Unearthed Arcana character systems

[willpell]

Perhaps there is a thread for this question already, but Search appears to be borked again so I'll never find it. Hence, I'm starting one.

I'm making NPCs for my game and I'm trying to apply the Unearthed Arcana rule for Reducing Level Adjustment, so that I can judge the ECL fairly for these characters despite them not actually being in play. What I'm having trouble with is applying the Wealth by Level guidelines.

For example, I have a Hobgoblin Paladin of Tyranny; having gotten to level 3, he's eligible to buy off his +1 LA. But I can't figure out whether he should get the WBL of an ECL 4 character at the same time, or whether he should continue gaining WBL of his original ECL despite the reduction. I know he'd be losing a chunk of XP if he were a player character, but that would just give him time to gain even more gold before he leveled again, wouldn't it? So I'm really having a hard time figuring out how the mechanics ought to "realistically" play out in this scenario.

(It might be relevant to point out that since these NPCs of mine are automatically leveled up at the appropriate time, I've been adjudicating their access to crafted items and so forth by assuming that they pay XP costs in the form of GP, 5 GP per XP - essentially an Item Creation Feat becomes a 30% discount on the purchase price of the item, since everything else is abstracted due to NPC status. I'm not sure the same logic applies to this situation but I thought I'd mention it.)

While we're discussing Unearthed Arcana, I just thought I'd toss this out there - does anyone like the Bloodlines system? I'm inclined to like the general concept and I've tried hard to get the mechanics to work, but they just seem...bad. +2 to a Skill, +1 to an attribute, and a bonus feat seem like a rather small payoff in exchange for having to take a dead level. And in most cases the skill and attribute being boosted and the granted feat aren't the most useful ones anyway, and they seem to have almost deliberately "balanced" the things by sticking the best of one category with the worst of another (+2 Bluff is nice, but Dodge not so much). It seems to me as though there have to be better ways of making a character with a tie to minotaurs or efreets or something.

[Boci]

NPCs do not use LA, they add add class levels to the base creatures CR.

[willpell]

NPCs do not have CR; monsters do. These are being treated as if they were PCs, save for their XP and wealth being assigned at fixed thresholds.

[molten_dragon]

NPCs do not have CR; monsters do.

Untrue. NPCs do have a challenge rating. See page 37 in the DMG. The general rule of thumb is that an NPC has a CR equal to its level in a PC class or its level-1 in an NPC class.

When calculating a monster, it's a little harder, but generally monsters from the MM are commoners or warriors, so you can usually just add class levels on a 1 level = 1 CR basis.

[willpell]

Untrue. NPCs do have a challenge rating. See page 37 in the DMG. The general rule of thumb is that an NPC has a CR equal to its level in a PC class or its level-1 in an NPC class.

Which makes ever so much sense given that PCs with the exact same race and class but they probably have to take a level adjustment.

[Boci]

Which makes ever so much sense given that PCs with the exact same race and class but they probably have to take a level adjustment.

The logic is that CR is for an enemy who will only live for a single encounter. For them, fast healing 3 is the equivalent of an extra 15-24 hit points, but for a PC it is much more. Hence the difference in CR and LA.

[willpell]

Well I don't design my NPCs with the idea that they will go down after one fight; it might happen but I'm not going to design him on the assumption it will. My philosophy is that, even for an Ogre or something, he's a person with his own life and priorities other than playing the villain or victim in someone else's life story. My NPCs are meant to come to life and be compelling, to act as factors in the gameworld just as the PCs do; even the level 1 commoner is a hero by his own standards, and even the Vile archlich has more motivation than just being a boss monster. That's why I prefer to give them the same treatment that a PC deserves as much as possible.

[sonofzeal]

Yep, CR != ECL, which is probably appropriate. Pathfinder tried to erase that difference, but even though PF monsters are generally slightly nerfed compared to 3.5 monsters of the same CR, they make brutally overpowered PCs. Defences intended for four PCs to focus fire on tend to be a little much on an average PC. And offence that was fine running off base stats gets bumped way into the stratosphere by PC ability score rolls/pointbuy.

CR is not ECL, nor should it be.

What's balanced for a PC is by no means balanced for an opponent, and vice versa.

[Boci]

That's why I prefer to give them the same treatment that a PC deserves as much as possible.

So you play out their adventures with another DM rather handling it off screen? If not, then fast healing is worth less to a monster than to a PC. Ditto for at will arcane sight. Most uses for it are out of battle, so it shouldn't raise the CR of an ogre to have it, but it is very useful for a PC, enough to possibly warrant LA.

[eggs]

"Sense" and LA/CR?
Bwahahahahahaha :smalltongue:

EDIT:
On bloodlines, this (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=5019.0) reading/usage is reasonable and usually fair (some cost, some benefit, nothing crippling or free). But treating bloodline levels as actual levels makes them pretty terrible where they aren't abused.

[Urpriest]

This thread makes me immensely, irrationally angry. Especially since the OP has almost certainly read my monster handbook, and knows better.

[Daftendirekt]

This thread confuses me because the LA on Hobgoblins is actually being enforced. The only race less deserving of +1 LA are Blues.

Seriously, how do Blues and Hobgoblins have +1 LA but Whisper Gnomes do not?

[eggs]

They weren't as good at sneaking by the editors?

[Ivellius]

This thread confuses me because the LA on Hobgoblins is actually being enforced. The only race less deserving of +1 LA are Blues.

Seriously, how do Blues and Hobgoblins have +1 LA but Whisper Gnomes do not?

And if you ignore the text and look only at the Blue's stat block in the book, they in fact don't have one! At least in my printing.

Hobgoblins at least do have ability score bonuses without associated penalties.

[Daftendirekt]

The only difference between Blues and normal goblins is that they are naturally psionic and trade +Dex for +Int.

Now, look at the several other naturally psionic races in the XPH. Now, granted, some have LA, but they have goodies to merit it, like high(er than +2) ability bonuses, power-like abilities, etc. Becoming naturally psionic should not make a goblin +1 LA.

But anyway, that's not the point of this thread.

[willpell]

Defences intended for four PCs to focus fire on tend to be a little much on an average PC.

I don't see why - it's just as likely that the PCs will have four opponents focusing fire on them. Of course the average encounter is supposed to have the monster team totaling a substantially lower power level than the player team, since a completely fair fight would be equally likely to go either way, and you'd prefer for the players to be able to survive to the next fight. Buf if you're having trouble challenging the players, going for a higher-level encounter is a good way of fixing that...and if they survive, hey, loads of XP.


And offence that was fine running off base stats gets bumped way into the stratosphere by PC ability score rolls/pointbuy.

I always give my NPCs the same pointbuy as players, except for some dragons where I used the base array just for starters since they were a lot of effort to figure out. If the monster in question has Fighter levels, he'll have a potent BAB; if he has levels in Commoner or the like, not so much. Either way this ties into my "they're just like you despite lacking a player" ethos...I'm sure Redcloak approves.


So you play out their adventures with another DM rather handling it off screen? If not, then fast healing is worth less to a monster than to a PC.

I don't actually play out an NPC's adventures, but I assume he has them. He will be more likely to fight until he drops if he knows he can fast-heal it all in a half-hour; sometimes the Power of Plot can make things turn out otherwise, but I absolutely don't treat him as a disposable speedbump for the players who exists only to get killed for XP, unless he's undead or a construct or the like (in which case it's his creator who gets detailed as if he was a PC). Even mindless oozes and dumb-as-dirt animals have survival instincts and do not walk around with "Slay me" signs on their back; they prioritize food and safety just like any other (super)natural creature, and they have as much right to be part of the gameworld as the PCs do, they just aren't "onscreen" except in the PCs' presence.


Ditto for at will arcane sight. Most uses for it are out of battle, so it shouldn't raise the CR of an ogre to have it, but it is very useful for a PC, enough to possibly warrant LA.

Whether the ogre has an ability like that will make a huge difference to how I plan around his role in the campaign, and giving his PC self an LA will reflect that. The ogre with one barbarian level who is just looking to club something and stuff it into his mouth is treated the same as a human brute with the same number of HD, even if they came from class levels; both are straight-up fights. The ogre with one wizard level (somehow not the same as an Ogre Mage) with the ring or whatnot of Arcane Sight...he's treated much the way a human wizard (with a rather suboptimal build) would be, he becomes more of a puppetmaster who harasses the players from afar with minions and plots and such, using the Arcane Sight as a tool to accomplish his goals, which the PCs will try to thwart. Giving this latter ogre an LA just means he gets more WBL to outfit himself with useful trinkets to make him a more interesting and challenging foe.


This thread makes me immensely, irrationally angry. Especially since the OP has almost certainly read my monster handbook, and knows better.

Your guide has been quite useful to me for comprehending the Monster Manual rules, but it pertains to a usage that I am deliberately choosing to interpret otherwise (save in the case of familiars, Created Undead, and the like, who really do only exist for a PC's or NPC's benefit), so I don't know what you're objecting to. My stance on how monsters should be treated in my game is not a mistake, it's an intentional jugment call about the themes my setting is meant to convey, and as the DM I have a right to make it.


On bloodlines, this (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=5019.0) reading/usage is reasonable and usually fair (some cost, some benefit, nothing crippling or free). But treating bloodline levels as actual levels makes them pretty terrible where they aren't abused.

Treating bloodline levels as actual levels is exactly what I always assumed you were supposed to do, and that was why I figured they sucked utterly. It's also probably what I would have to do to my NPCs just for the sake of simplicity, for the same reason that I might just end up deciding I can't reduce ECLs for them - it means nothing for them to pay XP when I'm advancing them on the standard schedule.

The alternate interpretation - that a major-bloodline Wizard with 6000 XP pays 3000 XP for a bloodline level, continues casting only 1st-level spells but has a caster level of 3, and then earns another 3000 XP to gain his third Wizard level, now casting 2nd-level spells and having a caster level of 4 1000 XP sooner than he otherwise would, is...interesting, unsettling, and altogether beyond my ability to process. Certainly the fact that it can, and perhaps was meant to, be read that way makes it more useful. Previously my assumption was that you were simply gaining an entirely blank level, in exchange for some fairly minor benefits.

[eggs]

Previously my assumption was that you were simply gaining an entirely blank level, in exchange for some fairly minor benefits.
Yeah, that was probably how Bloodlines were supposed to work. But they're awfully-written enough, that I'm honestly not sure.

And like you say, that usually makes them terrible (except when they're abused, like with Ardent manifesting, ToB multiclassing or various forms of caster level trickery; and in those cases, things basically just break).

[Endarire]

If you reduce a creature's LA but its ECL is otherwise the same, use the wealth for the higher ECL.

[Boci]

I don't actually play out an NPC's adventures, but I assume he has them. He will be more likely to fight until he drops if he knows he can fast-heal it all in a half-hour; sometimes the Power of Plot can make things turn out otherwise, but I absolutely don't treat him as a disposable speedbump for the players who exists only to get killed for XP, unless he's undead or a construct or the like (in which case it's his creator who gets detailed as if he was a PC). Even mindless oozes and dumb-as-dirt animals have survival instincts and do not walk around with "Slay me" signs on their back; they prioritize food and safety just like any other (super)natural creature, and they have as much right to be part of the gameworld as the PCs do, they just aren't "onscreen" except in the PCs' presence.

So do I, its really not that big a deal and is sorta removed from the NPCs with LA issue.


Whether the ogre has an ability like that will make a huge difference to how I plan around his role in the campaign, and giving his PC self an LA will reflect that. The ogre with one barbarian level who is just looking to club something and stuff it into his mouth is treated the same as a human brute with the same number of HD, even if they came from class levels; both are straight-up fights. The ogre with one wizard level (somehow not the same as an Ogre Mage) with the ring or whatnot of Arcane Sight...he's treated much the way a human wizard (with a rather suboptimal build) would be, he becomes more of a puppetmaster who harasses the players from afar with minions and plots and such, using the Arcane Sight as a tool to accomplish his goals, which the PCs will try to thwart. Giving this latter ogre an LA just means he gets more WBL to outfit himself with useful trinkets to make him a more interesting and challenging foe.

Your confusing the issue by adding a wizard level. Focus on the arcane sight. You ogre NPC will only ever use arcane sight off screen, so how exactly will it make him more of a challenge when it comes to a fight?

Also consider: LA is only important for a fight. If you PCs are not going to kill the ogre, it doesn't matter if he's CR: 3 or CR: 4. The only reason you need to know the difference is when it comes to awarding XP to your players.

Given that your approach is problematic (as outlined by your conundrum in the OP), is treating NPCs as PCs with regards to LA really worth it?

[willpell]

And like you say, that usually makes them terrible (except when they're abused, like with Ardent manifesting, ToB multiclassing or various forms of caster level trickery; and in those cases, things basically just break).

How does the Ardent break them?


If you reduce a creature's LA but its ECL is otherwise the same, use the wealth for the higher ECL.

But its ECL isn't otherwise the same. My level 2 Hobgoblin with a +1 LA is ECL 3; when he reaches level 3 and pays to buy off his LA, he is still ECL 3, but he's been adventuring long enough that he should have the WBL of an ECL 4 character. And then when he actually reaches ECL 4 with his fourth level, he should have even more treasure; I just can't figure out exactly how much.


Your confusing the issue by adding a wizard level. Focus on the arcane sight. You ogre NPC will only ever use arcane sight off screen, so how exactly will it make him more of a challenge when it comes to a fight?

Because he could have been spying on the PCs for weeks and have a huge amount of information about their magical capabilities, which he could have used to custom-tailor a defense (hiring mercs with the Improved Sunder feat and giving them orders to break the hero's magic amulet, or sending a rogue to break into their inn room and steal the wizard's Pearl of Power). None of those options exist for the normal ogre, so a Level Adjustment for the arcane-sighted Ogre is very appropriate.


Also consider: LA is only important for a fight. If you PCs are not going to kill the ogre, it doesn't matter if he's CR: 3 or CR: 4.

It does indeed matter what his ECL (not CR) is, because the players might try to kill him, and his own awareness of how powerful he is or isn't determines how I roleplay him, quite possibly changing the players' minds on whether to kill him or not. Sure sometimes he'll act cocky when he's a weakling in an attempt to get them to leave him alone, or act meek and pathetic when he's really incredibly dangerous, but I still need to know what the truth is even if I intentionally obfuscate it. His power level needs to be tailored to the players just in case they kill him for XP, and whether they do might well depend on how I portray him.


Given that your approach is problematic (as outlined by your conundrum in the OP), is treating NPCs as PCs with regards to LA really worth it?

It doesn't matter; it's the only option I deem acceptible. The standard approach is intolerable to my mindset; it makes the game seem like a cardboard diorama full of children's talking toys to me, and I cannot use it even if the alternative is worse, any more than I could dive into a tub of live spiders even if the alternative was to be set on fire.

[Boci]

Because he could have been spying on the PCs for weeks and have a huge amount of information about their magical capabilities, which he could have used to custom-tailor a defense (hiring mercs with the Improved Sunder feat and giving them orders to break the hero's magic amulet, or sending a rogue to break into their inn room and steal the wizard's Pearl of Power). None of those options exist for the normal ogre, so a Level Adjustment for the arcane-sighted Ogre is very appropriate.

No it isn't, for three reasons.

1. Have you seen the hide modifier on an ogre?

2. Arcane sight won't allow him to identify the item, he will just get a general idea of their nature

3. Anyone with average intelligence can think of that, it doesn't take arcane sight to know that adventures are weaker without their shiny gear


It does indeed matter what his ECL (not CR) is, because the players might try to kill him,

So let them kill him and then think about how much his abilities made it more of a challenge than an average ogre and award XP based on that.


His power level needs to be tailored to the players just in case they kill him for XP, and whether they do might well depend on how I portray him.

So you want realistic NPCS, whose behavior is govened by a number that only semi exists in game?


It doesn't matter; it's the only option I deem acceptible. The standard approach is intolerable to my mindset; it makes the game seem like a cardboard diorama full of children's talking toys to me, and I cannot use it even if the alternative is worse, any more than I could dive into a tub of live spiders even if the alternative was to be set on fire.

You do realize its possible to have realistic NPCs without giving them LA?

[willpell]

1. Have you seen the hide modifier on an ogre?

It'd be a -4 for size, and he could take off his armor to negate the rest. Throw in some circumstance bonuses for terrain and the PC with the best spot check having been distracted, coming down sick, or whatnot...it's far from impossible, though it does admittedly go against the grain.


2. Arcane sight won't allow him to identify the item, he will just get a general idea of their nature

Combined with good Knowledge: Arcana checks (again, unlikely for an ogre, but not impossible if he's built for it) and a little deductive reasoning, he should at least have some idea of some things that will give him an edge in the fight.


3. Anyone with average intelligence can think of that, it doesn't take arcane sight to know that adventures are weaker without their shiny gear

But knowing which piece of gear has the most powerful magic is another story.


So let them kill him and then think about how much his abilities made it more of a challenge than an average ogre and award XP based on that.

That's exactly what an LA accomplishes.


So you want realistic NPCS, whose behavior is govened by a number that only semi exists in game?

Not sure what you mean here.


You do realize its possible to have realistic NPCs without giving them LA?

Obviously...if they're human or of a similarly non-powerful race. But if the race has special powers that are worth as much as an entire class level, then they need to have LA. (Whether the abilities of, say, a Hobgoblin are worth an entire level of the class of your choice is another story, of course.)

[Urpriest]

Willpell: anything that a monster can do in combat with the PCs is modeled by CR. If arcane sight et al makes a monster better at targeting the right stuff in combat, then it's already part of the CR calculation.

Anything important that a monster does out of combat won't be modeled by CR, true. But it won't be modeled by LA either. Suppose the Ogre spies on the PCs before the fight with Arcane Sight or the like, and thereby gains an advantage. From the PCs' perspective, this is no different from what would happen if one of the Ogre's friends (say some Goblin Wizard) did the spying, reported back to the Ogre, and then wandered through a portal to the Nine Hells and was never seen again. If the information was gained that way, would you give the players XP for the Goblin? If so, where do you draw the line? Someone has to build dungeons: architects, builders, etc. If the PCs best a trap, do you have them gain XP for having defeated the trap's creator? (If so, CR 10 spell turrets would be giving them way more XP than any other CR 10 encounter).

Let's take another big example of why LA doesn't model what you're going for. Vampires have LA +8. Why do they have such a huge LA? Three things: Dominate, Create Spawn, and the ability to come back when killed. These all make a PC much more powerful and much more able to affect the world, adding new potential tactics. The PC can send unlimited minions after their enemies and can themselves reset and try fights multiple times. So all of these make a monster more of a challenge than the template's CR +2 would indicate, right?

Nope! Suppose a vampire NPC uses Dominate to send minions after the PCs. You use the minions' CRs to determine the PCs' XP. Spawn? Same thing. Suppose the vampire himself comes back after the PCs kill him, and they fight him again. They still get the XP.

PCs fight multiple monsters/NPCs (which by the way are the exact same thing) in-game. NPCs, in-game (as opposed to in-backstory) fight only the PCs. This guarantees asymmetrical mechanics. There isn't a straightforward way to balance the ability of a PC to call in unlimited aid, which is why vampire has a ludicrous level adjustment. There is a perfectly straightforward way of doing it via CR: just give the PCs XP for what they actually defeat.

[whibla]

I'm making NPCs for my game and I'm trying to apply the Unearthed Arcana rule for Reducing Level Adjustment, so that I can judge the ECL fairly for these characters despite them not actually being in play. What I'm having trouble with is applying the Wealth by Level guidelines.

For example, I have a Hobgoblin Paladin of Tyranny; having gotten to level 3, he's eligible to buy off his +1 LA. But I can't figure out whether he should get the WBL of an ECL 4 character at the same time, or whether he should continue gaining WBL of his original ECL despite the reduction.

Actually, logically neither, or rather, yes and no, in order. WBL is calculated from average treasure gained from level appropriate challenges x the number of challenges required to gain a level (see explanation on page 54).

Assuming you're going to be anal sticking rigidly to the loot rules, the aforementioned character gained 2700 gp in the process of gaining enough experience to get from 3rd to 4th level, giving him a total of 5400 gp (by the table on page 135). At this point, if he decides to spend those experience on paying off his LA he remains a 3rd level character. In gaining enough experience to go from 3rd to 4th he again gains 2700 gp. His total wealth is now 8100 gp. This is higher than a 4th level character's, and lower than a 5th level character's, 'approved' wealth.

The problem goes away if you simply use the table on page 54 every time he goes up a level, rather than worrying about exactly what his WBL is. Bear in mind that since he paid of his LA his ECL is exactly the same as his CL after that point.

If I might say, while I admire your desire to be exact (or perhaps, exacting) about these things it strikes me as rather more trouble than it's worth. The majority of encounters do not have the 'average' treasure as listed on the tables...that's the whole point about them being averages. Some encounters, and this definitely includes npc encounters, will have no real treasure at all, some will have far more than the average. Worrying about whether all your npc's have treasure that matches the WBL of characters of the same level is actually both unecessary and unrealistic. Quite apart from creating an amout of additional work for you, with time that could, possibly, be better spent on other aspects of your game. Not having a go, just my opinion.

[willpell]

@ UrPriest: Frankly I can't fathom why creatures with a Create Spawn ability are allowed as PCs at all; the result would be like roleplaying Agent Smith in the Matrix sequels, so I don't see the point. But the rest of your explanation is well taken and I shall consider it.



Assuming you're going to be anal sticking rigidly to the loot rules, the aforementioned character gained 2700 gp in the process of gaining enough experience to get from 3rd to 4th level, giving him a total of 5400 gp (by the table on page 135). At this point, if he decides to spend those experience on paying off his LA he remains a 3rd level character. In gaining enough experience to go from 3rd to 4th he again gains 2700 gp. His total wealth is now 8100 gp. This is higher than a 4th level character's, and lower than a 5th level character's, 'approved' wealth.

And really I ought to have been perfectly capable of doing that math myself. Thank you for compensating for my inexplicable failure to have a functioning brain.

(To be explicit, this is a sincere thanks combined with self-deprecation, but not sarcasm of any kind.)


If I might say, while I admire your desire to be exact (or perhaps, exacting) about these things it strikes me as rather more trouble than it's worth.

That's pretty much my life story.

As to why I bother, I have literally hundreds of these NPCs, and following the rules precisely up until I have a reason to do otherwise is the only thing that makes managing them all possible. I have to be somewhat fair and consistent, although I always give myself permission to change a rule on the spot if I have any real reason to. Just wanting the character to be an uber-powerful Mary Sue is not such a reason, not when they're NPCs. But for instance, the Hobgoblin Tyranny Paladin I've been talking about? While I was building him, I changed the PoT's skill list to replace Heal with Intimidate, because it didn't make sense to me that a Tyranny paladin couldn't scare people, and lacking their own Heal skill was a decent explanation for why they would continue to rely on social support structures despite believing in Evil's individual-power-uber-alles ethos. That I'm not being completely capricious is proven by the fact that at the same level where I did this, I bought him a cross-class Move Silently rank but didn't officially make MS a PoT class skill, because that wouldn't make any sense for the class (although in retrospect I could have called it a racial substition level, I hadn't figured those out at the time).

The rules are never binding to me, since I'm the DM. But that doesn't mean I don't generally prefer to follow them, just like I generally prefer to play card solitaire without granting myself the right to look at face-down cards before the game rules allow me to reveal them. I change a rule if it's no longer helping me, and otherwise I rely upon it as a part of my framework.

[yougi]

Well I don't design my NPCs with the idea that they will go down after one fight; it might happen but I'm not going to design him on the assumption it will. My philosophy is that, even for an Ogre or something, he's a person with his own life and priorities other than playing the villain or victim in someone else's life story. My NPCs are meant to come to life and be compelling, to act as factors in the gameworld just as the PCs do; even the level 1 commoner is a hero by his own standards, and even the Vile archlich has more motivation than just being a boss monster. That's why I prefer to give them the same treatment that a PC deserves as much as possible.

In fact, LA and CR are concepts that do not exist in the game, but are only there for DMs and players to balance characters. LA is there for players to play members of a race that is more powerful than the standard ones, while CR is there for the DM to know when it's appropriate for the party to face it.

As such, you can consider that a Hobgoblin has an ECL of 4, yet it still has a CR of 3. If a player wants to play it, it is a 4th level character. If you want your PCs to face him, he's appropriate for a 3rd level party.

Akin to Urpriest's vampire example, one I find particularly evident is that of at-will abilities. The difference between a minion who can use an ability three times a day and one that can use it at will is particularly small: a minion will most likely be killed within three rounds. However, for a PC, it's a HUGE difference.

While I agree with you that NPCs would not think of themselves as built for a single fight, and while one can (should) assume that the Ogre Barbarian 5 who guards the Evil Warlock's tower has had other fights in its life, CR measures their ability to challenge PCs through a single fight.

So my point is, go ahead and calculate both CR and LA for your NPCs. In reality, if they're your PCs' enemies, only their CR matters, and if they're on your PCs' side, only their LA matters.

[yougi]

Well I don't design my NPCs with the idea that they will go down after one fight; it might happen but I'm not going to design him on the assumption it will. My philosophy is that, even for an Ogre or something, he's a person with his own life and priorities other than playing the villain or victim in someone else's life story. My NPCs are meant to come to life and be compelling, to act as factors in the gameworld just as the PCs do; even the level 1 commoner is a hero by his own standards, and even the Vile archlich has more motivation than just being a boss monster. That's why I prefer to give them the same treatment that a PC deserves as much as possible.

In fact, LA and CR are concepts that do not exist in the game, but are only there for DMs and players to balance characters. LA is there for players to play members of a race that is more powerful than the standard ones, while CR is there for the DM to know when it's appropriate for the party to face it.

As such, you can consider that a Hobgoblin has an ECL of 4, yet it still has a CR of 3. If a player wants to play it, it is a 4th level character. If you want your PCs to face him, he's appropriate for a 3rd level party.

Akin to Urpriest's vampire example, one I find particularly evident is that of at-will abilities. The difference between a minion who can use an ability three times a day and one that can use it at will is particularly small: a minion will most likely be killed within three rounds. However, for a PC, it's a HUGE difference.

While I agree with you that NPCs would not think of themselves as built for a single fight, and while one can (should) assume that the Ogre Barbarian 5 who guards the Evil Warlock's tower has had other fights in its life, CR measures their ability to challenge PCs through a single fight.

So my point is, go ahead and calculate both CR and LA for your NPCs. In reality, if they're your PCs' enemies, only their CR matters, and if they're on your PCs' side, only their LA matters.