I just spent over 2 hours rolling up two Githyanki Psychic Warriors for an upcoming game session. For those of us who can't afford Hero Lab, does anyone have any tips to speed up this process?
Just use the statistics (to hit/dmg/hp/saves) based on CR at the back of the bestiary to fudge their combat statistics and don't worry about building them as full NPCs unless they become important to the story?
I do that most of the time, but these will be an important part of the story. I'm all about fudging when I can! LOL
Don't use HeroLab? When I'm working with familiar material, I can bang out complex characters in no more than half an hour on a piece of paper. Most of that time will be taken by selecting equipment and spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can take many hours over the span of two [i] weeks[\i] on ONE. Two in two hours is too slow?
I take that long for casters, but never for melee without spells. What part of the process is time consuming?
The answer, IMHO, is simple ... remember that these are NPCs and do not need the statistical detail of a PC. You don't need to be so precise ... with as inaccurate as the CR system is, just give them stats and such in the ballpark of similar CR'd enemies. No need to math it out.
Rolling any character higher than level 1 takes quite a bit longer. I find it takes less time in many cases to go level by level, than it does to try to create them at their final level. And going level by level is less prone to mistakes along the way. Also easier to stop midway and come back another day when going level by level.
I use the npc list on the ogc for most of the npcs.
when I need to make someone spesific I use:
http://www.trovetokens.com/pathfinder.html
the trick is to not give a flying ferret about how many skill points or feats, just do a rough build and save the character sheet as an image.
(then my pcs head in a different direction than I anticipated, level up once or twice and I realize I have to redo the whole guy before they meet him to keep him a relevant challenge.)
Normally, I have my players to roll one or two stats. 4d6 take away the lowest, all characters share the same rolls. Then have them roleplay their characters and complete some daily tasks they got assigned to do as they decide which roll go to which stats. It's means can already can start the game as you create characters, I found it more fun this way. Then I have them fill in their other stuff through some role playing such as spells, favorite class bonus, skills and equipment. The last group took me 3 hours for 3 players, but one of them was a 6 years old kid and we did some role playing so it's not too bad.
|
If you happen to use a houserule to reduce Big Six use, such as giving people bonuses for being high level (rather than getting those bonuses from equipment), that reduces the amount of work spent on selecting equipment significantly.
For example, I'm working on a variant where you remove the Headbands/Belts, and instead give people a few more build points per level to generate abilities. So then you can just make the level 10 character as (say) a 40bp statline instead of a 20bp statline with statboosting gear.
|
Stealing NPC statblocks, and altering them for flavor, is one of the easiest ways.
My DM loves the NPC Codex.
This is what I do too! In fact, I believe there is a sidebar or something that addresses this idea and that all you need to do is remove the NPC's racial adjustments and apply the race you want instead.
I guess the most time consuming is picking the right feats, doing the maths for the skills, and picking out the psionic powers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just arbitrarily giving stats only works for pure monsters, as the players will be asking for loot afterwards (how did this githyanki have 30 AC with no armor at all?)
Not really. One, most players I know are completely aware that there are abilities NPCs get that would be disruptive for PCs to have, and that NPC abilities are functions of plot.
If all else fails, just slap a +20 natural armor bonus on him and call it a day.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not really. One, most players I know are completely aware that there are abilities NPCs get that would be disruptive for PCs to have, and that NPC abilities are functions of plot.
If all else fails, just slap a +20 natural armor bonus on him and call it a day.
In my experience, this isn't true at all, and a large part of the difference in design philosophy between Pathfinder and 4E...Pathfinder doesn't actually build NPCs with different rules than PCs. And that's part of why Pathfinder is more popular, IMO.
It's certainly part of why I prefer Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I guess the most time consuming is picking the right feats, doing the maths for the skills, and picking out the psionic powers.
I'd say that if these are really important npc's then spending that much time isn't a waste. It means you're thinking things through and have a good understanding of your npc. If you're doing this for something that's just a kill for the party, then you're probably putting too much thought into it.
My rule of thumb is that I don't flesh out more npc's than there are pc's. So if 4 pc's are playing, then I might flesh out 4 npc's with major plot purpose for the campaign. Otherwise, I just use NPC Codex stat blocks or Bestiary stat blocks and modify to suit.
Really, all that information is for your reference. So you only have to create what you'll need to remember later.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not really. One, most players I know are completely aware that there are abilities NPCs get that would be disruptive for PCs to have, and that NPC abilities are functions of plot.
If all else fails, just slap a +20 natural armor bonus on him and call it a day.
In my experience, this isn't true at all, and a large part of the difference in design philosophy between Pathfinder and 4E...Pathfinder doesn't actually build NPCs with different rules than PCs. And that's part of why Pathfinder is more popular, IMO.
It's certainly part of why I prefer Pathfinder.
Eh. That was one of the things I liked about 4e. It wasn't a colossal pain in the butt to GM because you had to do stuff like this.
And even in PF, you're completely authorized to do so, because you're the freakin' GM. 'These rules are just guidelines, break 'em if you need to' is a gaming truism from day 1.
Not really. One, most players I know are completely aware that there are abilities NPCs get that would be disruptive for PCs to have, and that NPC abilities are functions of plot.
If all else fails, just slap a +20 natural armor bonus on him and call it a day.
In my experience, this isn't true at all, and a large part of the difference in design philosophy between Pathfinder and 4E...Pathfinder doesn't actually build NPCs with different rules than PCs. And that's part of why Pathfinder is more popular, IMO.
It's certainly part of why I prefer Pathfinder.
Eh. That was one of the things I liked about 4e. It wasn't a colossal pain in the butt to GM because you had to do stuff like this.
And even in PF, you're completely authorized to do so, because you're the freakin' GM. 'These rules are just guidelines, break 'em if you need to' is a gaming truism from day 1.
Definitely agree with Zhayne. Plot armor (and everything else) are definitely NPC abilities that should be applied as necessary. Don't abuse the heck out of it, but if you want an NPC to have or be able to do something it does. You are the DM, you don't have to play by "the rules". Your jobs is to present a challenge to the PCs (not overwhelm them and kill, nor make it a cake walk). Sometimes, to make that more intertesting it is better to make a fighter that can use wands without needing UMD because you can.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eh. That was one of the things I liked about 4e. It wasn't a colossal pain in the butt to GM because you had to do stuff like this.
I didn't mind it for minions and minor enemies, but the fact that literally no other character in existence used the same rules as PCs annoyed the hell out of me.
And even in PF, you're completely authorized to do so, because you're the freakin' GM. 'These rules are just guidelines, break 'em if you need to' is a gaming truism from day 1.
True enough, but some players will be less than accepting of this and might be upset, and possibly justifiably so. It really depends on the particular group's social contract.
Assuming I dont have a ready made npc handy (I keep a library of them from various sources available) that fits precisely with what I am going for, I will still take a premade npc as my basis. Making a level 12 wizard bad guy? Fine I take a level 12 wizard out of the npc codex, then modify him as needed. This saves me time on a lot of things. First off basic math. I can adjust stats, but I dont have to do the initial calculations. Just move things up or down as needed. I dont have to choose every skill point, just move some around, same thing with spells, feats, gear etc. It means I dont have to write in each and every thing, just what specifically is needed for the character I am going for.
I guess the most time consuming is picking the right feats, doing the maths for the skills, and picking out the psionic powers.
Feats: Figure out what this guy's shtick will be. Feats should mostly fall into place with that. I'd even suggest leaving feats for last (or at least leave a few open) just in case you need to cover a hole (like adding Iron Will or something).
Skills: Pick the couple feats that will be important for this character. The entire skill list doesn't even need to be written out, since no ranks basically means Stat + Equipment modifier. As long as you know the base stats, your skills written out should only be the ones that you'll need to call on over and over (Perception and maybe a couple based on what they do).
Personally, equipment is the longest aspect to NPC creation for me, since you can really fudge CR up with combining certain items, and you have to think about what you're ok with the PCs getting their hands on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely agree with Zhayne. Plot armor (and everything else) are definitely NPC abilities that should be applied as necessary. Don't abuse the heck out of it, but if you want an NPC to have or be able to do something it does. You are the DM, you don't have to play by "the rules". Your jobs is to present a challenge to the PCs (not overwhelm them and kill, nor make it a cake walk). Sometimes, to make that more intertesting it is better to make a fighter that can use wands without needing UMD because you can.Not really. One, most players I know are completely aware that there are abilities NPCs get that would be disruptive for PCs to have, and that NPC abilities are functions of plot.
If all else fails, just slap a +20 natural armor bonus on him and call it a day.
In my experience, this isn't true at all, and a large part of the difference in design philosophy between Pathfinder and 4E...Pathfinder doesn't actually build NPCs with different rules than PCs. And that's part of why Pathfinder is more popular, IMO.
It's certainly part of why I prefer Pathfinder.
Eh. That was one of the things I liked about 4e. It wasn't a colossal pain in the butt to GM because you had to do stuff like this.
And even in PF, you're completely authorized to do so, because you're the freakin' GM. 'These rules are just guidelines, break 'em if you need to' is a gaming truism from day 1.
I dont agree with this mentality, and I despise plot armor. The thing that appeals to me most about pathfinder is how internally consistent the rules are. I have a strong distaste for disassociative rules, and while I am all for house rules, thats not what 'plot armor' is. Its an arbitray and immersion breaking (for me) short cut, that makes it so the rules are no longer internally consistent.
Any time the dm simply fudges the numbers to suit his fancy without working within the system, he's removing player agency, making the choices his players unimportant. "Fighter have a high attack bonus? No big deal I'll arbitrarily add 10 to the bad guys ac, with no additional reward offered for the added difficulty, just a big middle finger to the fighter player who made his choices to make him good at hitting stuff. He might was well have put his feats into skillfocus basket weasving, then my bad guy wouldnt have needed the plot armor." Its almost uinversally something that will drive me away form a table.
Mind you I do want a challenge at the table, but when a dm increases difficulty it should be done within the system, because that increases the reward the players get (in the form of xp or treasure as either magic items, or a higher cr are responsible for the more difficult opponent).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dont agree with this mentality, and I despise plot armor. The thing that appeals to me most about pathfinder is how internally consistent the rules are. I have a strong distaste for disassociative rules, and while I am all for house rules, thats not what 'plot armor' is. Its an arbitray and immersion breaking (for me) short cut, that makes it so the rules are no longer internally consistent.
Any time the dm simply fudges the numbers to suit his fancy without working within the system, he's removing player agency, making the choices his players unimportant. "Fighter have a high attack bonus? No big deal I'll arbitrarily add 10 to the bad guys ac, with no additional reward offered for the added difficulty, just a big middle finger to the fighter player who made his choices to make him good at hitting stuff. He might was well have put his feats into skillfocus basket weasving, then my bad guy wouldnt have needed the plot armor." Its almost uinversally something that will drive me away form a table.
Mind you I do want a challenge at the table, but when a dm increases difficulty it should be done within the system, because that increases the reward the players get (in the form of xp or treasure as either magic items, or a higher cr are responsible for the more difficult opponent).
Well, considering that I've done away with XP and use plot based leveling, and that I've done away with the standard treasure system and use a magical encumbrance system perhaps that changes things. There is no longer a specific reward system for based on the difficulty of what you're fighting. Rather, there is a plot and your level progresses based on the plot. And, as welath is a direct connection to power, I have fixed it to level. My intention is to challenge and create a memorable story. Not for players to fixate on how much xp or gold something is worth.
I also wouldn't arbitrarily add +10 NA to AC, so perhaps you point is moot because my method is more about adding unsual power and SLA to melee types that wouldn't normally have them to increase the challenge a bit. Not to make my player's choices irrelevant by adding large bonuses so that they cannot be overcome.
Thanks everyone for the advice. I do have one more question; I downloaded PCGen and it seems to work great, except that I can't open the files to print or even look at the finished character when I save it.
Well, I had to uninstall PCGen. It stopped working properly then crashed my computer.
sigh...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, considering that I've done away with XP and use plot based leveling, and that I've done away with the standard treasure system and use a magical encumbrance system perhaps that changes things. There is no longer a specific reward system for based on the difficulty of what you're fighting. Rather, there is a plot and your level progresses based on the plot. And, as welath is a direct connection to power, I have fixed it to level. My intention is to challenge and create a memorable story. Not for players to fixate on how much xp or gold something is worth.I also wouldn't arbitrarily add +10 NA to AC, so perhaps you point is moot because my method is more about adding unsual power and SLA...
Truth be told I dont use xp anymore either, or gold for that matter. So yea, I agree its not about the specific risk/reward, but more about appropriately assesing the level of risk. There is a general structure to things and just popping abilities in and out of a character violates that structure, and thus potentially violates what is or isnt an appropriate challenge. For instance, a 5th level fighter with npc gear is a CR 4 challenge. A 5th level fighter with npc gear who can cast haste as a spell like ability is not a CR 4 challenge.
And yes your method isnt as troublesome for me, though I do prefer that it be done via the rules then not. Nothing sucks more then the 'i can do it but you cant' nature of certain rulesets (this is of course my opinion). If the badguy fighter suddenly can throw fireballs, and the player fighter wants to do it too, he should have the option. Even if it isnt actually an option for his particular character (maybe you need to be a certain race) but it should be in the general pool of options for everyone.
Any time the dm simply fudges the numbers to suit his fancy without working within the system, he's removing player...
The rules are consistent. PCs use these, NPCs use these. NPCs are not PCs, they occupy completely different design space, and serve entirely different purposes. NPCs simply do not need the level of detail that a PC does, as most of them are 'one and done'.
You also make the assumption that doing so is intentionally done as a 'let's screw this player' action, which is bullcrap at its finest. If you're a bad GM, yeah, but the fact that NPCs do things players can't and shouldn't has been there since day one. How many times are we told about stuff 'in olden days' that can't be replicated now? Minor artifacts with nobody can figure out how to make? The necromancer with a positive army of shambling horrors obviously outside the scope of Animate Dead?
All NPCs, baby. And it's completely within the system, because the system says 'You're the GM, you can do what you want. Just remember that with great power comes great responsibility'.
And I don't use XP, CR is so inaccurate as to be useless, and I use Mythic Evil Lincoln's inherent bonuses system, so treasure isn't really a thing.
From the Gamemastery guide:
"Sometimes, a GM might find that there’s no perfect fit within the existing rules for an encounter, creature, or other element he’d like to include. Yet rather than being deterred and having to reimagine his adventure, it’s completely within the GM’s purview to get creative with the rules to make what he wants or a campaign needs. Ultimately, while the Pathfinder RPG’s rules are designed for ease of use and to promote fairness in a game, they exist to help a GM tell his story, and should never be a hindrance to play. If revising the rules or reworking them to better suit a situation improves an adventure, the GM is within his rights to make any adjustments he sees fit. "
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Zhayne:
Of course the GM can change things. The GM can do whatsoever they desire. That in no way means that doing so is always right or appropriate. If the GM sends 1st level characters up against a Pit Fiend or other foe they have no chance against and laughs as they die and tells them to make new character so he can do it again, despite the fact they find this extremely unpleasant, he's still well within his rights as as GM. That doesn't make the behavior appropriate.
Now, what you're talking about isn't in the same category as that, and is, in fact, a perfectly acceptable way to play the game. It is not, however, a style of gaming that everyone is going to find acceptable (almost nothing is).
Many people enjoy the feeling of verisimilitude provided by a set of rules that apply to the PCs and NPCs impartially, the physics of the game world in a sense. Removing that element of consistency is very possibly inappropriate in a game made up of such people, who will feel vaguely betrayed and cheated.
To draw an analogy, it's like a GM fudging dice rolls...some people consider that appropriate, some don't. A GM knowingly doing it in a group who don't is behaving inappropriately because he's violating the social contract of the gaming group in question, even though that behavior would be fine in another group. Likewise, a GM following your advice (which you are presenting as universally applicable, intentionally or not) in a group who aren't okay with it, is likewise behaving inappropriately and violating the social contract of the group.
It all comes down to what the specific group is cool with.
If it enhances the game and the fun, I can't imagine why anybody would fuss about it. The players should never be seeing the NPC stats, anyway, so how would they know?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If it enhances the game and the fun, I can't imagine why anybody would fuss about it.
I'd argue it doesn't enhance the game. It makes things a bit easier for the GM and changes the game, but different people will regard ir as either an enhancement or a detriment. And my previous post actually goes into detail about why some people might object but here are two quick reasons:
#1: It f$!@s with immersion. If people like to imagine their characters are in a world with a set of coherent rules that govern it, violating said rules can be immersion breaking and unpleasant.
#2: A lot of players base their choices on what they know about the way the world works. If the world suddenly works differently from that, they can get effectively ambushed. Like making house rules without telling your players, this is a bad thing.
The players should never be seeing the NPC stats, anyway, so how would they know?
That's the same logic that you can use for fudging rolls when the group isn't cool with that. And dishonest as hell. I prefer to game with people I'm not currently lying to.
Hell, pretty much any justification where you begin with "But they'll never know." you're trying to justify doing something highly morally questionable.
And players who pay attention to the rules would definitely notice eventually. I've noticed things like that before in a number of games one way or another. It sometimes takes a bit of time, but stuff like that usually gets noticed by somebody, IME.
Now, I'll reiterate, I consider fudging or using different rules for NPCs fine...when it's agreed on by the group. Not all groups will agree to such.
|
#1: It f@*%s with immersion. If people like to imagine their characters are in a world with a set of coherent rules that govern it, violating said rules can be immersion breaking and unpleasant.
#2: A lot of players base their choices on what they know about the way the world works. If the world suddenly works differently from that, they can get effectively ambushed. Like making house rules without telling your players, this is a bad thing.
Just want to give my opinion on these two.
1: It f@*%s with immersion?!? Immersion would be the players saying "Man, how did he move so fast, I hardly hit him?" "I Don't know but is wasn't the magic he was carrying" Not thinking "hmm, missed him on a 17, he's an elf, has chainmail, he must have a ring +3. Where is his magic ring?"2: The world is full of mysterious things. If the players know how everything works, where is the wonder, the excitement, the mystery? "Maybe he made a deal with the devil, or maybe he was in some dragon ritual or maybe he was a God. We killed a God. Awesome!"
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just want to give my opinion on these two.
1: It f@*%s with immersion?!? Immersion would be the players saying "Man, how did he move so fast, I hardly hit him?" "I Don't know but is wasn't the magic he was carrying" Not thinking "hmm, missed him on a 17, he's an elf, has chainmail, he must have a ring +3. Where is his magic ring?"
But the thing is, what you just said sorta proves my point. The second is a break in immersion. It makes you go "Wait, what? That doesn't make sense..." if there was a by-the-rules answer, it might break immersion momentarily, but only momentarily, the lack of such an explanation exacerbates the break significantly, and makes such breaks much more likely.
In other words, nobody thinks the second one if the Elf's AC was reasonable and explicable in the first place.
2: The world is full of mysterious things. If the players know how everything works, where is the wonder, the excitement, the mystery? "Maybe he made a deal with the devil, or maybe he was in some dragon ritual or maybe he was a God. We killed a God. Awesome!"
There's plenty of that even using the RAW. The players aren't gonna know every rule. But if you do this sort of thing, you eventually run into one they do, and then its a definite problem.
And the point of point two wasn't actually that they knew everything, but that people make and play characters based on the assumption they know how the basic rules work. Pulling the rug out from under them by changing how said rules function via unique creature abilities or impossible ability combinations is generally poor form.
Now, if the PCs know going in that you'll be making such changes, that's coo, they knew what they were getting into, but if they go in thinking things are gonna work one way, making them work another isn't fair at all.
And none of that may seem like compelling arguments for you and that's fine...but they're compelling for me. Playing in a game as described would both make me unhappy and quite possibly piss me off rather severely. And you should check with your players before doing this stuff to make sure they don't feel the same. Which is all I was ever advocating...and means that doing this is not universally good advice, since it will not please some groups. Which was my point in the first place, actually.
I would recommend myth-weavers for your sheets, both NPC and PC. It won't do everything for you, but it will do the basic arithmetic for you, calculate CMB/CMD, etc. by plugging in the appropriate stat mods when it can. You can also sort and save sheets, so you can tweak them for later. It isn't hero labs, but it is very useful.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do prefer if the NPCs' bonuses came from somewhere.
Because the BBEG's appropriately-high AC came from an actual knowable source, the players could interact with it. If instead he just got some sourceless +10 plot armor bonus, the players would just have to resort to hoping they roll high.
As a player I often ask the GM "what kind of armor are they wearing? Are they relying on toughness or speed for defence?" because those are things that a moderately trained warrior can see. And then adapt his tactics to it.
The GM doesn't tell me the numeric bonus, but as a player you should certainly have some idea what is giving them the most significant bonus.