bard' to have Pack Tactics from the MM. They will certainly get less stuff than a PC but their glass cannon may be more powerful in that one thing.

 

[Reynard]

I think it is an important distinction to note that the question was NOT whether all NPCs were built like PCs, but whether some were. Those are two significantly different propositions.

 

[aco175]

I think it is an important distinction to note that the question was NOT whether all NPCs were built like PCs, but whether some were. Those are two significantly different propositions.

This is the nice thing that 4e led us to and 5e kept. Making the DMs job easier in monster design. I have yet to make a NPC in 5e using the PHB and going through a class checklist to make my head of the thieves' guild to be a rogue from the PHB. He will certainly have some rogue abilities and backstab, but also may be able to double his BS damage 1/rest or shadowjump or such that any PC rogue will not be allowed to do. He will always use the monster statblock, I cannot see spending the time filling out a character sheet for any NPC.

Now, say a NPC becomes a PC somehow, then he will get a PC sheet and conform to the PHB and lose and cool powers he had being a 'monster'.

 

[Helldritch]

I think it is an important distinction to note that the question was NOT whether all NPCs were built like PCs, but whether some were. Those are two significantly different propositions.

And this is a major difference.
I do not want my giants to follow PCs' rules.
But I want my Mage NPC to follow them.

Stat Blocks have a few things going for them.

• Fast and easy to use.
• Great for basic monsters that do not need "complicated" tactics. But still have some spells to cast. (i.e. a cultist.)
• Do not take a lot of space.
• Do not need prep at all if you use them as written.

They have a few things going against them.

• Easy to learn by some players which will memorize them. Don't you dare change them. This is true in open tables such as AL or my Friday Night Dungeons where anyone can join if a place is missing.
• Not very versatile. Thus the need of a lot of different monsters of the same type/level (CR)/race to build varied encounters.
• Needs prep if you want to modify something and unless you change a spell power for one of equivalent strength/level, you need to check the CR calculation if you want to stay fair and square with its relative power.
• Can break verisimilitude for many. Especially those that know the rules as good as their DM (and sometimes way better). (The famous why can't I counter spell that obvious spell that is cast by a human NPC... This one bugs me to no end.)

NPCs following rules for PCs, should/must be restricted to casters. But it does have advantages.

• Gives a credible verisimilitude to the world in general. Surprise or additional powers, if any, must have a narrative to back them up (given by a god or whatever). But since most campaign are against evil, as these special things are offered to "evil" opponents, no player is surprised to see the "evil" side cheat. Not only is it not surprising; It is expected.
• Very versatile. A spell list can be changed in a few seconds no need to check the CR as a spell of level 2 switched for a 2nd level does not change the CR but the flavor of the NPC. Just write down the change and here you go.
• Adds the possibility to turn over said NPC into a full character in a moment's notice. The spell list is there, the rest can be added in a few minutes.
• As easy to use at low to mid level threats as stat blocks.
• Not easy for players to memorize.

The main disadvantages of doing the later are.

• Requires a bit more knowledge to run them.
• Some spells will definitely never be used in an encounter.
• Might seem a bit overwhelming for young and inexperienced DM as a lot might be written (depending on the caster's level).

If build from scratch will require a lot of time to prep. Less as one gets more used to it, but nonetheless takes time.
* Not as easy to use at higher CR/lvl as the stat block as the quantity of spell prepared will be significantly higher.

Note however that both the stat block and the "conformed NPCs" can be used as written in the MM with no prep at all. So arguing that you can't "improvise" encounters with conformed NPCs is not really a thing. I have improvised quite a lot with both systems.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I don't make full PC stats up for NPCs, but several of them if you don't look TOO close you will find look VERY like a PC.

I take a Knight from MM add race stat mods (yeah I still use the ones from the 2014 rules for it not for PCs, but to flesh the NPC) then I add second wind and action surge to it... now it looks like a fighter

I take a druid from the MM add race stat mods then take the spells and rearrange them a bit and give them a wildshape form...

 

[TwoSix]

Voted 1, I haven't used an actual PC-type build for an NPC in a long time.

That being said, I have no problem attaching various class "tropes" to a NPC, I'm just not a stickler for "this ability comes at this level and has such-and-such limitation". If I describe a NPC as a paladin in game, I'm pretty likely to give them some sort of aura of protection ability, and some kind of smite ability, for example. But I have no problem giving them 13 Hit Die, but only 2nd level spells, and a weird list of spells to cast.

And I have no problem giving NPCs powers that might not be available to the PCs as initial build options. Things like custom feats, custom classes, or weird boons that are kind of like magic items are all things that exist in my campaigns, and the NPCs have those things just like a PC might discover in play.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Did not vote. Seems that there is enough nuance in peoples' answers to make a 3-choice poll meaningless.
Like many others, I use NPC rules or blocks as best suits the game-facing concerns. Neither the PCs nor NPCs 'are' fighters or wizards or bards, so much as those are gaming constructs which help facilitate adjudicating their mechanics as they exist as themselves (which may be wizards or bards in the colloquial sense).

In prior editions, many NPCs/creatures had character classes and levels. For example, in AD&D 1E, a sergeant in the guard might be a Fighter 3 or something.

In 5E, creatures don't have classes or levels (typically...?) but might have class features, of course.

I'm not honestly sure there's much of a difference. The guard who was F3 was near synonymous with a 3HD monster at that point, and in several modules an entry with a town guard might list them as "(F3; AC5 (chain); HP 13, AT 1 (1-8), morale 9)" or the like, almost identical to the monster entry, excepting 'F3' instead of a HD number. I don't recall 2E AD&D (where PCs start having a lot of moving parts, character creation-wise) that modules started including complexly-made guards, or the like.

In my mind, 5e is diverting back towards the TSR-era model with NPCs which are less complex to operate unless (as others have mentioned, the DMG fully supports using PC rules for NPCs as one decides them necessary) otherwise needed.

 

[Fanaelialae]

The PCs aren't the only classes characters in the world, but they tend to be rare.

I voted no, but if there had been a "mostly yes" option, that's the one I would have gone with.