NPC classes

[RandomCasualty]

Is it just me or are these things done totally wrong?

I'm not talking about the fact that any individual class is poorly made, but rather the purpose of those classes.

I'm going to propose something.

NPC classes shouldn't be weaker than PC classes. Every class should be level = CR, regardless of if it's NPC or PC.

What NPC classes should do on the other hand is be simple to run for the DM. Like monsters, they should be easy to put in an adventure. We don't want extensive choices to be made, nor extensive calculations. I mean seriously, I just want to be able to take a warrior and drop him into the adventure without choosing magic items or feats or whatever. He should be a simple set of numbers, possibly with some mandatory survival abilities (like not getting totally raped by battlefield control)

The goal of NPC classes should be:

-They don't need magic items to compete (or require few magic items anyway), because magic item selection is a pain in the ass. As balancing factors, they may have abilities preventing them from using magic items.
-They get few (if any) feats.
-They never require spell choices at any level. All NPC casting should be beguiler style casting, possibly even with an X/encounter cap on it.

So you can make up a simple level 5 warrior or NPC caster who happened to be CR 5 as well, but would take very little creation time.

[MrWaeseL]

That list sounds like it would make a good class

[tzor]

1179323123[/unixtime]]NPC classes shouldn't be weaker than PC classes. Every class should be level = CR, regardless of if it's NPC or PC.

YES! This is true! Amen! Etc.

Every class NPC and PC should be generally equal. The NPC will always be < than a PC of the same level because of wealth differences, but not because of class choice.

Then what should be the criteria between that is a PC and what is an NPC class? Adventure!

PCs are generally adventurers, who go out and adventure. Their classes should represent that fact. They should be good at adventuring.

NPCs are generally people who live in villages, farms, towns and cities. They live their daily lives. Their classes should represent that fact. They should be good at defending the city or being the local temple priest or being a good crasftman, or bring a schollar, or doing whatever nonsense nobles do.

Then there are niche NPC classes. The adept, for example, gives a great model for the traditional witch (either good or evil) combining divine spells with an arcane familiar. Only problem is that it's written in the typical butcher the NPC class mentality.

Accordning to the "rules" a nth level adept is equal to an nth-1 level PC. I haven't done the math, but even that adjustment is nonsense on face value. (A 20th level adept gets 2 5th level spells from a limited subset of spells, a 10th level cleric gets 2+1 level spells from the complete list of divine spells.) (Ironically cleric is a good way to compare NPC classes since they don't get a special every level just like NPC classes.)

Let's run the experment through an NPC generator and see what happens?

Askr, male human Adp20: CR 19; Size M (6 ft., 3 in. tall); HD 20d6; hp 86; Init -1 (-1 Dex); Spd 30 ft.; AC 9 (-1 Dex); Attack +10/+5 melee, or +9/+4 ranged; SV Fort +6, Ref +5, Will +16; AL CG; Str 11, Dex 8, Con 11, Int 15, Wis 19, Cha 13.

Languages Spoken: Aquan, Common, Goblin.

Skill points: Adp 115

Skills and feats: Craft (Bowmaking) +18, Craft (Leatherworking) +20, Craft (Sculpting) +17, Craft (Weaponsmithing) +24, Hide -1, Knowledge (Nobility and Royalty) +23, Listen +4, Move Silently -1, Spellcraft +25, Spot +4; Craft Staff, Craft Wondrous Item, Forge Ring, Improved Unarmed Strike, Spell Focus (conjuration), Spell Penetration, Toughness, Toughness.

Possessions: 220,000 gp in gear.

Adept Spells Per Day: 3/4/4/4/4/2.

Ishmael, male human Clr10: CR 10; Size M (5 ft., 11 in. tall); HD 10d8; hp 52; Init -1 (-1 Dex); Spd 30 ft.; AC 9 (-1 Dex); Attack +9/+4 melee, or +6/+1 ranged; SV Fort +7, Ref +2, Will +11; AL CG; Str 14, Dex 9, Con 11, Int 13, Wis 19, Cha 15.

Languages Spoken: Common, Terran.

Skill points: Clr 52

Skills and feats: Concentration +13, Heal +16, Hide -1, Knowledge (Local) +2, Knowledge (Religion) +13, Knowledge (The Planes) +14, Listen +4, Move Silently -1, Spot +4; Brew Potion, Enlarge Spell, Maximize Spell, Negotiator, Scribe Scroll.

Possessions: 16,000 gp in gear.

Cleric Domains: Strength, Knowledge.
Cleric Spells Per Day: 6/5+1/5+1/4+1/4+1/2+1.

This should be a slaughterhouse, but they appear more or less equal to me ... considering that one is double the level of the other that is saying something!

[User3]

I know that IH has its own issues, but, still, you might want to check the Mastering Iron Heroes sourcebook, which implemented exactly this with its villain classes. Still, it's only for some inspiration, as IH characters don't have battlefield control; as such, AFAICT, those villains are indeed screwed by it.

[Draco_Argentum]

1179323123[/unixtime]]Every class should be level = CR, regardless of if it's NPC or PC.

Everything in the game should be HD=CR=caster level and all DCs should scale with HD.

[the_taken]

1179375684[/unixtime]]

1179323123[/unixtime]]Every class should be level = CR, regardless of if it's NPC or PC.

Everything in the game should be HD=CR=caster level and all DCs should scale with HD.

I concur. My system already incorporates this concept, and I readily promote it everywhere.

[virgil]

Why should HD/CR/CL be tied into one whole? I don't recall the system really intending that to be the case, and saying it should is like saying that spells shouldn't increase exponentially in power; it might be a good idea, but the entire system is based on that not being the case.

[Brobdingnagian]

We should still keep weak NPC classes that go five levels (RoW Warrior, for example), just so we have some low-level mooks, but any NPC class that goes beyond fifth level, I agree must be equivelant to the PC classes.

[the_taken]

1179385256[/unixtime]]Why should HD/CR/CL be tied into one whole? I don't recall the system really intending that to be the case, and saying it should is like saying that spells shouldn't increase exponentially in power; it might be a good idea, but the entire system is based on that not being the case.

The entire system was created by multiple people who did not even agree on what the colour of the case actually is. We have to define the case ourselves.

[RandomCasualty]

1179386368[/unixtime]]We should still keep weak NPC classes that go five levels (RoW Warrior, for example), just so we have some low-level mooks, but any NPC class that goes beyond fifth level, I agree must be equivelant to the PC classes.

I'm not even sure if we need true mook classes, except to simulate stuff of lower than CR 1. After all, under my paradigm, an NPC warrior 1 would be a CR 1 encounter. So if you want the bad guy to have a bunch of guards, you throw in a bunch of warrior 1s.

The only thing you have trouble with is a CR 1/2 guy. Which I suppose you could create a special 1 level class for, similar to the other stuff that's supposed to suck, like commoners. They'd almost behave like 0-level characters did in 2nd edition, being something that's so weak it's under the system itself.

Then what should be the criteria between that is a PC and what is an NPC class? Adventure!

Well, not exactly.

Basically the differentiation in my mind is one of complexity, not of power or purpose. PC classes are made to be used by PCs. As such, they can afford to throw out lots of options for their players. Choosing spells, or lots of bonus feats, or ability trees, or whatever.

NPC classes on the other hand are for the DM. Now, the DM still wants competitive and powerful NPCs, it's just that he doesn't want to get bogged down in all that choice and complexity. He just wants a quick NPC he can throw down to challenge the PCs, as opposed to spending hours designing this character. He really doesn't want to bother buying magic items, or carefully selecting many feats, or creating a build progression. Seriously, you're creating a mook here, and it's okay if he's one dimensional, you just want him to be reasonably powerful and competitive.

The idea is to design NPC classes with the mindset of simplicity, not lack of power. So your NPC warrior isn't going to be a bastion of complex moves and special actions. Yeah, he gets in there and chops stuff up, maybe with one or two minor gimmicks.

Your NPC casters are designed such that they don't have to worry about what spells to prepare or extensive problems with how many spells per day they get or having to write up a spellbook, because DMs don't even care about that. I just want a guy who throws color sprays or fireballs or whatever.

There are a lot of player-only dynamics in D&D. Among them are:

-Magic items
-Chooseable abilities (feats, spells, etc.)
-Spell slots or uses per day.
-Complex class builds

Now, a DM may use this stuff for one or two main NPCs, but for the majority of NPCs, especially in humanoid heavy campaign settings, you just want some simple way to make them without cherry picking all this stuff in your free time.

As it is now, it's pretty much impossible to run a 10th level game with just NPCs, you're forced to use mostly monsters, simply because you can drop a monster down and run it out of the book, as opposed to having to use hours of build time making a human fighter or orc sorcerer effective. I personally cringe whenever I try to create a wizard as an NPC.

So my proposal would simply be to design NPC classes with this design in mind. Simple, fast, yet effective. So you take an NPC warrior 10 and drop him into the quest without much trouble. And he's CR 10 and competitive. No worries about cherry picking a lot of feats or magic items, he's already CR 10, just the NPC class. Just like taking any stock CR 10 monster.

[AlphaNerd]

The only thing you have trouble with is a CR 1/2 guy.

No, not really, CR should go from -inf to +inf. I mean, how difficult an encounter it is is supposed to solely depend on the difference in CR.

So you take an NPC warrior 10 and drop him into the quest without much trouble. And he's CR 10 and competitive.

I laud this goal. Basically, you're asking for pregenerated *classes*, which would be awesome (for DM work). No (or very few) choices, except which to pick. No crossreferencing necessary. Pregenerated spell lists that don't suck which they can cast off until they run out of hitpoints (or have sorcerorish numbers per day, which is more or less the same thing).


For instance:

BattleWizard [NPC]
Stats: Str 8, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 18, Wis 12, Cha 10 (do not increase stats due to HD)
HD: 1d4 (average 2.5/lvl)
Skills: The following are in-class skills with maximum ranks. Spellcraft (Int), Knowledge (Arcana) (Int), Knowledge (Planes) (Int), Concentration, Decipher Script (Int), Move Silently.
BAB: Bad Fort: Bad Ref: Bad Will: Good
1 Magic Missile, Color Spray, Cast on the Run
2 Grease, Sleep
3 Scorching Ray, Glitterdust, Empower Spell
4 Invisibility, Smarter Than You
5 Fireball, Deep Slumber
6 Slow, Don't Kill Me
7 Black Tentacles, Phantasmal Killer
8 Fear, Dimension Door
9 Hold Monster, Teleport, Quicken Spell
10 Feeblemind, Cone of Cold
11 Chain Lightning, Disintegrate, Me Too!
12 ...

Weapon and Armor proficiencies: BattleWizards carry around staves which deal 1d6+level/3 damage on a successful hit. They have an armor bonus of 2+level/2.

Spellcasting: BattleWizards can cast any spell they know at-will. The save DC for all spells they cast is 10 + 1/2 HD + Int modifier.

Cast on the Run: Battlewizards know that its stupid to stay where you can hit them -- they can cast a spell during a double move action, at any point along the double move action. This movement does provoke AoA as normal.

Empower Spell: At third level, BattleWizards may apply the Empower Spell feat to any spell that is lower in level than the maximum they can cast. BattleWizards may only apply one metamagic feat to any spell.

Smarter Than You: BattleWizards gain a +2 competence bonus to intelligence at level 4. This bonus increases to +4 at level 10, and to +6 at level 16.

Don't Kill Me: BattleWizards gain a +2 competence bonus to Constitution at level 6. This bonus increases to +4 at level 12, and to +6 at level 18.

Quicken Spell: At third level, BattleWizards may apply the Quicken Spell feat to any spell that is 4 or more levels lower than the maximum they can cast. BattleWizards may only apply one metamagic feat to any spell.

Me Too: At level 11, BattleWizards enter the wish economy and all their stats gain an inherent bonus of +5.

[Crissa]

Another thing about NPCs that I've hit on Frank's list of 'is this PC appropriate'...

NPC classes don't have to:
-Be useful in combat. If their skills are situational, they may be eliminated by tactics or strategy.
-Be useful out of combat. They need spot and listen, but their out of combat use can be unskilled.
-They can have 'puzzlemonster' abilities. They're not players, you don't have to worry about monsters being flummoxed by them, generally. Also, you don't have to worry about them getting shafted by some other ability.

-Crissa

[Draco_Argentum]

I read a very interesting theory about why people seem to do better in the last few turns of a wargame than the first few. As the game goes on you lose units. This means that you can spend more time choosing the perfect move for the remainder.

I think the same applies to NPC classes. The DM is one person with many NPCs and he is expected to keep things moving so all the NPCs have to be moved quickly. The players have only one PC and maybe a pet.

If the DM has too many options per NPC each round either they spend forever picking the optimal moves or they make suboptimal moves. So not only should NPC classes be easy to stat up they should also have only a few moves each.

[RandomCasualty]

1179424055[/unixtime]]

I laud this goal. Basically, you're asking for pregenerated *classes*, which would be awesome (for DM work). No (or very few) choices, except which to pick. No crossreferencing necessary. Pregenerated spell lists that don't suck which they can cast off until they run out of hitpoints (or have sorcerorish numbers per day, which is more or less the same thing).

Yup, that's pretty much exactly what I'm looking for. About the only real thing I'd change with the battlewizard is that instead of granting bonuses to his ability scores, I'd just grant straight bonuses to the stuff you want to increase, be they AC, hit points, saves or spell DCs. In general, the fewer steps of removal, the less calculations to be made and the easier it is the character is to make.

[AlphaNerd]

If I were to do this more than haphazardly, then I would have put it all (ability scores too) into a giant table. Level, BAB, attack bonus, ability scores, HP, skill ranks, whatever. Precalculated. I bet you could fit at least one, maybe two per 8.5 x 11". It's still useful to have the stats, in case he gets ray of enfeebled, or whatever, or needs to make a random skill roll. Unfortunately, in D&D, you need ability scores for monsters, even though they're basically arbitrary.

[RandomCasualty]

1179512928[/unixtime]]If I were to do this more than haphazardly, then I would have put it all (ability scores too) into a giant table. Level, BAB, attack bonus, ability scores, HP, skill ranks, whatever. Precalculated. I bet you could fit at least one, maybe two per 8.5 x 11". It's still useful to have the stats, in case he gets ray of enfeebled, or whatever, or needs to make a random skill roll. Unfortunately, in D&D, you need ability scores for monsters, even though they're basically arbitrary.

Yeah, I was actuallythinking of some kind of monster ability that negates the need for ability scores. Something like

Monstrous Fortitude: Whenever you'd normally take ability damage, penalty or drain, you may suppress the effects of this and instead only take the following penalties based on accumulated ability loss

Strength: For every 2 points of strength loss, you take a -1 penalty on attack and damage rolls, grapple checks and strength based checks.

Dexterity: For every 2 points of dexterity loss, you take a -1 penalty to AC and reflex saves.

Consitution: For every 2 points of consitution loss, you take a -1 penalty to fortitude saves and lose 1 hit point per hit dice.


Anyway, that's a rough draft, but I figure that could simplify things alot. I've always sort of been on a quest to try to make NPCs and monsters simpler to run and otherwise cut out the fat and secondary scores of a creature's stat block.

[Catharz]

So, why are there so many dungeons? Because NPC mages get disintegrate at will.


Why not scrap the idea of "NPC classes" and just use 'simple classes' + predetermined feats and EQ? It's easy to imagine somebody wanting to play an NPC mage.

The only useful NPC class setup would get 4 active abilities max, plus their basic (passive) stats (and no used EQ). Everything scales. If you're giving out a good mix of 2-3 abilities per level, that's a PC class.

So your mook mage gets fear, scorching ray, sleep, and dimension door. No feats. Skills = level+3 (Know (arcana), Know (1 other), Concentration, Spellcraft). They have a spell component pouch. Use RC's "Monstrous Fortitude."

In a sense I'd rather have pre-generated NPCs with simple classes, because as least then there isn't the dissonance of the NPCs either not having EQ or not using the EQ they have.

[tzor]

No BBEG should have NPC classes, they should all have PC classes. They may be pre-determined limited action classes, but they should be PC classes none the less.

NPC classes should be when you go to the town of Smallville and you have to defend the town against the goblin army that is comming from 100 miles away to actually attack the Castle Anthrax another 100 miles away and the town just happens to be in the way. The guard has a couple of dozen warriors, there is the town adept who provides all the healing to the women in the town. (The offical town cleric is actually the town drunk.) A couple of experts, one artistocrat and a plethora of commoners.

[RandomCasualty]

1179586067[/unixtime]]No BBEG should have NPC classes, they should all have PC classes. They may be pre-determined limited action classes, but they should be PC classes none the less.

NPC classes should be when you go to the town of Smallville and you have to defend the town against the goblin army that is comming from 100 miles away to actually attack the Castle Anthrax another 100 miles away and the town just happens to be in the way. The guard has a couple of dozen warriors, there is the town adept who provides all the healing to the women in the town. (The offical town cleric is actually the town drunk.) A couple of experts, one artistocrat and a plethora of commoners.

This is what NPC classes are currently, and I totally disagree with the entire paradigm.

I mean, it's fine to have CR 1/2 entries for crap warriors, and CR 1/4 or whatever for commoners, sort of how typical humans used to appear in the AD&D monster manual. But we don't even need classes for them.

I've always felt "expert" should just be a template, not a class. It's an NPC template you apply to give some trivial character some helpful skills, like a weakened sage or something. So he can have a big skill bonus in a craft or mental skill of his choice, but it doesn't affect combat, so nobody cares.

If you're CR 1 or better, then you might as well just have a real class that doesn't have crazy CR rules.

As far as BBEGs, they could have PC classes or better NPC classes. Sometimes you really want a BBEG to have a lot of options and that's fine. The main use of the classes I propose is more for the BBEG's minions.

When you have Drathon, the 10th level dread warlord, and he has a couple of elite bodyguards, a court mage, a divine priest, and a small handful of thieves, you don't want to stat all those out. You'll be up for fucking hours doing them all with PC classes and seriously, most DMs don't have the time, nor do they want to take the time to create what is effectively 8+ PCs. It's just not worth it most of the time, not for a character who appears in one encounter, dies and is never seen again (which the fate of most NPC opposition).

The current system of creating NPCs doesn't work well. I mean seriously, how many of us actually write out the contents of an NPC wizard's spellbook when you're playing a 10th level quest? I know I don't... it's just too much work. I dont' even calculate NPC gold values most of the time, I just assign equipment. Again, too much work. I mean, that stuff is fine for making 1st level goblin barbarians, but at like 5th level and above, it's just too much of a pain in the ass.

What I want to do is have NPC classes act as help for the DM. They're stuff you can hand a particular NPC and know he's going to be competitive, without worrying about all kinds of overhead, like choosing feats and all that garbage.

[tzor]

1179602496[/unixtime]]This is what NPC classes are currently, and I totally disagree with the entire paradigm.

And here is probably where we disagree. I believe that the NPC classes are crap classes. No matter what they try to do they are still crap classes.

Consider the warrior. Why should we even have a warrior? What is it about a warrior that is different from a fighter? Remember we are talking classes, so the difference has to be from the very start, level 1, otherwise we are just hiding a PrC within a class. The warrior should be a unit combat fighter, either with the units guarding the walls or in milita units. In either case they regularly train and fight as a unit.

What the warrior is, however is a fighter with lower hit dice, no bonus feats, and one less skill to spend his limited skill points. (I mean what the hell gives with not letting them have craft?)

The fighter’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Ride (Dex), and Swim (Str).

The warrior’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Ride (Dex), and Swim (Str).

As written the warrior is CRAP. Just write up a regular fighter with a lower level.

The expert is a rules breaker class. It allows you to roll your own collection of skills for your NPC. Other than that cute angle the class is worthless.

The aristocrat is an interesting class but it needs a hook to make it seem worthwhile. Basically they should have more money than everyone else. Being weathly should be a part of their class description. Ironically we can't technically do that because NPC wealth is AFAIK closed content and thus no open content material (like an NPC class) can mention that in public.

[Nihlin]

1179608662[/unixtime]]
And here is probably where we disagree. I believe that the NPC classes are crap classes. No matter what they try to do they are still crap classes.

...As written the warrior is CRAP. Just write up a regular fighter with a lower level.

Right, and writing up a 10th level fighter is a pain in the ass. I think the issue is terminology, really. Some NPCs are bureaucrats that the PCs talk to, and some NPCs are evil wizards that the PCs fight. You want ease of use in both cases. You don't need the bureaucrats to be able to fight well, however, and you might actually prefer if they sucked at it. So, using the same classes for each is going to yield ass-kicking sewer inspectors or woefully weak challenges. That's not acceptable. Using suck classes for the sewer inspector and PC classes for the evil wizard means the evil wizard might take several hours to write up. That's not acceptable, either.

So, to make everyone happy, we need to be able to build an effective evil wizard fast enough to prevent the players from wandering over to the Wii. In the same time frame, we also need to make a competent sewer inspector who sucks in a fight. The current NPC rules vaguely support the latter, and fail for the former.

[tzor]

I can go up to the web and whip out the stats for an nth level anything in no time flat. Whipping out the right wizard for the occasion might be harder but then again it's the occasion that makes it harder. (Equiping him is another matter I don't think I know an automated NPC equipper.)

[Brobdingnagian]

Anyone ever think the sorcerer (PHB) would make a wonderful NPC class, minus the sucky spell progression?

Think about it. They get a very limited amount of spells which, as a PC, makes them worthless. But as an NPC, those spells can be entirely situational (since he's only going to be used once then killed off or otherwise leaving the game) and the extra spells each day make him an actual worthwhile opponent.

Of course, picking out those spells takes time, and we're trying to cut down on that, but I do agree that most (not all) NPC classes should be equivelant to PC's of the same level, just easier to stat out and play.

[Draco_Argentum]

Tzor, you're just being obstructionist now. Simple combat NPC classes dosen't prevent the use of PC classes for the same thing so even assuming this became the official rule I fail to see how its a problem.

Non-com NPCs really only need to be a HD and a bunch of skill bonuses. You could use Frank and K's profession skill rules with them pretty successfully too.

[User3]

Alpha, I have to admit that you inspired me.





Combat Trooper[NPC]
Stats: Str 18, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8 (do not increase stats due to HD)
HD: 1d10 (average 5.5/lvl)
Skills: The following are in-class skills with maximum ranks. Intimidate, Jump, Listen, Sense Motive
BAB: Good Fort: Good Ref: Good Will: Good
1 Attack Mastery, No time for fancy pancyness
2
3 Charge!
4 Tons of Attacks:
5 Larger than you
6 I've got no time to Die!
7
8 Keep it Moving
9
10 I've got my eye on you
11 Me Too!
12 ...

Weapon and Armor proficiencies: Combat Troopers carry around weapons which deal 1d8+level damage on a successful hit. They have an armor bonus of 8+level/2.
Their weapons may be one (or any) of the following: Melee, Reach or Ranged (80 Foot range increment). If using a Melee weapon a Combat Trooper gains an
Sheild bonus of 2+level/2.

Attack Mastery: Combat Troopers get a bonus to all attack rolls equal to 1 + 1/2 levels.

No time for fancy pancyness: Anytime that a Combat Trooper could gain a feat, they instead deal +1 damage per hit and gain +1 hit point per hit dice.

Charge!: Battle Troopers may make a double move and attack. The attack ends the Combat Troopers movement for the round.

Tons of Attacks: Combat Troopers may attacks of opportunity equal to 1/2 their level. They cannot gain attacks of opportunity from any other source.

Larger Than You: Combat Troopers gain a +4 competence bonus to all size dependant effects (grappling, tripping etc.) at level 5. This bonus increases to +6 at level 10, and to +10 at level 15.

I've got no time to Die!: Combat Troopers gain a +2 competence bonus to Constitution at level 6. This bonus increases to +4 at level 12, and to +6 at level 18.

Keep it Moving: Combat Troopers may make an extra 5 foot step in their round, even if they already took one that round.

I've got my eye on you: Combat Troopers can take attacks of opportunity on any action that provokes one within 5 feet per level; excluding movement.

Me Too: At level 11, Combat Troopers enter the wish economy and all their stats gain an inherent bonus of +5.