Post/Author/DateTime	Post
spookyruthy 04-12-06, 04:24 AM	Is it possible to introduce NPCs that don't necessarily follow the rule-set? I have had an idea for a human child that has telekinesis and can control her toys and dolls. I'm not intending for her to enter any combat (but betting on the party they probably will end up fighting her) and I don't want her to be a psionic, as that would give her access to powers that she doesn't have. I'm slightly concerned about introducing NPCs without following a rule-set in the event that I need to create an in-depth character sheet if they end up having to enter combat.
Torack 04-12-06, 04:41 AM	Yes it is. Flavour is what the game is all about, giving a child telekinetic abilities IMO is pretty awesome and I might have to steal that idea at some point. ;)
MrBrown 04-12-06, 04:43 AM	The question to be answered here is, "what do the players expect?" If the players don't expect the NPCs to use the same rules as them, then it's no problem. If they do, then suddenly bringing an NPC in that doesn't follow the same rules might seem "cheating" to them, and will break the game. In either case, what I recommend doing is trying to find a feat/ability/whatever in some book that is similar to what you're trying to do, and use a "variant" of that. EDIT: Though, this is only a problem if the rules constantly come into question, such as in combat.
Cantankerous 04-12-06, 06:42 AM	Personally I dislike ANY rule applying to only the PCs or only the NPCs. I think the whole thing is counter productive, including the official way that Diplomacy is handled, where it can not be applied to a PC. It was one of the first rules we as a group excised from our game in my own campaign. Disparity, such as can so easily be created in this manner, can be deadly to group cohesion. Mind you, I don't say that the OPs idea doesn't sound like a good one...but if I'm going to have a NPC able to do it, then a PC able to fulfill the same prerequisites can do so as well. Now, THOSE can be difficult. Anything from a specific and unusual Feat or Feat chain, to a specific race or bloodline, or a specific minimum (or possibly even maximum) level or age. As long as the Players are ok with it, even if they don't know what IT is, but they give the DM the go ahead to bend the rules, it's all good. Isshia
Archmagi1976 04-12-06, 06:51 AM	In my view it all comes down to what the players expect... Do they expect the DM to story tell something were thier characters are the main stars? Or is the DM more like the ref. at a hack and slash brawl? If you have characters that require you to be the ref. Then make a character sheet, but remind them hitting little children, even evil children could be considered "Evil!" :plotting: If you need the character sheet idea? She has one supernatual ability, it is called the "Spell telekinesis". End of subject, but I find well rounded players who like the story more then bashing in children's heads in will not complain about a little rule bending.
StormKnight 04-12-06, 09:53 AM	Sure, absolutely, go for it! However, if psionics are not a part of the campaign world, it might make more sense to define them as spell like abilities; unlimited uses per day of Mage Hand and some similar abilites. As far as I'm concerned, the character creation rules are for PCs to ensure balance. They are an artificial game mechanic and should not be applied to NPCs except for convenience. ...but if I'm going to have a NPC able to do it, then a PC able to fulfill the same prerequisites can do so as well. This is probably a good approach for adding new abilities, but I see no reason for a prerequisite not to be "was born with the ability to do this"...which the PCs weren't. Its no different from telling someone they can play an Elf but can't play a Beholder.
orionm42 04-12-06, 10:25 AM	I have had an idea for a human child that has telekinesis and can control her toys and dolls. I'm not intending for her to enter any combat (but betting on the party they probably will end up fighting her) and I don't want her to be a psionic, as that would give her access to powers that she doesn't have. I'm slightly concerned about introducing NPCs without following a rule-set in the event that I need to create an in-depth character sheet if they end up having to enter combat. Do you have a problem creating a child who is a 9th or 10th level wizard? Seems perfectly acceptable to me. Also, if the party is several levels lower and they try to attack her, I see no reason the child prodigy shouldn't clean their clocks. The PCs don't need to attack every character in the game and there is nothing wrong with introducing NPCs that the players cannot defeat in combat. Alternatively, if you are just looking for an NPC that can levitate her dolls, why not just make her a third level wizard with access to levitate. It seems to me there is no need to go against the core rules at all here.
Senevri 04-12-06, 11:04 AM	TEMPLATE:Telekinetic, +1 LA This creature is normal in every way, except it has Telekinesis as a constant Supernatural ability. Treat the creature's hit dice+5 as it's caster level for purposes of mass and number of objects it can manipulate. The creature can automatically take 10 on concentration checks for the purpose of this ability. Using the Violent Thrust version of the spell prevents the creature from using telekinesis 'til she's had 8 hours of rest. Alternatively, give a permanent "Unseen servant" effect as a spell-like ability, if you want to disallow the possibility of combat uses. ---- EDIT: Essentially, this is my version of complaining, "You don't _need_ to break the rules." Actually, I'd consider something like a permanent Unseen Servant bound to a single person a valid use of a Wish spell or somesuch... And, you can after all, just _find_ a ring of three wishes if you're lucky. Hmm.
Millennium 04-12-06, 12:28 PM	It's quite possible to introduce NPCs which don't follow the rules. However, if the changes you make are mechanical, then you should usually come up with some kind of mechanic for it. You may not need to use that mechanic, but unexpected situations come up sometime. In a case like this, I'd give her a permanent mage hand or unseen servant effect as a supernatural ability. Neither one of these is powerful enough to be of much use in combat, but should be enough to manipulate a doll pretty easily. I prefer the unseen servant version, myself; it's got a little extra strength and motor control. There need not be an actual servant -after all, this is really the girl's own power- but it might be kind of nifty to have her power manifest as an "imaginary friend".
DM_Greatness 04-12-06, 01:44 PM	Dude, your fine. If is going to help you advance your story, or add the right type of feeling to your campaign, then go ahead and roll with it. - Are you going to make something to exploit against your players? No - Do your players trust you to be fair in combat? I'm hoping Yes Dude, your fine. Roll on with your game as intented
Robert_Fox_Kitsune 04-12-06, 01:53 PM	It's a cool idea- I'm in agreement that unlimeted uses mage hand would be simple, and justifiable
Tempest Stormwind 04-12-06, 06:25 PM	Here's also a thought. I'll illustrate this best with an example. I've helped make a character who was perfectly in control of his body. So long as his flesh was in direct contact with the air, he could transmute that flesh into different substances (same shape, more or less)on an instinctive, intuitive level -- from reflexively turning incorporeal just in time to avoid a sword, to turning his arms to stone just before a punch, to being able to turn his legs and spine into a springlike system when he needed to move fast... and he would do all of these instantly. He was wracked in pain from this, though, as the source was a bit of contamination from the Far Realm. He had to practice such rigorous self-control that he felt rather cold or nearly robotic in his behaviour. No one could deny his combat prowess, though, and as he gained levels he could assume stronger and stronger materials. Mechanically? Pure monk. No change whatsoever from the one in the player's handbook. In direct contact with air only: Monks lose abilities when wearing armor. This guy wore a loincloth. Reflexively turning incorporeal: Wis to AC. Hardened arms on striking: Increased unarmed damage. Spring-legs: Enhancement bonus to speed. Far Realm mental contamination requiring restraint: Lawful alignment. Levels lead to new materials: Increase in AC bonus, unarmed damage, and other abilities. Other monk abilities were described similarly. This character had no reference to Ki or martial arts whatsoever -- Flurry was a shapechange effect turning one arm into two (and so on), Abundant Step was turning himself into air molecules (killing him) at the same time as turning other air molecules into an exact copy of him (mind, body, and all. I think the player decided that the soul actually migrated as well rather than being rebuilt, but this is minor), Purity of Body was a flesh-to-flesh transmutation... you get the idea. It's at this point that people on the Classes board tend to look at me funny, because *obviously* you need a new class for this sort of thing, or even a new race... but you don't. You just need good description. Look into reflavoring things before you necessarily look for a rules-based solution. You'll be surprised at what turns up.
Cantankerous 04-13-06, 01:45 AM	Hi S_K, ...but if I'm going to have a NPC able to do it, then a PC able to fulfill the same prerequisites can do so as well. This is probably a good approach for adding new abilities, but I see no reason for a prerequisite not to be "was born with the ability to do this"...which the PCs weren't. Its no different from telling someone they can play an Elf but can't play a Beholder. That's one of the main reasons I put in that line. It's also the same reason that I mentioned this one: Now, THOSE can be difficult. Anything from a specific and unusual Feat or Feat chain, to a specific race or bloodline, or a specific minimum (or possibly even maximum) level or age. Isshia
Vaalingrade Ashland 04-13-06, 02:17 AM	Breaking the rules to make the game more interesting is one of the best things about the job of DMing. Go for it! If someone asks later, tell them he's a unique monster.