Enemies with Class Levels?

34 posts / 0 new
Last post
Simply put, how are you supposed to go about building encounters with NPCs who have class levels? I don't see any rules for how many XP they're worth at all. I mean, obviously building them is simple enough; you just use the same rules as PCs. I'm just not sure what the rewards for killing them are supposed to be.

I'm asking this because I'm considering converting the Dungeonland module from ADnD to DnD Next, and I'm not sure how to handle the oodles of class-possessing NPCs in the adventure, many of whom are much higher level than the example NPCs in the Bestiary.
Come visit Dark Side of the Moon, the new home to the Nasuverse fandom!
I have the same problem. I don't like playtesting the pre-made adventures, so I convereted my campaign to DDN and started fresh. But because no monsters/npc building tools have been provided yet in the playtest, it makes this very difficult.

My feeling is that WOTC will release NPC classes/templates of the sort, for instance, you won't make a level 5 Fighter NPC, you probably will make a level 5 Warrior NPC. Or perhaps they won't even have class names, they will just have a level based on the Hit Die/Abilities you give them. Really I have no clue, but its clear to me that WOTC is not their yet as monster math is still a mess.

For now you kind of have to improvise and use the bestiary as much as you can.
I have the same problem. I don't like playtesting the pre-made adventures, so I convereted my campaign to DDN and started fresh. But because no monsters/npc building tools have been provided yet in the playtest, it makes this very difficult.

My feeling is that WOTC will release NPC classes/templates of the sort, for instance, you won't make a level 5 Fighter NPC, you probably will make a level 5 Warrior NPC. Or perhaps they won't even have class names, they will just have a level based on the Hit Die/Abilities you give them. Really I have no clue, but its clear to me that WOTC is not their yet as monster math is still a mess.

For now you kind of have to improvise and use the bestiary as much as you can.


Oh, we already have the rules to make the NPCs; they're right there in the "Character Creation" rules. I was just wondering how to go about using them in encounters. How many XP they would be worth, and such things. You know, in case I want to throw a Level 10 Fighter at my PCs, or something similar.
Come visit Dark Side of the Moon, the new home to the Nasuverse fandom!
I know what you mean. I want to throw monks at my PCs as a "send in the ninjas" type of thing. I just found a higher xp monster of equivalent level and used that. Hopefully it'll work well.
"What's stupid is when people decide that X is true - even when it is demonstrable untrue or 100% against what we've said - and run around complaining about that. That's just a breakdown of basic human reasoning." -Mike Mearls
* Minions monsters.... some class features can be added like template.

* Solo monsters (the bosses)... levels could be added. Creation may be slower but we talking about excepcional enemies. 


*  Role monster classes: For example Artillery, Brute, Controller, Lurker,  Skirmishers, Soldier.

For example: Ogre + 3 Brute levels, or drow assasin + 2 levels lurker.


And type monster classes: (undead, fay, contruct, plant, beast magic..). 

For example: Iron Golem + 3 Contruct, or Linnord with 6 Dragon, or Troll +2 giants.


* Background levels (do you rembember nPCs classes?)

 Aristocrat, bourgueois, magister, bushman, peasant, craftman....

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

I'm really hoping we get a way to beef up monsters via class levels as well. Strahd's not just a vampire or a vampire with unique powers, he's a vampire wizard. And sometimes you just need a single orc or gnoll as the warchief and don't want to make a brand new monster.

While adding class levels to monsters sucked in 3e, it should still be possible. The fewer class features and bonuses from 5e would already make it easier. And there might be ways to make it even easier and more streamlined. 
Just as long as it's better than the 4e version where it made monsters elites so you couldn't have a full adventuring party. 
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: 
What Would Wrecan Say?

5 Minute Workday

My Webcomic
Updated Tue & Thur

 

I've kind of been eyeballing it, and I think that any solution will have to incorporate eyeballing anyway. As 3.5 veterans know, in that system the notion that there was a remotely tight correlation between class level and CR was an absolute farce. While Next will hopefully be better balanced than that, some things are just stronger when monsters have them. At least in Next, wizards are stronger as NPCs than other classes becuase they can spend every round of their short lives casting the very strongest spells they have available; it doesn't matter that that makes them only good for one combat a day, because that's basically thier life expectancy. Similarly, a rogue is little more than just a bad fighter when used as a monster. A monster's skill benefits aren't very important in most situations. A level 6 rogue is a level 5 rogue with a few extra HP. Basically no difference. A level 6 fighter is a level 5 fighter with a few extra HP and an extra shot to land Deadly Strike every round. Big difference.

Now the odds are really good that they're going to do one of two things. They're either going to ignore the fact that you can't cleanly translate PC levels to CR and just pull a 3.5 and provide a simple but almost uselessly poor conversion, or they're going to pull a 4e and just ignore PC-built creatures as NPCs entirely. I can't imagine them putting together a table that says "a wizard level is worth 1.3 CR, and a rogue level is worth .8 CR" or something. That sends an unfortunate message, even if there are good reasons for it, like skills being less good on monsters and daily abilities being more good. And even then, such a table would still require a lot of eyeballing, since different abilities are different levels of "good" on a monster.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
Why not a system to create and modify monsters?

For example:

A thakathi (I hate the word "witch doctor" it isn´t cool) goblin ...

a thakathi goblin: 100 XPs

a thakathi goblin + 2 levels controller = 100 + 200 XPs: 

a thakathi goblin + 2 levels controller + 1 feat + 1 class feature = 100 + 200 +15 + 20 XPs: 

a thakathi goblin + 2 levels controller + 2 talismans with spell "summon monster level 1"
= 100 + 200 + 15 +20 + (2x50) XPs: 

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

I'm really hoping we get a way to beef up monsters via class levels as well. Strahd's not just a vampire or a vampire with unique powers, he's a vampire wizard. And sometimes you just need a single orc or gnoll as the warchief and don't want to make a brand new monster.

While adding class levels to monsters sucked in 3e, it should still be possible. The fewer class features and bonuses from 5e would already make it easier. And there might be ways to make it even easier and more streamlined. 
Just as long as it's better than the 4e version where it made monsters elites so you couldn't have a full adventuring party. 


I'll point out that this isn't what I'm asking for. I'm just asking for rules to throw a regular, Human Fighter against the party. Not a Bugbear Fighter or whatever, adding class levels on top of monsters; just regular, PC Race NPCS with regular, PC Classes. It was something you could do in every edition other than 4th, so it'd be nice to be able to do it once again.

Come visit Dark Side of the Moon, the new home to the Nasuverse fandom!
Oh but that's a sticky wicket.
If they can make that work well, I'll be shocked beyound words. 
Simply put, expecting a party to fight another party of similar power and capabilities in anything but a well rested state is begging for TPK, for reasons already covered.

However, to each their own. I'm not sure, with bounded accuracy (especialyl monster's abysmal accuracy) and fluctuating damage how it should be scaled.
I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
I'm really hoping we get a way to beef up monsters via class levels as well. Strahd's not just a vampire or a vampire with unique powers, he's a vampire wizard. And sometimes you just need a single orc or gnoll as the warchief and don't want to make a brand new monster.

While adding class levels to monsters sucked in 3e, it should still be possible. The fewer class features and bonuses from 5e would already make it easier. And there might be ways to make it even easier and more streamlined. 
Just as long as it's better than the 4e version where it made monsters elites so you couldn't have a full adventuring party. 


I'll point out that this isn't what I'm asking for. I'm just asking for rules to throw a regular, Human Fighter against the party. Not a Bugbear Fighter or whatever, adding class levels on top of monsters; just regular, PC Race NPCS with regular, PC Classes. It was something you could do in every edition other than 4th, so it'd be nice to be able to do it once again.



Minor nitpick: 4E could have regular PC race with regular PC classes.  It's just that building 4E monsters the exact same way you built PCs was not the recommended way of doing things, because the dynamics involving PCs can easily make the PC-built monsters too frail, too complicated given their short spotlight time, or far too durable for a monster.

To explain that last point, there's a reason why A) monsters have only 1 healing surge/tier, and B) most monsters have no way of accessing healing surges, and it's usually because you already have to deal with numerous hit points, adding an ability to heal that monster on top of his high hit points makes him very... annoying.

There's already at least two D&D 4E PvP-style games out there (one is a Quake-inspired D&D team vs. team deathmatch, while another -- of my own make -- is more of DotA-inspired).  So I can easily state how fragile PCs are against PC-like characters.  I've also tried sicking a PC-built NPC with a bunch of minions against a group of same-level PCs, and the NPC dropped in just one round, wasn't even worth mentioning.

Now if the objective of the exercise is to make a recognizably PC-like opponent in 4E, all you had to do was flip to page 182 of the DMG and use one of the given class templates on top of either an existing PC race monster, or a custom monster.  Alternatively, just make an NPC with the key class features and powers that you want to give to those NPCs.

I tried once a sort of doppleganger combat wherein the PCs fought NPC versions of themselves in 4E, and although I didn't take all the powers the PCs had -- I took only the most iconic powers that the grroup remembers, then toyed with the rest -- it actually went off far better than I expected, as they were challenged, but not to the point of absurdity IMHO.

Again: If you're intending to make an NPC appear to be a PC, just give him enough traits, powers and stats to make him recognizably as that PC race/class.  Perhaps when considering ECL would entire levels of classes be subject to relevance when building monsters, but given how D&D Next's approach is "imagine how the monster would look like, then give him the appropriate stats so it'll be so"**, I see no reason why just cherry-picking parts of the PC race/class would be a bad idea.

- - - - -
I actually noted before that in spite of how it's often been told that monsters had this huge HP bloat, I didn't see that big a difference when PCs and NPCs were placed side by side, at least during heroic tier.

Fighter vs. Soldier, assuming 13 CON
Level 1: 28 HP / 29 HP
Level 2: 34 HP / 37 HP
Level 3: 40 HP / 45 HP
Level 4: 46 HP / 53 HP
Level 5: 52 HP / 61 HP
Level 6: 58 HP / 69 HP
Level 7: 64 HP / 77 HP
Level 8: 70 HP / 85 HP
Level 9: 76 HP / 93 HP
Level 10: 82 HP / 101 HP

Sure the monster HP grows faster resulting in a 19 HP gap at level 10, but then again monsters usually don't have access to


  • Toughness and items that increase maxHP value

  • Second Wind and healing in general (with or without surges)

  • TempHP


So a Fighter who has Crushing Surge and has training in Endurance can add +1 tempHP per round, possibly granting him at least 5 HP in 5 rounds.  If we were talking Dwarven Battlerager with the right feats and stuff, that's easily 5 HP per round, which actually makes him tougher than a Soldier type monster of equal level (and possibly tougher than a Brute of the same level).

- - - - - 

** not sure how aesthetics-based mechanics designing isn't bound to have problems 
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
I want to use NPCs that have classes as "monsters" in my campain as well and I was thinking of doing this : a level 1 NPC = level 1 exp * 2. This is a houserule and might not be perfect, but I also do not know how to make this up. :S

Another "problem" that arises when speaking of NPC "monsters" (a NPC fighter for exemple) is the fact that they can crit. I mean, any monster can crit, but it normally only does max damage. As soon as a "class" enters the portrait though, this crit is more than enough to kill a low level character in 1 shot. 

 "Critical Hit: If your attack is a critical hit, it deals maximum damage. Treat the damage dice you roll, including bonus dice from abilities such as Sneak Attack, as if you rolled their maximum results. A character or a monster who has levels in a character class deals even more damage on a critical hit. At 1st level, you deal 2d6 extra damage on a critical hit, provided the attack deals damage (you roll this damage; it is not maximized). At each odd--‐numbered level after 1st, this extra damage increases by 1d6, to a maximum of 6d6."

This can hurt a lot agaisnt PCs.  
There are no rules yet for this :P So there are no rules to find.

Also, class level enemies are cool, but they have a history of being overly complicated to make, especially when spellcasters are involved. I hope they find a way to streamline it a bit. 
My two copper.
I've made dozens upon dozens upon more dozens of NPCs and enemies with class levels for v3.5 and Pathfinder and they're very very hard to balance with the XP system. For example, a 5th level Battle Sorcerer that wears armor, uses a two-handed weapons, has Power Attack and the spell Wraithstrike ISN'T a CR 5, trust me. The fact is, when you start mingling PC options and builds into Monsters and NPCs, the game starts becoming PvP. Additionally, it clearly starts to show how bad the class disparity can be.

I don't mind specific rules for making monsters and giving certain PC options to NPCs to perhaps throw at your enemies, but can we PLEASE have a separation between the two and not revert back the how bad 3E got?  
There are no rules yet for this :P So there are no rules to find.

Also, class level enemies are cool, but they have a history of being overly complicated to make, especially when spellcasters are involved. I hope they find a way to streamline it a bit. 


Which is why I prefer how 4E did it: instead of having to take various classes etc., just pick a role, progress HP appropriately, then add only the relevant bits here and there.  The hit points might have needed a bit of tweaking, but overall it's a lot simpler than building NPCs as PCs complete with feats etc.
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
There are no rules yet for this :P So there are no rules to find.

Also, class level enemies are cool, but they have a history of being overly complicated to make, especially when spellcasters are involved. I hope they find a way to streamline it a bit. 


Which is why I prefer how 4E did it: instead of having to take various classes etc., just pick a role, progress HP appropriately, then add only the relevant bits here and there.  The hit points might have needed a bit of tweaking, but overall it's a lot simpler than building NPCs as PCs complete with feats etc.


I could do without the roles, but just straight rules on how to beef NPCs by applying small templates or easy multipliers/addition would be sweet.
My two copper.
I'm hoping that in order to add class levels you just take your monster, and add the multiclassing table levels to it. So your goblin with 2 levels of fighter is a G1/F2.

I’m a 1e DM who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years. When I got to the point of throwing leveled enemies at the party I had a good idea of what they could and could not handle. So TPK wasn’t really an issue. And re XP, I just give XP for completing certain missions or goals, I would make a rough guess as to what it was going to be worth, and if I was short I would just pad the next mission up a bit.


So reading this thread I am just curious as to why the XP values have to be so accurate now. If anyone has any quick insights I would love to hear them.


I am definitely not trying to flame up an edition war, just curious.


Thanks.

I’m a 1e DM who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years.


That's odd, because Dark Heresy only came out in 2008.
Come visit Dark Side of the Moon, the new home to the Nasuverse fandom!

I’m a 1e DM who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years. When I got to the point of throwing leveled enemies at the party I had a good idea of what they could and could not handle. So TPK wasn’t really an issue. And re XP, I just give XP for completing certain missions or goals, I would make a rough guess as to what it was going to be worth, and if I was short I would just pad the next mission up a bit.


So reading this thread I am just curious as to why the XP values have to be so accurate now. If anyone has any quick insights I would love to hear them.


I am definitely not trying to flame up an edition war, just curious.


Thanks.



I, for one, don't even care about EXP values; if it weren't for LFR I would've ditched EXP from all of my campaigns and used the "you level up when the DM tells you to level up" method of handling characters.

However, even though I skip out on EXP, I place full emphasis on levels instead.  Each level for me -- both player side and monster side -- should mean something, which means for me comparing even level 0 monsters to level 1 monsters should make the level 1 monster much more powerful than the level 0 monster, not only in terms of the basic stuff (hit points, defenses, attack, damage), but also in terms of their other abilities are.

This is why I have a problem with the D&D Next monster scheme, because monsters of the same level aren't always even in close approximation to each other.  Looking at page 6 of the Bestiary alone, you have a Giant Crab and a Dark Acolyte next to each other.  The former is a level 1, 13 HP opponent worth 20 EXP, while the latter is a level 2, 9 HP opponent worth 90 EXP.  The only thing that makes the Dark Acolyte more valuable is the fact that he has a "Cure Light Wounds" spell, and maybe a ranged attack to boot, but the Giant Crab is tougher, deadlier in melee, has aquatic capabilities, and is only 5% easier to hit than the Dark Acolyte.  Maybe alignment has something to do with it too, but the point of the matter is, why is a level 2 creature almost in every way inferior to that of a level 1 creature?

Again, I as a DM don't care about EXP values unless the system uses EXP-as-point-buy in place of levels, so the fact that monster levels in D&D Next don't seem to matter is baffling to downright frustrating at best.
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
I’m a 1e DM who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years.


That's odd, because Dark Heresy only came out in 2008.



Dark Heresy is a role-playing game. Warhammer 40k is the demon spawn, d6 smack down, born from a game called Space Hulk which saw its release in 1989. 

 ">Here's a quick video about what 40k is and how it compares to RPG's 


I'm really hoping we get a way to beef up monsters via class levels as well. Strahd's not just a vampire or a vampire with unique powers, he's a vampire wizard.



And Fighter. 


If I had the 4E or full 3X spread I would give him Warlord or Marshall, respectively, as he was sorta the military commander super hero of his homeland, which made his fall all the more tragic.
I, Strahd was a surprisingly good book. 
Then again, as a Darklord, he's more of a plot device than creature to pop for xp. 
I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
I’m a 1e DM who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years.


That's odd, because Dark Heresy only came out in 2008.



Dark Heresy is a role-playing game. Warhammer 40k is the demon spawn, d6 smack down, born from a game called Space Hulk which saw its release in 1989. 

 ">Here's a quick video about what 40k is and how it compares to RPG's 


I know what 40k is, dude. Why did you think I mentioned Dark Heresy?
Come visit Dark Side of the Moon, the new home to the Nasuverse fandom!
We don´t need discuss because we could agree a solution: A modular monster creation.

Minions: monsters with "monster role class levels" (the fastest, easiest and simplest option, only hit points and some bonus are added).

For example: a goblin with three levels of lurker
a ogre with levels of giants or brute... 
The dwarf bartender with 2 levels of peasant (do you rebember the nPC classes from DM guide 3rd Ed?)


Elite: monster with class template, like 4th edition:

For example:
assasin drow (hit points + bonus attack and saves + some class feature)
a thakithi (= "witch doctor") goblin.
barbarian half-ogre


Solo: The equivalent to PC, the slowest and most complicated way of create a character, only for the most important nPCs.

For example:
Werner Ruscheider the vassalich, revenant (PC race) dread necromancer 3 + shadow assasin 5

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 




There's already at least two D&D 4E PvP-style games out there (one is a Quake-inspired D&D team vs. team deathmatch, while another -- of my own make -- is more of DotA-inspired).



Color me intrigued, some links please?
I’m a 1e DM who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years.


That's odd, because Dark Heresy only came out in 2008.



Dark Heresy is a role-playing game. Warhammer 40k is the demon spawn, d6 smack down, born from a game called Space Hulk which saw its release in 1989. 

 ">Here's a quick video about what 40k is and how it compares to RPG's 


I know what 40k is, dude. Why did you think I mentioned Dark Heresy?




When you said "That’s odd, because DH only came out in 08." It sounded to me like you thought that I was indicating that I had been playing DH for these past 10 years. The only explanation I could think of for your interpretation was that you did not understand what 40k was and so you assumed that I was talking about DH. 

I still don't know why you mentioned Dark Heresy. I would like to know why you brought it up, but only out of idle curiosity. 




I’m a 1e DM who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years.


That's odd, because Dark Heresy only came out in 2008.



Dark Heresy is a role-playing game. Warhammer 40k is the demon spawn, d6 smack down, born from a game called Space Hulk which saw its release in 1989. 

 ">Here's a quick video about what 40k is and how it compares to RPG's 


I know what 40k is, dude. Why did you think I mentioned Dark Heresy?




When you said "That’s odd, because DH only came out in 08." It sounded to me like you thought that I was indicating that I had been playing DH for these past 10 years. The only explanation I could think of for your interpretation was that you did not understand what 40k was and so you assumed that I was talking about DH. 

I still don't know why you mentioned Dark Heresy. I would like to know why you brought it up, but only out of idle curiosity. 



Because you were talking about things in the context of RPGs, and implied that you were playing the Warhammer 40k RPG for ten years, when it's only been out for about four. ;)
Come visit Dark Side of the Moon, the new home to the Nasuverse fandom!
I’m a 1e DM who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years.


That's odd, because Dark Heresy only came out in 2008.



Dark Heresy is a role-playing game. Warhammer 40k is the demon spawn, d6 smack down, born from a game called Space Hulk which saw its release in 1989. 

 ">Here's a quick video about what 40k is and how it compares to RPG's 


I know what 40k is, dude. Why did you think I mentioned Dark Heresy?




When you said "That’s odd, because DH only came out in 08." It sounded to me like you thought that I was indicating that I had been playing DH for these past 10 years. The only explanation I could think of for your interpretation was that you did not understand what 40k was and so you assumed that I was talking about DH. 

I still don't know why you mentioned Dark Heresy. I would like to know why you brought it up, but only out of idle curiosity. 



Because you were talking about things in the context of RPGs, and implied that you were playing the Warhammer 40k RPG for ten years, when it's only been out for about four. ;)


As someone who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years also (well pre 6th anyway) I saw nothing as such implied.  Amongst 40k miniatures players, since the wargame came first we always refer to it as 40k or Warhammer or Warhammer 40k.  We refer to its fantasy counterpart as Fantasy Battle, Warhammer,etc.  When we are talking about the rpg we generally will say which specific 40k rpg from fantasy flight, ie Dark Heresy, Deathwatch, etc.  I've never heard the rpg side of 40k referred to as Warhammer 40k.

As someone who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years also (well pre 6th anyway)

Man thats funny, I also stopped at 6. I bought the book and thumbed through it, I just couldnt bring myself to jump in, I don't know why. And so I have been kind of floating for a while, now I find myself looking at DDN. I was watching Glee with my wife a few months ago and they had this quick scene of some kids playing D&D in a room after school. They were all dressed up and jumping around. It made me laugh and prompted me to pulll out my old campaign material. I'm not sure where its going to go from here.


As someone who has been playing Warhammer 40k for the past 10 years also (well pre 6th anyway)

Man thats funny, I also stopped at 6. I bought the book and thumbed through it, I just couldnt bring myself to jump in, I don't know why. And so I have been kind of floating for a while, now I find myself looking at DDN. I was watching Glee with my wife a few months ago and they had this quick scene of some kids playing D&D in a room after school. They were all dressed up and jumping around. It made me laugh and prompted me to pulll out my old campaign material. I'm not sure where its going to go from here.



I actually had made the switch to Warmahordes (it's a great game) but miniature wargames have always been my replacement rpgs when I couldn't play an rpg.  My buddies became highly interested in 5E so now we have two games going!  Also yeah I haven't seen too many movies or shows 'get' roleplaying right.  Freaks and Geeks does in one episode.  Key and Peele got it pretty good too.   



There's already at least two D&D 4E PvP-style games out there (one is a Quake-inspired D&D team vs. team deathmatch, while another -- of my own make -- is more of DotA-inspired).



Color me intrigued, some links please?


www.fourthcoreteamdeathmatch.com/ <- FourthCore Team Deathmatch is the one that's gaining ground.  My own game (Omni Potens) hasn't exactly gotten enough bearings mostly because I'm financially drained (so I can't do organized play as much) but I already have the team vs. team rules and a couple of maps to boot, liberally taking a few elements from FourthCore too from time to time ;)
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
Simply put, how are you supposed to go about building encounters with NPCs who have class levels? I don't see any rules for how many XP they're worth at all. I mean, obviously building them is simple enough; you just use the same rules as PCs. I'm just not sure what the rewards for killing them are supposed to be.

I'm asking this because I'm considering converting the Dungeonland module from ADnD to DnD Next, and I'm not sure how to handle the oodles of class-possessing NPCs in the adventure, many of whom are much higher level than the example NPCs in the Bestiary.


My answer to the original post:

For XP budget if you look in the "DM Guidelines" they have that table of Combat Encounter XP's for Easy, Average, and Tough. The XP values of the monsters in the Bestiary almost all fall somewhere between the XP of the "Average" of its level and the "Average" of the level higher than it.

The damage output for Wizards, Fighters, Rogues, Clerics, pretty much matches up with same-level Bestiary monsters. There are ranges, a dwarf with a 2-handed axe will output more than a Human with Longsword. It's ok though, the Bestiary has damage ranges also, and there are tradeoffs between AC and damage etc. I'd just be careful with the "Inflict" spells as they seem to do a lot of damage right now.

LONG STORY SHORT: for an estimate until they release something better.
I'd use the "Average XP" value from the Encounter Building Guidelines Table of a monster of the same level, but multiply it by 1.5X. For example: If you make a level 5 Fighter, a level 5 "Average Encounter" in the table is 260, so multiply that by 260*1.5=390XP for a level 5 NPC Fighter.

For simplicity for Fighters and Rogues, I'd only ever give them Deadly Strike or Sneak Attack, unless it seemed thematically relevant to also give them a different maneuver like Cleave or Spring Attack. Keeping track of whether they used their expertise dice each round would be difficult, though.