I'm not sure I've ever actually built a NPC with the same rules (as in, actually going through character generation or whatever).

In the past, I always used shorthand for NPCs.

For the past several years, I generally stopped bothering to have any stats pre-written for NPCs at all. My notes about NPCs are all about who they are, how they relate to other characters / the plot, and what their personality is like. If for some reason I need to roll something for them, I just assign stats on the fly for what seems appropriate; the time taken to stat out things I might never need and have to try and look up in the middle of a game seems like a waste.

In a game like D&D, this would mean they would default as a monster of whatever race they are and maybe I give them extra HD if they are more experienced like in the older editions of D&D (so the standard orc has 1+1 HD but Grug the experienced warrior has 3HD, etc.) Note that if Grug the orc is someone I'm expecting to fight the PCs then I'll have those stats ahead of time (I always stat out encounters ahead of time for speed); but if he's the captain of the town guard I don't need stats until such point he comes into conflict with the PCs.

In a game like Cthulhubusters, I use a set of standard percentages based on the NPCs background and what they are trying to do (so Prof. Bumbles will have a 75% roll for academic matters but gets a lousy 15% when handling a firearm while Gary the Gangster gets 50% for firearms but only 1% if you ask him about the occult).

Whatever is available that I could use for NPCs, most often what I actually will use is whatever quickly produces an adequate depiction of the character I have in mind.

More complicated methods may be splendid for PCs, as each player has only a few to manage, they are more often used for a long time, and the matter of balancing them in game terms with other PCs can be important.

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

I have, and it's one of my favorites. And no way am I going to sit down and work out guild apprenticeship and so on -- never mind play X number of years of weeks of later life -- just to generate an innkeeper or thief or whatever.

Quote from: Phillip;860556I have, and it's one of my favorites. And no way am I going to sit down and work out guild apprenticeship and so on -- never mind play X number of years of weeks of later life -- just to generate an innkeeper or thief or whatever.

There are rules for experience by year. No need to play it out. But I was mostly keying on the statement that no one would roll up NPCs like they do PCs. One of the things that differentiated Runequest, especially in the RQ1 and RQ2 versions was that the NPCs all had a full set of stats that were randomly rolled. Just like the PCs. So yeah, I'm thinking anyone who thinks that no one would ever roll stats for the NPCs probably never played Runequest.

Quote from: Bren;860571So yeah, I'm thinking anyone who thinks that no one would ever roll stats for the NPCs probably never played Runequest.

Not having ESP myself, I must infer what he thinks from what he wrote -- and that's not it.

Quote from: Phillip;860572Not having ESP myself, I must infer what he thinks from what he wrote -- and that's not it.

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?

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.

It doesn't require ESP. It does require reading multiple posts though. And to be fair, I am ignoring the "run NPCs on adventures" part since that isn't even a universal method of getting experience for the PCs. And even where it is, there seem to be a lot of people who don't actually track XP in games like D&D where it seems central to character advancement system. The GM just levels the PCs when she feels like it or when it is dramatically appropriate. The exact same thing would work for NPCs.

I use different rules for NPCs.
By which I mean no rules.

I prefer NPCs that are light on rules. They should cover the basics. If they have stats like PCs then it should be very easy to come up with those stats compared to the PCs. Usually, I'll just eyeball stats.

Mostly the same rules, but there's always exceptions.  The classic example would be the Necromancer villain who's undead legion is way bigger than his actual Caster Level should allow him to control, because frankly 10 skeletons is a pretty lame legion.  Also the archetypal evil wizard who's arcane experiments have twisted and warped the land around his tower---"Twist and Warp Landscape" not being a spell I ever actually wrote up.

Quote from: RPGPundit;861575I use different rules for NPCs.
By which I mean no rules.

This is a good aproach, unless the NPC is directly opposing the PC in combat or otherwise, when the NPC needs some rules to enable non-fiat interaction. The Altanian Wise Women in my 5e D&D game have all kinds of psychic powers of precognition etc, but no rules attached, and I think they work much better that way.

Nexus, could you clarify what you mean by 'Same rules or Different'?  Does short hand count as 'different' rules?

Just to explain my view:  You're still using the same stat systems, the same limitations for humanoid NPCs, just shortening them to key points, rather than writing it all out.  Which to me, means 'Same Rules'.

Quote from: S'mon;861588This is a good aproach, unless the NPC is directly opposing the PC in combat or otherwise, when the NPC needs some rules to enable non-fiat interaction. The Altanian Wise Women in my 5e D&D game have all kinds of psychic powers of precognition etc, but no rules attached, and I think they work much better that way.

"No rules" can (and I think usually does) mean just that: No RULES limiting the possible capabilities of NPCs, rather than no interaction with mechanisms such as attack, damage and saving rolls.

In other words, for a PC we have rules dictating the rolling of ability scores, selection of character class, available cash and equipment, etc. However, if I want an NPC Wise Woman who can make some kinds of potions, do some kinds of divination, or whatever, then I as GM can simply make her so. Even if a PC with that set of powers -- if so available at all -- might have to be of a certain level (bringing with it a level of fighting power), I do not feel obligated to make the Wise Woman some sort of adventurous monster-slayer; she can be a peasant of but ordinary (or even sub-average) combat strength.

Quote from: Phillip;861649"No rules" can (and I think usually does) mean just that: No RULES limiting the possible capabilities of NPCs, rather than no interaction with mechanisms such as attack, damage and saving rolls.

I guess I think of "no rules" as meaning "no stat block". Stat blocks often seem detrimental to running certain NPCs, especially in D&D and other level-based games.

Quote from: S'mon;861651I guess I think of "no rules" as meaning "no stat block". Stat blocks often seem detrimental to running certain NPCs, especially in D&D and other level-based games.

It's obscure just how a descriptor is supposed to be detrimental; perhaps you could explain? On the other hand, it's easy to see how something could be not likely to be useful, and in that case I'd go ahead and leave it out, just as the TSR-era monster write-ups usually don't go into many details not relevant to a fight.

A manticora waiting to waylay travellers and eat them hardly needs more than HD, AC, move, and appropriate attack data. On the other hand, a household serving girl probably does NOT require those details; personality factors would be more obviously relevant.

Quote from: Phillip;861657It's obscure just how a descriptor is supposed to be detrimental; perhaps you could explain? On the other hand, it's easy to see how something could be not likely to be useful, and in that case I'd go ahead and leave it out, just as the TSR-era monster write-ups usually don't go into many details not relevant to a fight.

A manticora waiting to waylay travellers and eat them hardly needs more than HD, AC, move, and appropriate attack data. On the other hand, a household serving girl probably does NOT require those details; personality factors would be more obviously relevant.

true how much you can leave out depends on the game and what the npc is going to be doing

as to how a system handles npcs my preference is to handle them the same as pcs adn then ill semi cheat a good example it how my mages dont have all there spells filled in but they wont know more spells then they should not know or more spells then they should