Same system. Coming from TFT, where there is no NPC distinction except that NPCs aren't being played by players. I often don't do all the possible details until they become relevant, though, and if playing with GURPS, I do not fuss with calculating exact point costs unless I'm interested, instead assigning values based on what's reasonable and appropriate for who they are and what their background is.

On the other hand, I have sometimes developed shortcut approximation systems for quickly resolving actions between NPCs. For instance, I did a bunch of pre-calculations that let me boil down the results of GURPS melee combat between certain types of NPCs to a single die roll per turn each. This meant I could field 40 NPC fighters in a battle, and if 20 of them were fighting each other on a given turn, I could roll 10 (12- or 20-sided) dice in a handful, line them up with fights, and know right away what happened in all those combats, instead of figuring out what each person would do, roll for attack and defense, calculate damage and effects etc. A minor miracle. When one of those NPCs started fighting a PC or a more detailed NPC, however, I'd use full stats for the previously-generic NPC.

I often use varying levels of detail - out of focus NPCs who the PCs aren't interacting with appear with a generic template appropriate to their type. If there's some reason to pay more attention to the NPC, I detail them more and more. Like it might start with a generic Shopkeeper or Man Of The Crowd template, but when asked by PCs where they're from and what they know about the town up the road, they get a name, place from, and a note about what their Area Knowledge skill level is.

Quote from: Bren;859472I guessing you've never played Runequest.

I like RQ's deal with NPCs and monsters and whoever all using the same rules but even then I don't stat up every person in the village, just the ones where it seems like it might come into play... and I'll cut corners like having three sets of quicky stats (just basic characteristics and combat skills) for the entirety of the local militia... and those might get pulled into double duty for a street gang or some bandits. But they're all still using the same rules as the PCs when/if any need for rules arises.
The bandit king might be a fully fleshed out guy, generated like any PC.

Systems where an NPC takes ages to roll up helped me realise that I didn't want to play that sort of system. This helped me realise that I didn't want an arbitrary distinction between PCs and monsters either. Wanting to use the same system for all NPCs and monsters strongly informed the design of Explore. For example, the bonus on strength giants get due to their size is the same set of rules that give halflings a penalty due to their size. Also although it's a skill based system,
As others have said, simplification of the system for NPCs (partial stats or typical stats) doesn't make it a different system.

Quote from: Bren;859472I guessing you've never played Runequest.

I was going to say that in RuneQuest I always use the same rules for NPCs as PCs.

Sometimes, I might take shortcuts - An NPC with a bad wound might just fall over and not do much rather than fight to the death. NPCs surrender more often than PCs do. NPCs might not use the best tactics and so on.

However, the rules for NPCs and the rules for PCs are exactly the same for me.

Most of the games I'm running/playing actually do use the same rules for PC's and NPCs, shorthand or not.

For example, in Mutants and Masterminds 3e home game, I make my supervillains pretty much based on the same archetypes that the players do.  If a villain's a blaster, I pick out powers based on the power level I'm aiming for and buy them with the same points from the same pool of powers.

Champions/Hero does the same thing.  Has for decades.

Technically Marvel Heroic Roleplaying does as well, but that's almost completely freeform in terms of power selection and modification, so I don't really qualify it for this.

Depends on what you mean.

If you mean are all NPCs created and statted as if they were built from the ground up like PCs? No, unless their entire skill loadout is necessary.  So NPCs that I think the players will interact with more in depth are detailed more accurately beforehand.  Street Thug #76 is not, he's a base set of stats I've tweaked and randomized according to rough ability, but I usually err on the side of more stuff to pull from then less, so oftentimes there are little interesting bits about the NPCs in the notes.  I remember one bandit who was spared by the party and later became one of the party, and eventually the sheriff of a small town the party helped.  Along the way, the bandit developed a complete profile of information, much of it organically created through the campaign.

If you mean do they use the same rules and mechanics involving task resolution?  Yes.  There are no dramatically assigned divisions between Mooks, Minions, Henchmen, Right-Hand Men, Leaders, Elites, Epics, etc, each having their own genre-appropriate mechanics.  My hobby is roleplaying, not storyboarding or screenwriting.

I much prefer PCs and NPCs use the same rules.
I've found I don't like character generation to be too random, because then (when GMing) I basically can't use it to build NPCs.

 I came to this from playing Mutant Epoch, which is a sort of Gamma World redux where everything - race, attributes, and skills - is totally randomized. Its annoying when the PCs want to meet a guy who can fix their car and the PC generation system is useless because rolling something up is as likely to end up with an ex-gladiator or a expert courtesan or whatever.

One set of rules thanks.  It's okay to abstact npcs or treat them as generic averages but the actual rules of play should apply equally to them.

Ideally, same as PCs.

That's easy enough to implement in games with simpler character creation such as TSR D&D and OSR hacks, Classic and Mongoose Traveller or Savage Worlds.

More complex RPG, usually those would th extenive skill lists (CoC, RQ) or lots of character creation choices (most supers games) should really have a few generic stat blocks or character sheets the GM can refer and modify as needed.

I'm not necessarily opposed to having "mook" type NPCs for a certain sort of game, but generally speaking, I like symmetry. And I like antagonists to have teeth.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;859535I've found I don't like character generation to be too random, because then (when GMing) I basically can't use it to build NPCs.

Interesting...  I like systems where character generation is pretty random because that makes it easier for me to build NPCs.

If I know I need a certain profession (such as an auto mechanic in your example), then I can fiat that one aspect to be what I want and roll the rest, easy-peasy.  In non-random systems, I have to stop and think and make choices about every aspect of the character or, even worse, take the time to balance point totals.

Quote from: nDervish;859560Interesting...  I like systems where character generation is pretty random because that makes it easier for me to build NPCs.

If I know I need a certain profession (such as an auto mechanic in your example), then I can fiat that one aspect to be what I want and roll the rest, easy-peasy.  In non-random systems, I have to stop and think and make choices about every aspect of the character or, even worse, take the time to balance point totals.

Indeed, interesting...
You're likely to be fiat-ing a couple of aspects since there may be attribute requirements and the like as well to get a workable character.

I don't usually feel any need to build out every point for a nonrandom character (usually there's no guarantee that NPCs are built to the same point buy anyway). Its handwaving either way I guess, but it feels less like cheating if I'm undercutting the NPCs as opposed to letting them bypass all the limitations PCs suffer from.

Quote from: nDervish;859465Similar 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.

Same here. This method also throws a wrench in some metagaming tactics, though that's just a comical side-effect rather than a motive, as I don't care if players employ metagaming.

In rules-light systems and in those on the low end of rules medium, I support NPCs being built in the same way.
In anything from average rules-medium to rules-heavy, I support the NPCs being built in a simplified way.
There's no one size fits all answer, alas.

I agree with AsenRG in that there's no one-size-fits-all answer, but generally I prefer NPCs to use different, simplified rules from PCs.  Even in gritty, caverns-and-kobolds environments, PCs are fundamentally different from NPCs and monsters.  If nothing else, they are the idiots who wander into deadly tombs to steal treasure from vicious monsters.

NPCs follow different functions in the game than PCs, so they don't need to follow the same rules.  Furthermore, PC rules are designed to give the players enough engagement with their characters, while the DM has so much to do that it's not important for NPCs to follow the same rules.

So, for example, if I'm running a B/X game, most townspeople have 1d4 hit points and save as a "normal man" or 0-level human.  That's it, their entire stat line.  Even a party of NPC adventurers doesn't need to go much beyond HP, equipment, and a few prepared spells.  I'll maybe give them a +1 modifier in their Prime Requisite(s) if it comes up.

NPCs should be roughly as powerful as PCs, but it's totally fine by me if they have powers and abilities that the PCs can't normally get.  If the PCs really, really want something they've seen an NPC do, I'll figure out how the PCs might achieve such a thing, but most of the time it's simply not relevant.

If an NPC becomes important enough in-game to merit more detail, then I might assign some stats, or even roll up a character, but usually that comes AFTER the NPC has already gained significance in the game.

Quote from: Ddogwood;859579I agree with AsenRG in that there's no one-size-fits-all answer, but generally I prefer NPCs to use different, simplified rules from PCs.  Even in gritty, caverns-and-kobolds environments, PCs are fundamentally different from NPCs and monsters.  If nothing else, they are the idiots who wander into deadly tombs to steal treasure from vicious monsters.

I am fine with simplified resolution for NPCs, though it is nice if that is also available for PCs. So if I'm running a game where there are complete newbies and/or total kids, they can take a simplified character instead of a detailed character. I liked the Cinematic Unisystem NPCs, for example.

However, I don't like the idea of there being a "PC glow" such that there are objective, visible differences between PCs and NPCs. It's nice like in BRP when you can have a former PC become an NPC, or if there is an ongoing NPC, then when a new player joins, they can take that NPC as their character.