I make my NPC's totally hard core in case my party goes nuts? Do you all?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

For example in one group tonight we have level 4 & level 5 characters and they largely deal with three or four level 8 to 12 long term NPC's.

The NPC's have background roles in the story and will be relevant for sometime. I just don't want to make the captain of the guard a walk over for them if they get him isolated.

In another a NPC who needed the party to escort her on a quest was secretly a level 12 Warlock(!) who I figured for sure they would try to kill. Turned out either this group of would be murder hobo's liked the XP of killing the demons which she summoned to complete her part of the pact with her patron or they sympathized with her being Reincarnated 14 times until she came back as an elf again thanks to a pact with a demon lord.

It feels like this has been entertaining for the parties but I have some pretty competent NPC's out there...How do you all handle this?

[Laserlight]

I don't assume the PCs are going to murder every NPC in sight when the PCs could get what they want just by asking politely.

Granted, sometimes that assumption has been wrong. So...very...wrong.

[Pelle]

I love using the Noble stat block for important npcs.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

I do similar things for important PCs. Now, if the party comes up with a creative way to get the jump on one of them and kills them then that's certainly okay. I'll just have to adjust. But I'm not going to make the King or Queen of the Realm a level 2 peasant. They will have some sort of skills and likely be significantly higher level when the party meets them. Sometimes it's similar for minor characters who give off the "don't mess with me" vibe. That way if the murder hoboism kicks off, they'll realize from fighting the minor character that they need to step back a play more realistically.

Anecdote: One of my friends baited his murder hoboish party into a level 1 TPK to make a point about playing good/neutral characters correctly. He told them about an old man walking with a cane and some low quality robes. The perceived a purse jingling with coins and tried to steal it. Turns out he was the Archmage of the Wizards Tower and had several defensive enchantments around him. He just didn't like being spotted and identified when he went out, so he put on a disguise. The party was swiftly dealt with and they started over.

[Camman1984]

I leave my npc's as basic npc classes unless they have a good reason to be tougher. Sometimes people murder their employer, just make sure there are consequences. I could technically kill pretty much any one of the elderly state leaders in the real world one on one without much difficulty, but I don't because there would probably be consequences :)

[Lunali]

Build your NPCs with CRs instead of class levels.

[Erys]

For example in one group tonight we have level 4 & level 5 characters and they largely deal with three or four level 8 to 12 long term NPC's.

The NPC's have background roles in the story and will be relevant for sometime. I just don't want to make the captain of the guard a walk over for them if they get him isolated.

In another a NPC who needed the party to escort her on a quest was secretly a level 12 Warlock(!) who I figured for sure they would try to kill. Turned out either this group of would be murder hobo's liked the XP of killing the demons which she summoned to complete her part of the pact with her patron or they sympathized with her being Reincarnated 14 times until she came back as an elf again thanks to a pact with a demon lord.

It feels like this has been entertaining for the parties but I have some pretty competent NPC's out there...How do you all handle this?

While probably firmly in the minority, I don't like the idea that the Players are the only PC's in the world. As such, there are many important people peppered through out my worlds that are PC classed npcs. There are no shortage of legit NPCs too; but, it is not uncommon for a King, a High Wizard, Merchant Guildmaster, and even (rarely) a Tavern Owner to have levels in a particular class or two, usually with a few trinkets on them as well that they picked up from the 'old days'.

90% of the time these people are retired adventures and now doing the day-to-day routines of their given profession. Though I do occasionally have rival PC groups compete for the same prize as my players, or something similar to that affect.

[RazorChain]

No, my NPC's are made according to the world, not to give the PC's a tough fight should they decide to murder them.


One of the best rules is to not to fall in love with your own creation, in this case NPC's, because the PC's are going to show up in their muddy boots and trample all over them. The game is not about your fantastic NPC's but rather about your PC's.

If my PC's would start a career in murderhoboism then I just let them face the consequence of their actions.

[BurgerBeast]

I don’t like this idea, generally. I try to decide the levels of NPCs independently of the PCs. To me it makes perfect sense that a group of 4 adventurers could kill a typical Captain of the Guard without much trouble.

However, I do like what Erys has to say on this, and I do this too.

I just don’t try to make particular NPCs unkillable unless there are reasons beyond “I really don’t want the players to get away with this.”

[MaxWilson]

I share Erys' preference for NPCs with classes and levels, although obviously plenty of NPCs are just 0th level nothings. This is therefore a semantic nitpick, but:


While probably firmly in the minority, I don't like the idea that the Players are the only PC's in the world.

Er, by definition they are, unless there are other players. Literally the only difference between PC and NPC is that a PC has a player attached. That's why the term "NPC" exists.

It's fashionable for people to pretend like PC means "anyone with classes and levels" but this is wrong. In 5E, according to the 5E DMG, some NPCs are built using PHB rules, but they are still NPCs unless and until a player takes control of them (e.g. as a replacement after a PC dies/retires).

There is no reason either BTW why PCs cannot be built using MM rules. If you let a player play a Helmed Horror, that's now a PC.

The PC vs. NPC distinction isn't about stat blocks and abilities. It's a metagame distinction.

[Erys]

I share Erys' preference for NPCs with classes and levels, although obviously plenty of NPCs are just 0th level nothings. This is therefore a semantic nitpick, but:



Er, by definition they are, unless there are other players. Literally the only difference between PC and NPC is that a PC has a player attached. That's why the term "NPC" exists.

It's fashionable for people to pretend like PC means "anyone with classes and levels" but this is wrong. In 5E, according to the 5E DMG, some NPCs are built using PHB rules, but they are still NPCs unless and until a player takes control of them (e.g. as a replacement after a PC dies/retires).

There is no reason either BTW why PCs cannot be built using MM rules. If you let a player play a Helmed Horror, that's now a PC.

The PC vs. NPC distinction isn't about stat blocks and abilities. It's a metagame distinction.

I feel you.

I wasn't really using the terms with strict definitions; but rather saying one town may have an Archmage per the NPCs in the back of MM; another town may have an actual 20th level Diviner- complete with all the class abilities. The former is more common (albeit still very rare), but the latter does exist.

[No brains]

If every NPC is so badass, then why don't they take care of their problems? I'll tell you, because they're just one person. A 12-level warlock can probably be overrun by a 4-person team of 5th-level characters. It takes a colossal power disparity to stay safe in the action economy, and sizes only go up to gargantuan anymore.

The best safety net for NPCs is society. Just like a strong single NPC can be downed by 4 PCs, those 4 PCs can probably get zerged down by 16 CR 1 creatures (guards). Not only does this add to verisimilitude, it also keeps PCs from gaining anything especially powerful when they do manage to beat the odds and down a hero NPC.

Society also gives a good reason for the PCs to be there in the first place. The same CR1 merchant that the PCs can mob is also vulnerable to goblin raids, even with guards. So while a merchant can survive a goblin raid on their caravan, it still hurts their bottom line with lost goods and guards. That's why they hire a band 4 drifters to take out the goblins, hopefully without agreeing to any down-payment. If they come back, their pay still beats losing goods and business contacts.

That's not to say there should never be exceptions. Sometimes Odin or Bahamut will disguise themselves as geezers just to mess with people's heads. Sometimes Conan would like a couple of extra guys watching his back till he's out of the temple. Though even when this is the case, a better story can be told through a humiliating defeat that keeps them alive rather than a OMGWTFBBQLOLORIGINALCHARACTERDONOTSTEALTPK.

In the end, just make sure everybody can have fun with what's in front of them. Your table is a better judge of what you do at your table than me.

[MaxWilson]

Society also gives a good reason for the PCs to be there in the first place. The same CR1 merchant that the PCs can mob is also vulnerable to goblin raids, even with guards. So while a merchant can survive a goblin raid on their caravan, it still hurts their bottom line with lost goods and guards. That's why they hire a band 4 drifters to take out the goblins, hopefully without agreeing to any down-payment. If they come back, their pay still beats losing goods and business contacts.

IMO, the game is more fun when the stakes are higher, such that the merchant cannot survive a goblin raid. Saving someone from ruin and/or death is a lot more heroic (and interesting) than protecting someone's return on investment.

One fun way to start a campaign is to kill off all the good guys in a huge military disaster at the start of the campaign, except for a few low-level novices and apprentices (the PCs) who become the only hope of turning things around.

[RazorChain]

The best safety net for NPCs is society. Just like a strong single NPC can be downed by 4 PCs, those 4 PCs can probably get zerged down by 16 CR 1 creatures (guards). Not only does this add to verisimilitude, it also keeps PCs from gaining anything especially powerful when they do manage to beat the odds and down a hero NPC.

Society also gives a good reason for the PCs to be there in the first place. The same CR1 merchant that the PCs can mob is also vulnerable to goblin raids, even with guards. So while a merchant can survive a goblin raid on their caravan, it still hurts their bottom line with lost goods and guards. That's why they hire a band 4 drifters to take out the goblins, hopefully without agreeing to any down-payment. If they come back, their pay still beats losing goods and business contacts.




This is why PC's become murderhobos, because they become wanted criminals and fugitives. Society makes them outcasts so the PC's head to the next town/country/kingdom to trash up the place until they outstay their welcome and leave so they don't have to face the consequences of their actions.

[CTurbo]

I usually put some effort into my NPCs and yes I do usually make them a little OP but never to a silly degree.

I had a NPC Half-Elf Princess Bard that was central to the plot and while she was on the same level as the PCs, I took several liberties with her creation. She started with a 22 Cha, knew Eldritch Blast/Repelling blast for reasons, could cast Shield, and had the Inspiring Leader feat that funnily enough she almost never used lol. She also had a pet cat that was really her nearly 2000yr old level 20 Elf Land Druid great grandmother who watched over her(she didnt know).

For my more combat oriented NPCs, I'm liberal with their hit points.

For my spell caster NPCs, I dont prepare spells for them, they pretty much have the entire class spell list to choose from unless I specifically dont want to solve a problem too easily with a NPC.

My players have also learned the hard way to be nice to the homeless people and beggars as there is a good chance they are really an Ancient Metallic dragon. And there is always a chance that the barmaid is really a level 20 Fighter or Rogue so be nice to her lol.

[Ronnocius]

For example in one group tonight we have level 4 & level 5 characters and they largely deal with three or four level 8 to 12 long term NPC's.

The NPC's have background roles in the story and will be relevant for sometime. I just don't want to make the captain of the guard a walk over for them if they get him isolated.

In another a NPC who needed the party to escort her on a quest was secretly a level 12 Warlock(!) who I figured for sure they would try to kill. Turned out either this group of would be murder hobo's liked the XP of killing the demons which she summoned to complete her part of the pact with her patron or they sympathized with her being Reincarnated 14 times until she came back as an elf again thanks to a pact with a demon lord.

It feels like this has been entertaining for the parties but I have some pretty competent NPC's out there...How do you all handle this?

I generally pick an NPC stat block from the Monster Manual or from the expanded options in Volo's Guide to Monsters. For example, the knight stat block works well for most lesser nobles or heirs to a noble house while the noble stat block would work for older nobles who are not as physically capable as they once were, or a rich merchant.

The gladiator would represent significantly powerful figures such as the bodyguards of a king or duke, the local gladiatorial champion, a war hero etc.

The champion would work for the strongest warrior in an army, a master of combat, etc

Others include mage, archmage, apprentice wizard, the various wizard subtypes, blackguard, the warlock subtypes, bard, martial arts adept, swashbuckler, and master thief.

The warlord stat block would work for... well warlords as well as kings or other leaders if you want them to be able to hold their own in combat. Using the character creation rules is much more time consuming and in my opinion the payoff is minimal.

[Tanarii]

The best safety net for NPCs is society. Just like a strong single NPC can be downed by 4 PCs, those 4 PCs can probably get zerged down by 16 CR 1 creatures (guards). Not only does this add to verisimilitude, it also keeps PCs from gaining anything especially powerful when they do manage to beat the odds and down a hero NPC.
Exactly. I mean at a certain level PCs can definitely go all Fafhrd and Grey Mouser if they really want to. Murderhobo their way through society until they're forced to flee to the next city. Again.

But usually they're better of being Conan and taking on the evil snake cults the DM has provided. The enemies come in bite size chunks they can actually defeat that way, there (usually) aren't armies sent against them, plus they get more giant rubies.

(Note: I've never read Conan, so it's entirely possible he was totally a murderhobo in the books. :smallbiggrin: )

Of course, at a certain point it's just weird to still be running the kind of world where PCs have the power to be easy murderhobos, but aren't getting sucked in to the effects on the world. A party of level 11 characters absolutely should be able, with a good plan, to go in and kill a king or queen of a small to medium sized kingdom, even one surrounded by a small keep's worth of body guards. It might be a challenge, since there's probably grips of CR 3 Knight/Veteran-equivalents all over the place (Deadly challenge to 4x11th PCs in groups of 8), but it totally should be doable. They have already passes the point of mediocrity, and are supposed to be movers and shakers of entire continent's (and eventually world's) landscapes in T3.

[lperkins2]

I don't use class levels for NPCs (not that doing so in 5e is hard), but I also don't use CR0 statblocks for much of anybody besides kids. My minimum criteria is 'not murderable by little furry or feathered creatures'. Specifically, a commoner needs better than a 50/50 shot of surviving a deathmatch with an eagle (not a giant eagle, just the normal one).

The general pattern is kids (< 13, scaled to race) get the commoner statblock, teens are roughly CR 1/8 (6 stat points distributed according to profession), young adults are CR 1/4 (10 stat points, extra HD). Journeymen in their craft are around CR 1/2 to 1, and masters in a craft are CR 2.

Now, my reason for doing this is not to discourage murderhoboism, if the party decides to engage in wholesale slaughter, they'll approach it creatively so more HP and stats won't save the villagers. Instead, it's to have some sort of internal consistency in the world. Namely, if you are trying to run a sandbox dynamic world, you have to answer the question 'how has this town survived?' Often, villages are surrounded by significant threats that would slaughter any number of CR0 (or even CR 1/8 guards) creatures.

[Tanarii]

Specifically, a commoner needs better than a 50/50 shot of surviving a deathmatch with an eagle (not a giant eagle, just the normal one).
Personally IRL I wouldn't want to go up against an Eagle unarmed. Or even with just a club. :smallbiggrin:


Namely, if you are trying to run a sandbox dynamic world, you have to answer the question 'how has this town survived?' Often, villages are surrounded by significant threats that would slaughter any number of CR0 (or even CR 1/8 guards) creatures.
Good point. What's 'appropriate' for civilians in a long civilized region vs a frontier region vs a close-to-wilderness region is totally different.

[lperkins2]

Personally IRL I wouldn't want to go up against an Eagle unarmed. Or even with just a club. :smallbiggrin:

Yes, but I'd bet at least even money that you would survive (with injuries) while the eagle would probably expire. And you probably didn't grow up stick fighting for fun (since there wasn't a lot else to do) and living in a dangerous area with only a club to defend yourself. A 5e 'commoner' will die to the eagle about 60% of the time, and is strictly worse at all-things-combat except for having 1 more HP (which is offset by the eagle doing 2 more damage).

[Tanarii]

My view is probably biased by watching a video of Eagles taking out goats. So my mental picture is one coming in hard on an attack run and clinging to the humans head and shoulders while it shreds him up. :smallamused:

Otoh D&D in general has a history of having problems with reasonable stat blocks for representing combat between smaller animals and commoners. So I totally get your point of view.

[RazorChain]

(Note: I've never read Conan, so it's entirely possible he was totally a murderhobo in the books. :smallbiggrin: )


I have the omnibus, all the books by Robert E. Howard. Conan wasn't a murderhobo even though he was a pirate, mercenary and a thief. He always killed people for a reason :smallbiggrin:

He was an ubermacho guy who all the ladies swooned over but mostly he was a good guy in a tough world. He stood by his friends, hated magicians (who doesn't ....right?), you could always count on him to save the damsel......for his reasons :smallredface: But is totally understandable as it was written by a guy who lived in his mother basement his whole life

[lperkins2]

My view is probably biased by watching a video of Eagles taking out goats. So my mental picture is one coming in hard on an attack run and clinging to the humans head and shoulders while it shreds him up. :smallamused:

Otoh D&D in general has a history of having problems with reasonable stat blocks for representing combat between smaller animals and commoners. So I totally get your point of view.

When hunting goats, in 5e mechanical terms, the goat is surprised, and the eagle is attacking from out of sight (above, on a creature that doesn't usually look up), so has advantage on the attack roll. They really aren't as much of a threat to a creature which can stand on 2 legs, and has seen them coming (especially if said creature has a stick).

Note that if you stick the commoner in full plate, the eagle still has a 25% chance of killing them on the first attack, giving the commoner a shield only drops it to an 18% chance.

And my envisioned scenario here is a cage match (hence why one party or the other can't simply flee), with the eagle forced to walk (because it doesn't affect the eagle's stats at all to be on the ground). The commoner still loses.

Also note that you can substitute the eagle for just about any other CR 0 creature with a d4 damage die with similar effect, the eagle is just the worst offender.

[No brains]

IMO, the game is more fun when the stakes are higher, such that the merchant cannot survive a goblin raid. Saving someone from ruin and/or death is a lot more heroic (and interesting) than protecting someone's return on investment.

One fun way to start a campaign is to kill off all the good guys in a huge military disaster at the start of the campaign, except for a few low-level novices and apprentices (the PCs) who become the only hope of turning things around.

Maybe instead of italics, maybe I should have used "quotes" around *survive*. The implication is that the raids are steadily ruining the merchant and they're willing to shell out to do better than 'survive'. I agree that it can be more heroic to save someone from certain death, but in the context of murderous PCs, you may not want to let on that they are just as viable a source of certain death.

It also makes for some fun roleyplay, having the merchant try to bluff to the PCs that they are disposables out after pests when really they are terrified of both the PCs and the threats. Maybe there is someone who the merchant is even more scared of, and they don't want to appear weak to them...


This is why PC's become murderhobos, because they become wanted criminals and fugitives. Society makes them outcasts so the PC's head to the next town/country/kingdom to trash up the place until they outstay their welcome and leave so they don't have to face the consequences of their actions.

"Society" is what you make of it. Most realistic human cities are gonna throw those people out, but that's what goblin and drow lands are for. In those lands, if you wanna kill a waiter, the barkeep will just yell, "Oi! You gonna pay for that?" A nihilistic, overpopulated society can still serve as a 'society' and a clever DM can still run the same story with a slightly sadistic re-skin.

Not to mention, if the PCs get bad enough, it can turn into a defense campaign where bounty hunters, guards, bandits, and even other hero groups try to hunt the PCs. How long against what threats can the PCs hold out against? Can they use the dungeons provided by the DM to their advantage? Can they predict a summoned earth elemental flanking them through the walls? Can they just get the TPK that can let them role sane people? Sure.

[LordCdrMilitant]

Sort of?

I my most recent D&D game, level distribution was approximately:
Serf/Peasant: Level 1
Thug: Level 2
Town Guard: Level 3
Soldier: Level 5
Knight: Level 8
Lord: Level 10
Burgrave: Level 12
Count: Level 16
Margravine: Level 20

They were all built on the standard array.



However, they weren't like that to keep my party from killing them [in fact, they killed several NPC's who were much higher level than they were], but more to keep my level 6 party from feeling exceptional or heroic.

My players wanted to play level 6 characters to use more abilities that defined their classes, but I didn't want them to be exceptional people in the world, so I scaled everybody else's level so they were about the level of veteran footmen.


For the most part, my NPC's aren't particularly higher level than the party to keep them from dying. If they're more powerful/more veteran than the party, they're probably higher level, if they're weaker they're probably lower level.

[Naanomi]

Why is the king inherently a badass combatant? Isn’t that what guards and his court wizard and the like for? Sure some monarchs may be Richard the Lionhearted mid-level Paladins with battlefront experience... but at least as many are old men who are steeped in political machinations and paperwork (and hemophilia) since childhood

[lperkins2]

Why is the king inherently a badass combatant? Isn’t that what guards and his court wizard and the like for? Sure some monarchs may be Richard the Lionhearted mid-level Paladins with battlefront experience... but at least as many are old men who are steeped in political machinations and paperwork (and hemophilia) since childhood

If you use the commoner statblock for your old-man hemophiliac king, the 10 in int, cha, and wis is going to suck for his kingdom. Sure, they shouldn't all be battlefield generals ('though that was pretty common in the early middle ages), or mages, but they should have *something* they're good at (high social skills if they're 'steeped in political machinations').

[Vorpalchicken]

If the king is a terrible king like Henry VI, which isn't so uncommon, then sure use a commoner. If it's King John then use the noble stat block. If it's Henry V then maybe a Warlord or whatever is suitable.

I absolutely use low powered NPCs often (but not always.) The PCs should be badass and feel that way. Murdohoboism will have consequences but not always immediate consequences. They might even feel bad about the murder if it's really no challenge at all.

[LordCdrMilitant]

Why is the king inherently a badass combatant? Isn’t that what guards and his court wizard and the like for? Sure some monarchs may be Richard the Lionhearted mid-level Paladins with battlefront experience... but at least as many are old men who are steeped in political machinations and paperwork (and hemophilia) since childhood


If you use the commoner statblock for your old-man hemophiliac king, the 10 in int, cha, and wis is going to suck for his kingdom. Sure, they shouldn't all be battlefield generals ('though that was pretty common in the early middle ages), or mages, but they should have *something* they're good at (high social skills if they're 'steeped in political machinations').

This.

And not everybody has to be a fighter.

The king steeped in political machinations might be a rogue. That fits, and he's clearly competent at his job with a +6 prof bonus, 20 CHA, and expertise in Deception, Persuasion, Insight, and Perception.

[JNAProductions]

In general? No. My NPCs are as tough as it'd make sense.

The High Priestess of Sune, in a metropolitan city? Pretty strong-capable of casting 4th or 5th level spells, probably.

The Priestess of Sune in the local village temple? Probably has two cantrips and one 1st level spell a day, if that.

The king of a long-standing line, who hasn't faced a threat to his rule in generations and lives a hedonistic lifestyle? A Commoner. And a fat one at that.

The new king, who's a bloodthirsty conqueror who leads from the front? CR 10 or so.

[JackPhoenix]

This.

And not everybody has to be a fighter.

The king steeped in political machinations might be a rogue. That fits, and he's clearly competent at his job with a +6 prof bonus, 20 CHA, and expertise in Deception, Persuasion, Insight, and Perception.

Or he may still be a commoner with arbitrary bonus to relevant skills. He doesn't need to have Sneak Attack, Cunning Action, or archetype features of level 6 rogue. There's already precedent for changing skills and other features that don't affect combat.

[lperkins2]

Or he may still be a commoner with arbitrary bonus to relevant skills. He doesn't need to have Sneak Attack, Cunning Action, or archetype features of level 6 rogue. There's already precedent for changing skills and other features that don't affect combat.

True, and I don't usually bother using class levels, but that's still going to no longer be a CR 0 commoner (and please, give them more than 4 hp, or killing them will require no more than releasing 4 mad cats into their room at night).

[PhoenixPhyre]

Or he may still be a commoner with arbitrary bonus to relevant skills. He doesn't need to have Sneak Attack, Cunning Action, or archetype features of level 6 rogue. There's already precedent for changing skills and other features that don't affect combat.

Exactly this. Having class features is an exception, not a rule. The Archmage NPC doesn't have the Arcane Recovery feature. The Druid NPC can't wildshape.

NPCs have exactly the features and stats demanded by their role in the fictional universe. Not necessarily their role in the story, but their role in the universe. If that fellow needs to be a wizard with animals, he has features that help him out, even if he's otherwise a commoner.

Of the leaders of my mage college, one is a genuine archmage (using the stat block). Another is a political creature who struggles to cast 2nd level spells, but has dirt on everybody and powerful friends. Another is a Mage (stat block) who rose to prominence over more-skilled people by riding the coat-tails of his very powerful (former PC) friends.

One of my more politically powerful clerical NPCs can't really cast spells reliably (except zone of truth and command--speak!). But she can channel an avatar of her goddess that can sense truth absolutely (no save, no prevarication, no dissembling) and forces those under its gaze to tell the truth on penalty of total destruction. This is draining, so she doesn't most of the time. She also doesn't have any weapon or armor proficiencies.

Edit: what stops murderhobos from killing everyone is by making their players feel connected to the world. Not by making all the NPCs super-over-powered. And even if you do create OP NPCs, eventually the PCs will over-power them--they won't be level 4-5 for ever.

[JackPhoenix]

Of the leaders of my mage college, one is a genuine archmage (using the stat block). Another is a political creature who struggles to cast 2nd level spells, but has dirt on everybody and powerful friends. Another is a Mage (stat block) who rose to prominence over more-skilled people by riding the coat-tails of his very powerful (former PC) friends.

You've just reminded me of my Skyrim gameplay, where my Nord warrior, who only knew the starter spells everyone gets and one spell he required to demonstrate to join (and which he couldn't actually cast without items boosting his maximum magicka), became the archmage of College of Winterhold.

But he was really good at casting fist axe to the face. And shouting.

[fbelanger]

My personal rules of thumb.

Around 1% of population are professional.
==> have a level of 5 or more. CR 1/2 to 5.
The template of the Thug, Knight, Mage, Veteran are good exemple for this.

1 / 10 of professionals are Elite.
==> level 11 to 16. CR 6-10

1/10 of Elite are good enough to be legendary or exceptional character.
==> level 17+. CR 11+

[PhoenixPhyre]

My personal rules of thumb.

Around 1% of population are professional.
==> have a level of 5 or more. CR 1/2 to 5.
The template of the Thug, Knight, Mage, Veteran are good exemple for this.

1 / 10 of professionals are Elite.
==> level 11 to 16. CR 6-10

1/10 of Elite are good enough to be legendary or exceptional character.
==> level 17+. CR 11+

They might be professionals, but are they professional adventurers?

My model goes by tiers:



Tier
Level Equivalent
% of population


1
0-4
97.5


2
5-10
2.44%


3
11-16
0.052%


4
17+
0.0019%



And within a tier, the lower levels are more common than the higher ones. Basically it goes down by half every 2 levels within a tier and then by a factor of 10 between tiers.

[No brains]

I think 1 in 10,000 might still produce too many 17th level + characters, but maybe they're hidden or maybe they're not all alive. That would mean most cities have a super hero or two in them, according to the DMG's population suggestions. What made you decide on those ratios? Is this relevant to level-appropriate encounters in cities?

[PhoenixPhyre]

I think 1 in 10,000 might still produce too many 17th level + characters, but maybe they're hidden or maybe they're not all alive. That would mean most cities have a super hero or two in them, according to the DMG's population suggestions. What made you decide on those ratios? Is this relevant to level-appropriate encounters in cities?

My populations are pretty small (it's post-cataclysm). So there might be 5 people across the main play who can cast 9th level spells. The only one I know of for sure is the Archmage of the mage college, but he's both super old and super uninterested in anything that's not a) young, b) beautiful, and c) female. He rarely does anything these days.

The rest are hidden away or never fulfilled their potential. Those numbers are theoretical--they represent the potential growth, not actual capabilities. One in 10,000 could, if properly trained and motivated and in the right place and time, be able to reach 17th level-equivalent. Most don't--the only good way to gain power fast is adventuring, and that's really really risky.

I was calculating how many of each class of spell-caster there are, for population dynamics. Note that these are level-equivalents, not CRs or actual levels. More "can cast X level spells if a spell-caster."

[LordCdrMilitant]

Exactly this. Having class features is an exception, not a rule. The Archmage NPC doesn't have the Arcane Recovery feature. The Druid NPC can't wildshape.

I rather disagree. That would make the PC's exceptional and special for no reason in particular.

I didn't use to give my NPC's actual class level and just put things on them I thought they needed to represent competency at their jobs, but I discovered I liked the result of giving them class levels. It made the PC's less "special"; they no longer possess unique extraordinary powers, if they could do it, so could others of similar training and station. 5e doesn't have a lot of options to sift through compared to other systems, so it's one of the few times I could achieve it.


The players not being super murder-happy is also a nice consequence; they had to plan carefully if they wanted to take down somebody above their station [and even more carefully to get away with it]


They might be professionals, but are they professional adventurers?

My model goes by tiers:



Tier
Level Equivalent
% of population


1
0-4
97.5


2
5-10
2.44%


3
11-16
0.052%


4
17+
0.0019%



And within a tier, the lower levels are more common than the higher ones. Basically it goes down by half every 2 levels within a tier and then by a factor of 10 between tiers.

I didn't really consider adventuring a profession, it's more of a dangerous alternative to honest work. A sort of cross between a mercenary and a hobo.


That said, your table is interesting. I think that's about a similar density of high level characters as I had. 0.0019% is about 1-in-50000. It seems pretty high, all things considered.

[Tanarii]

I didn't use to give my NPC's actual class level and just put things on them I thought they needed to represent competency at their jobs, but I discovered I liked the result of giving them class levels. It made the PC's less "special"; they no longer possess unique extraordinary powers, if they could do it, so could others of similar training and station. 5e doesn't have a lot of options to sift through compared to other systems, so it's one of the few times I could achieve it. IMO the biggest issue with this is you can't just grab something out of the book and judge it's difficulty and approximate XP reward for the challenge.

They also don't always scale well for the expectation that NPCs will generally only ever exist for one scuffle. They don't operate on PC "table time".

Same problem with any DM designed or modified monster of course. But making each and every NPC that way is a pain in the butt for me as a DM.

Now henchmen are a different matter. I always design those using PC rules, because they operate on PC "table time" and because I don't need to be able to judge the effect in terms of a PC challenge or XP award value.

[Keravath]

If my PC's would start a career in murderhoboism then I just let them face the consequence of their actions.

This exactly. In games I DM the world is a consistent place. Anyone who goes around randomly murdering people will either encounter the wrong person eventually or will murder someone with very capable friends. In all likelihood, the characters will not survive. This may mean the end of the campaign but if the players are going to act strongly counter to norms of the existing culture then the odds are good that the "culture" or representatives of it will wipe them off the map eventually.

On the other hand, if the culture is setup in such a way that this would constitute normal or acceptable behaviour then they still need to be careful of who they target but the society as a whole or its governing body is less likely to step in.

Players need to realize (in my opinion) that their characters are likely not at the top of the food chain and that there are predators larger than them lurking. If they consider randomly killing NPCs to be acceptable and they can get away with it in the society where they currently are, then the odds are good that there are NPCs out there who will target them when the opportunity arises and the odds aren't bad that anyone who decide to engage the PCs is likely more powerful than them.

[Pex]

If it bothers you as DM your players are attacking every NPC they meet, talk to them. If you cannot agree on the type of game to play don't play together. Personally I wouldn't want to play with such players.