Community

I put a question in the Ask a Quick Question Thread, that started turning into more of a discussion than a quick question. So hear is a new thread for the topic.

I am curious what people think about Player Versus Player -or- PC versus NPC where the NPC is a PC class (such as a Paladin, Wizard, etc).

I posed my original question on this subject because I was interested in finding out what the amount of experience would be for an encounter with an NPC who was a PC Class.  Apparently doing this this was yet another 'no no' for the game (I seem to keep hearing that when I ask stuff around here).

The way the DMG presents using classes for monsters is through a template system.  That's all good for creating monsters that have a PC-style class, but what if I wanted a PHB race (like a human) to be an NPC you could encounter and fight, where this NPC happened to be an evil Paladin (not the DMG template, an actual PHB Paladin).

The problem that was brought up with having PC Classes as an enemy encounter, is that combat would not work out the same way it does with monsters.  PC Classes, presented as combat encounters, doesn't seem to work well because the damage they do can be better than an average monster - and the hit points a PC Class has is not comparable to a monster of its level, its less.  PC classes are not set up for combat with one another.

My main problem with this is that it makes things in 4th edition seem less flexible here.  It makes it seem more difficult to throw in encounters with 'bad guy' PC classes.  The only method that would seem to work is using the template system and adding it to a monster. But this might not work in one given example (in the last thread) of having a gladiator arena, where you may encounter other Fighters or maybe even be set against a PC in your group (which could be a friendly or deadly challenge).  Are you just supposed to make all NPC encounters with other Fighters here template monster encounters?

Though I think it would be really fun to add a template  to a monster (and maybe even make it a solo), I don't like that you cannot encounter an NPC in the game who is similar to one of the PC Classes without having problematic combat.  The game world starts to fall apart for me here, because it seems like the game is built upon an inconsistency in this area.

I know this is a fantasy game and that all editions of D&D don't really make good sense of realistic things, but when things are inconsistent between two different areas of the system itself (as in PvP) it bugs me.  Having a player who is a Paladin, who runs into another Paladin that challenges him - only to find out that the NPC Paladin has more hit points and less powers, is an inconsistency that makes the game slow down for me.

I brought up another example in the last thread, where one PC group runs into another PC group.  Some DMs will run campaigns for two groups, only to have them battle it out in a final epic campaign game.  My example was criticized  for 'bad form' (i.e. you should never have PCs face off!).  I don't think my example has to do with bad form, I think it has to do with possibility. If you take away a possibility in a game because the mechanics are not going to work out the 'necessary' way, the problem to me is the mechanics, not that the DM wants to have a PvP game.

Well anyway, what do you guys think of all of this? 

EDIT: see above post, which explains it a lot better.

They aren't designed for it. A battle with another PC will, therefore, not be fun to play.

You can do it, nobody will stop you, just don't expect it to be an interesting encounter.

No flexibility is removed; D&D 4e is a Cooperative Storytelling Game, where players fight monsters. You can still face off against an evil Paladin, it's just that he'll follow different rules from yours, because that is what would make the encounter most fun.

If you desperately want the NPC enemy Paladin to use the exact same rules as the PC Paladin, go play D&D 3.5e, where it's the expected way to go, or any other system designed for PvP.

Nov 20, 2009 -- 12:41PM, Sands666 wrote:

I know this is a fantasy game and that all editions of D&D don't really make good sense of realistic things, but when things are inconsistent between two different areas of the system itself (as in PvP) it bugs me.  Having a player who is a Paladin, who runs into another Paladin that challenges him - only to find out that the NPC Paladin has more hit points and less powers, is an inconsistency that makes the game slow down for me.

Here's a quick question to consider - how does the adventurer Paladin know that the NPC facing him or her is another Paladin?

Give an NPC a marking power, a decent encounter radiant melee attack, a weaker at-will-radiant melee attack and a encounter power to heal or bolster another NPC and the players won't notice the difference [1].

Or rather they shouldn't be able to tell the difference. If you go round shattering their illusions by telling them it's not the real McCoy then that's your problem :-)

And that's before we get into how different players narrate their powers.

Cheers,

Ash

[1] Actually they might, the PHB will have more options which have to be sifted when it's initiative comes up so it might actually be noticably slower.

[EDIT: Ninja'd like crazy. This post took a while to compose. ]

I've done a few PVP combats as such in 4e, as a way to test builds, have a fun time, etc. The basic issue is that PCs work on a very different set of assumptions and play in a very different arc than monsters do.

PCs have much less hit points at a baseline but have healing surges to recover them (including at the least Second Wind) which means they can be taken down in a hurry but can potentially recover. This is important for creating tension in 4e combat. When you get swamped you can quickly go from full to bloodied or even dying in a round or two, while still not being flat out doomed. Also this means you can have problems if you apply the NPC death rule (dead or unconcious at 0, PC's pick) instead of the PC death rule (death saving throws until -bloodied), since the PC-style NPC has lower max HP and needs that chance to heal back.

Another issue is daily novas. On the one hand, it tends to be the kind of cheesy asymmetry that 3.5 had, where a 'daily' in the hands of an NPC is no different than an 'encounter' power.. you know they won't have another encounter to spend it, while the PCs typically need to manage resources. Even handwaving away the assymetry (let's say, for example, you've made it clear up front that this is the only fight they'll have for the day so the PCs can nova freely too), there's still the problem of what the nova can do. For example, a level 1 human paladin with Weapon Proficiency (full blade), Righteous Wrath of Tempus, a +1 Vicious Fullblade (oo, a mighty level 2 item!) and the daily power Blood of the Mighty can move up to an enemy, spend a minor for Channel Divinity and a standard for his daily to lay the smack down for +8 vs AC for 6d12+5 damage (and taking 5 damage himself, hit or miss). In a PC vs PC-style-NPC situation, there's just no way for that to work out well. That is an intentionally extreme example but it's not like that'd be that obscure or wierd of a PC design. The reduced HP on the bad guys side means they are less able to withstand those novas initially, so they get cut off before they can heal. Meanwhile, PCs aren't really built to withstand those kinds of hits either. A level 1 warden with 20 con and Toughness has 42 HP. That attack does an average of 44 damage, dropping said maximum possible starting HP character in one hit on average. On a nat 20 it is all max'd for 79 damage, flat out killing said max HP character with plentiful overkill. For less extreme novas like brute strike + great sword (3d10 + about 4-5) you still risk flat out killing wizards and such from full on a crit or high roll.

As you get toward paragon the nova risk falls away. While they have more damaging attacks, they aren't as likely to flat out kill people (particularly on crits), though if you're vicious about it (i.e. dropping dailies on people that are well into bloodied) it can happen. At this stage you run into more of the complexity overload. Your players have, presumably, played their characters up from level 1 to paragon, learning only a couple new powers each level, and having time to practice how it all fits together within the character and within the team. You on the other hand have a whole batch of brand new characters, each with an array of daily and encounter powers and utilities (<-- there's another nova concern. Even if the players burn all their dailies, they may have chosen some encounter utilities while you have no real incentive for chosing those over more nova-licious daily utilities, especially ones with encounter long benefits) and while each player only has to concern himself with one character you need to keep track of a party of them. This I have done as well (one PVP game we had a three way conflict between three parties of three, with each player playing a party. It was GLORIOUS. but also a lot of work). When you add in that monsters are more likely to have any buffs written straight into their stats rather than as encounter long power bonuses and such, this tends to be a lot more complex than running a pack of monsters. 4e monsters are intentionally made to be as simple as they can be while remaining effective and interesting (opposing goals to be sure, but they work together).

Going beyond that up into epic, you start running into slog-risk. I played a 3-way free for all with level 28 characters once.. several hours later we had to call it a tie as the shop was closing and we had to leave, while none of the characters was in much risk of dying all that soon. One had incredible DR + regen, a second was nearly unhittable and had minor regen, and the last was probably doomed, having just used his "once per day, when you die" ability to become incorporeal and regain full HP (but didn't have any regen, so he would eventually get worn down). All the big guns had been used and we were quickly getting down to just at-wills. The defensive possibilities for epic level PCs can get truly rediculous, especially with a shall we say 'defensive nova' (i.e. using all their daily defensive options). That's on top of the complexity factor (which doesn't really get -too- much worse than paragon, as you do more replacement of powers than gaining new ones by that point).

------
So what should you do? Well you can take these warnings and factor them into your plans and use PCs as bad guys anyways.

Or you can make PC-inspired NPCs. Rather than follow PC creation rules, follow NPC creation guidelines from the DMG (actually I hear the DMG 2 has even better revised guidelines, but I haven't read it myself), but design the monster to have a 'human fighter' flavor or whatever. You could probably use the class templates as a guide. For example, you want a level 1 human 'fighter' NPC. So you want it to be a level 1 soldier, so start with the stats from there. Pull the powers/abilities off the fighter template, and the human race template. Compare the damage output you're coming up with against what the guidelines say and adjust if you think you need to. For example, if you're coming up with Brute Strike = 3d12 + 4 (+1d12 on crit) you might want to reconcider, and give him a longsword or greatsword instead.

Don't use either the guidelines or the classes as straight jackets. The guidelines tell you about what is 'typical' for a monster of that role of that level and the class is built with PCs in mind not monsters. You want to maintain the flavor of the class and approximately the overall power level of the monster role/level. So you can have aspects that are a bit strong for the monster role/level to fit the flavor of the class, as long as you take away somewhere else, preferably also to match the flavor of the class. Ideally what you want to end up with is something that plays like a member of the race and class, has a few identifiable tricks (i.e. the human fighter would mark on hit or miss, get combat challenge attacks, and have a bit high non-armor defenses across the board), but you want it overall balanced against other monsters of its level/role.

A key point to this is that you are -not- trying to min/max like a PC would. "Optimal" in this case is "equally challenge compared to other monsters of this role/level, while providing a distinct feel that is recognizeable as this race/class". If you need it to be more challenging, you should be adding levels, more enemies, or synergizing your monster force. (I say that, but really knowing your players and playing to what they like is even better advice. If you think the players would enjoy some slightly beef-ed up enemies without all the number-inflation that higher levels/more enemies entails, then by all means give them a challenge they'll relish.)

Nov 20, 2009 -- 12:41PM, Sands666 wrote:

I am curious what people think about Player Versus Player -or- PC versus NPC where the NPC is a PC class (such as a Paladin, Wizard, etc).

PvP is fine if the players want something different. Running pvp games like DDM work fine. PC vs NPC is also fine.

I posed my original question on this subject because I was interested in finding out what the amount of experience would be for an encounter with an NPC who was a PC Class.  Apparently doing this this was yet another 'no no' for the game (I seem to keep hearing that when I ask stuff around here).

The EXP value of an NPC is the same as a monster of the same level. Not a pc. Completely different rules for each write up.

The way the DMG presents using classes for monsters is through a template system.  That's all good for creating monsters that have a PC-style class, but what if I wanted a PHB race (like a human) to be an NPC you could encounter and fight, where this NPC happened to be an evil Paladin (not the DMG template, an actual PHB Paladin).

Then you can do just that, but the way monsters and npcs are written up saves time, adjusts for lack of feats and magical items and gives you powers that can and will be used during an encounter. You don't need an actual PC write up for a npc, but if you want to write up a pc for a monster, do it. No one is stopping you from doing what you want in your own game. Who cares what people on this forum think, when it comes down to it, its up to you, not us. As for races. You can make npcs of any race or class template and add powers or remove powers however you like.

The problem that was brought up with having PC Classes as an enemy encounter, is that combat would not work out the same way it does with monsters.  PC Classes, presented as combat encounters, doesn't seem to work well because the damage they do can be better than an average monster - and the hit points a PC Class has is not comparable to a monster of its level, its less.  PC classes are not set up for combat with one another.

Monsters heal less often than pcs, so monsters have more hp. Monsters can do more damage on average than a pc (depending) but pcs can spike higher, normally.

My main problem with this is that it makes things in 4th edition seem less flexible here.  It makes it seem more difficult to throw in encounters with 'bad guy' PC classes.  The only method that would seem to work is using the template system and adding it to a monster. But this might not work in one given example (in the last thread) of having a gladiator arena, where you may encounter other Fighters or maybe even be set against a PC in your group (which could be a friendly or deadly challenge).  Are you just supposed to make all NPC encounters with other Fighters here template monster encounters?

Template encounters work fine, I'v used them. If an elite isn't good enough, adjust it til it works how you want, or make it a 1pc vs 1 solo and give it class flavored powers. PC vs PC also works, if thats what you want to do. I'v played my character against other PC's before. No problems.

Though I think it would be really fun to add a template  to a monster (and maybe even make it a solo), I don't like that you cannot encounter an NPC in the game who is similar to one of the PC Classes without having problematic combat.  The game world starts to fall apart for me here, because it seems like the game is built upon an inconsistency in this area.

I'm not seeing the problem. I'm not seeing the need for PC writen up monsters either. I'v played it both ways and never had trouble. Except when a PC fights another PC wearing platemail, it makes it harder for the other pc to hit the plated pc. PC's can have very high defenses depending on items, where as monsters scale a bit more regularly.

I know this is a fantasy game and that all editions of D&D don't really make good sense of realistic things, but when things are inconsistent between two different areas of the system itself (as in PvP) it bugs me.  Having a player who is a Paladin, who runs into another Paladin that challenges him - only to find out that the NPC Paladin has more hit points and less powers, is an inconsistency that makes the game slow down for me.

Monsters and npcs don't need as many powers because most often, its not going to use them all before it is killed. You can give a level 1 standard monster 100 different powers if you want. Its not inconsistant because it works. Magical thresholds and bonuses make up for the lack of feats and magic items. You can add powers to monsters if you want. Its up to you. I fail to see the problem since I'v never experienced it first hand.


I brought up another example in the last thread, where one PC group runs into another PC group.  Some DMs will run campaigns for two groups, only to have them battle it out in a final epic campaign game.  My example was criticized  for 'bad form' (i.e. you should never have PCs face off!).  I don't think my example has to do with bad form, I think it has to do with possibility. If you take away a possibility in a game because the mechanics are not going to work out the 'necessary' way, the problem to me is the mechanics, not that the DM wants to have a PvP game.

I'm not sure what you want here. You can already do whatever you want in the game. You can build pc monsters if you want, or improve monster/npc write ups. Are you just trying to get people on the forum to support your idea so you can accept it yourself? It doesn't matter what we think, only what you and your players think. Do what you want and don't worry about validation from strangers.

Well anyway, what do you guys think of all of this? 

I think you should do what you want and not worry so much what strangers on the internet think. I also bolded my replies. If you limit yourself to whatever people on this forum think, then you will never be running your own game, you will be running/playing someone elses.

I'v played pc vs pc, it worked fine. I'v played pc vs modified npc and monster, it worked fine. I'v played as an npc vs another npc, it worked fine. Do what you want.