Do you prefer than NPCs and PCs run by the same rules or that there's a different, perhaps simplified rule set for NPCs? It doesn't have to be a binary answer of course.

Quote from: Nexus;859429Do you prefer than NPCs and PCs run by the same rules or that there's a different, perhaps simplified rule set for NPCs? It doesn't have to be a binary answer of course.

If I built my NPCs using the standard char crea as the PCs use, they would hurt the PCs in any conflict they might get into. Hah hah! No, seriously, I'm not kidding, Storytelling System is hella cold.

I usually do not bother statting out Minor NPCs and if rolls are needed, I'll usually just give them the lowest ratings reasonably possible. Major NPCs get fleshed out in areas that will likely come up in-game. Core NPCs are statted same as PCs

Depends on the game system.

In D&D and most Fantasy games, humanoids should be built along the same rules (in my opinion.)

Feng Shui, which is based Hong Kong Blood Opera or Martial Arts films, I don't care.

In most cases, it's always going to be different (unless the system is really, really simple). Are you really going to roll up an NPC, then send him on adventures like the PCs?

No, you're going to take a shortcut, probably assign ability scores, level, magic items. Maybe you give him a bit of a backstory, but that's it.

NPCs only need a shorthand. Of course, every DM has a different definition of "shorthand" necessary for the NPC to be useful to them.

I'm not sure shorthand counts as 'separate rules', does it?

Quote from: Nexus;859429Do you prefer than NPCs and PCs run by the same rules or that there's a different, perhaps simplified rule set for NPCs? It doesn't have to be a binary answer of course.

For PC-type NPCs:
'Same rules' works great in pre-3e D&D and in other systems where the rules are simple enough to make that practical. It's a nightmare in 3e D&D and similar complex systems; for those a better approach is to use much simpler rules to stat & run NPCs. 4e D&D probably goes too far the other way; 5e D&D seems to hit a sweet spot.

For very un-PC-like NPCs, some kind of arbitrary statting or no rules usually works best. The game may not have any rules for what the NPC is good at. 1e AD&D Sages don't resemble PCs at all but are statted out. 1e AD&D Blacksmiths don't really have much in the way of rules associated with them other than from the PC's perspective of hiring them.

It does depend on... er... genre conventions.  

I generally prefer my NPCs to interact with the rules the same as the PCs, but I don't need or want every god damn NPC to be built 'exactly like a character'.  Hell, I don't mind if the NPCs have the option to shave down the fiddly bits, like standard bonuses and penalties being 'built in'. So long as the option exists to dial down and manipulate the pieces if I need more granularity.

On the other hand, out and out Mook rules, such as Feng Shui, where Mooks DON"T interact with the rules the same way... and in fact might be viewed less as characters than collections of damage dealing obstacles... generally don't do it for me outside of very specific games... like Feng Shui.

Eh. Actually, the SETTING of Feng Shui, to me, would be a call for less Mookage, rather than more, but the RULES make Mookage ideal. Ah well.



As a contrast, I generally don't mind things like NPCs having less health than PCs, such as Twilight 2000. (Er... I believe this was true in Traveller: New Era as well, though I've parenthesized this comment as I don't want to swear to it).

Similar to the "shorthand" comments above, I'll wing it when creating NPCs/creatures and assign them whatever abilities I think they should have, in whatever crazy combination strikes me at the time, without any particular regard for how PCs are created.

Once they have their stats and abilities, though, those stats and abilities are handled the same way and using the same rules no matter who has them, PC, NPC, or otherwise.

Let me see.

A player has one PC which he plays all the time.

The GM has dozens and dozens of NPCs, some which may only appear once, briefly in the campaign before dying, some which may never appear at all. More to the point the GM will often have to control multiple NPCS at the same time.

I think the maths is pretty clear.

Quote from: JeremyR;859441In most cases, it's always going to be different (unless the system is really, really simple). Are you really going to roll up an NPC, then send him on adventures like the PCs?

I guessing you've never played Runequest.

Quote from: Spike;859463It does depend on... er... genre conventions.  

This.

In general, I prefer that they are treated the same, but certain genres include an expectation for mook-type NPCs and the rules usually reflect that.

Same rules as the PCs unless it is a non-com or non-classed NPC like a farmer, or such. I usually do not stat out NPCs until l it is actually needed. Which is rare. NPC villains though I make note of relevant stats and other minutia as warranted in case something alters any of that.

For me, it really depends on the system. When I got heavily into D&D (revised 3rd edition) I made a LOT of NPCs (as seen HERE) but as 4e and 5e rolled out I realized that I was far too ingrained with the system mechanics and "pluses/minuses" and all the maths that I sort of lost the reason for their existence (factored into the setting). Granted a LOT of them are just throw-a-way guys build to last an encounter or two and nothing more, but that sort of defeats the purpose of even making them an "NPC".

Basically what it came down to is more on how they operated within the scope of the game compared to being equal across the board. Now if I want to make an enemy NPC in v3.5 I don't follow the rules to the letter. I usually give them resources that can entertain a part of 4 PCs (something that I felt 3.5/PF is pretty terrible at) instead of just stats that are similar to PCs of similar level. For example, if I want a badass warrior to confront the PCs, I'm NOT going to follow the rules on feat-prerequisites, # of feats allowed to them, Skill ranks, standard HP, blah-blah...I'm going to make a guy who can potentially hold his own against 4-5 player characters and not go down in 1-turn. Sort of how 4e/5e now does solo monsters.

Significant NPCs (whether supporting or antagonistic) I tend towards using the same rules as the PCs, unless the system is an absolute ball-ache to do that. Though in those instances, I tend to avoid the system entirely.

Less signifcant NPCs will use a simpler system, shorthand, or different rules entirely.

In ZWEIHANDER Grim & Perilous RPG, all enemies are built using the same mechanics as player characters, save that they do not possess Fate Points.

That being said, I use shorthand stats for inconsequential non-player characters, usually only indicating their name, race, profession, a short description and their Order & Chaos Alignments. Rarely do I need to know what the Skill Ranks are of a village baker or local inn keep. I don't make them use Skill Tests, as the narrative defines their success rate. Now, if for some reason the players decided to draw swords on the aforementioned PCs, I reference the general listing for a Peasant or Tradesman in the back of the Bestiary of the core rule book.