Non-player characters are tricky to describe in an adventure. Consider the following: What do they want? How do they react to PC requests and other interaction? How do they respond to trickery, diplomacy, intimidation or violence? #dnd
Just as with encounter, a one-size-fits-all format doesn't work for NPCs. Change how they're presented in response to how they're used. If you have someone giving you a quest, it's a different format to a NPC-as-villain, or a NPC-as-reluctant-ally! Write differently! #dnd
The more freedom players have with their actions, the more attention you need to pay to detailing NPC reactions. If the PCs are given the goal of "discover from Bob who the traitor is", consider how Bob reacts to various actions and detail them. #dnd
"Bob is a kind person who wouldn't harm a soul" doesn't tell me that much when the PCs break into his place and start intimidating him. "Good" DMs can make something of that, but try not to assume you'll have a "good" DM. Give the DM help in your adventure text. #dnd
"Bob tries to flee if confronted aggressively" and "If threatened, Bob begs for his life while trying to mislead the party" both give far guidance for the DM. You don't need to cover everything, but broad strokes are better than none at all! #dnd
NPCs tend to exist in three variants: "one-use" NPCs that only appear in a single encounter; "important to adventure" NPCs that appear throughout an adventure, and "recurring" NPCs that appear throughout a campaign; each is treated differently. #dnd
With a "one-use" NPC, you probably control how and why the PCs encounter that person. So, it's much easier to give detailed guidelines of how they react. #dnd
With an "important to adventure" NPCs, their actions are typically very important for the entire adventure structure. In that case, you need guidelines on their overall goals and how they try to fulfill them - mainly because PCs will upend their initial methods! #dnd
Once you get to the "recurring" NPCs that go over a campaign, if they have any level of importance they'll likely spend at least one adventure heavily featured; apart from that, personality is important just for how they present to PCs. #dnd
Where to present the information about an NPC is also tricky. In general, if they appear in one encounter, put all their information in the encounter, with an general description of the NPC in a sidebar, and specific actions in main text. #dnd
If an NPC appears several times in an adventure, describe in the introduction who they are and their importance to the adventure, as well as overall personality and motivations. In individual encounters, explain the role of the NPC for that encounter, plus their actions. #dnd
As a DM, I don't want to search to discover who an NPC is and why they're relevant. A few of the S8 DDAL adventures are very bad about this, with information scattered over three or four places in the text. #dnd
Also: Try to limit the number of NPCs that serve important roles throughout the adventure. DMs and players are typically very bad at remembering them. Watching people struggle through investigations is hard enough when they're not also trying to remember imaginary people! #dnd
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I delight in running all levels of Dungeons & Dragons. There are always interesting challenges you can throw at the party, and they can always surprise you with their solutions.
I find nothing better than setting a challenge without knowing how to overcome it, and watch the players invent something in front of my eyes.
As the DM, you are the interpreter of the adventure environment. You should have a good idea where the key elements are, and then be able to extrapolate where additional elements are.
I've just been reminded that one of the most significant changes in 3E from what came before was to make it much harder for high-level monsters and characters to resist spells.
We're still living with those effects.
In AD&D, a very high-level fighter needed a 6 to save vs a fireball. There was nothing the caster could do to change that number (as I recall).
Add in magic (cloaks of resistance, rings of protection) and the fighter was only failing to save on a natural 1.
In the early days of Dungeons & Dragons, the XP tables were designed so that characters went from 1st to 9th level relatively quickly, and then slowed down.
Gygax suggested that it take 40-60 sessions (a year of play) to reach level 9, then a gain of 2-3 levels a year after that
Meanwhile, Hit Point acquisition slowed down significantly after "name" level. Magic-Users gained a solitary hit point per level thereafter!
However, the power of magic-users (number of spells, etc.) kept increasing significantly.
I think it's fair to say that the various designers of D&D during the early days weren't sure WHAT to do with the higher levels. There was a structure there, but most of the game was aimed at levels 1-9.
Trap silliness: in one of my dungeons, a group of kobolds lived in a room where they’d set up a swinging log to hit anyone entering the chamber. I think it was possible to detect, but my players didn’t, and so triggered it before being swarmed by kobolds.
The players survived the experience, and then, because players, painted a smiley face on the end of the log and reset the trap. Then left.
Several months later, they returned to the dungeon, some new players, some experienced, and looked down at their map upon which one room was marked with a smiley face. “Let’s go there, they said!”