>when facing monsters and villains, NPCs are inactive, uninformed,

>>49528314
The way i see it, if you paint the town guards in any way, they should act in that way. If they are painted as incompetents, make them act as incompetents on a general level. maybe one or two competents in charge, but otherwise keep the general flavor consistent.

On the flip side, if you paint them as an elite group that gets the job done efficiently and effectively, they should do as such. Regardless of PC or NPC opposition.

Consistency should matter more than fucking your players with a hard encounter. There are a million and one ways to give your players a challenge, and upping the competency level of otherwise retarded guards just leaves a bad taste in the mouth's of the players.

By the same token, enemies should be equally as competent against fodder and players alike. Its not like their abilities, thought processes, or anything changes just because you are a group of supposed heroes. There's a million and one parties that wants to be heroes, to get tales told about them. Treating your one party any different than another is, again, inconsistent.

So if the guards are retarded, they stay retarded. If the lich say's he'll destroy the world (or someone else tells you of him doing so) and they ignore that for some stupid shit, destroy the world. They wanted to be heroes, and let up the chance to do so. It may be a dick move, but it is as a direct result of their actions. Doing it in the reverse order would produce the same results, but without destroying the world, as an example.

>>49528314
Have you ever seen the Mimics react to being attacked by another monster in DS?
Yeah, you're the hero but a fucking Mimic could beat the game if provoked, probably even more easily than you. I like to make that true of NPCs, they're not NPCs because they're particularily weak and can't defend themselves, they're NPCs because they have lives that prevent them from throwing everything to the winds and beating the BBEG themselves.

Having something (like getting killed by chikens in Zelda games) to remind the player that they're chosen ones because of their attitude and choices rather than some god-given power level helps immersion and in my experience also helps making them care for the setting.

>>49530454
In dark souls 3 there's actually a part almost tailored to getting a mimic to fight a giant fire demon. The fire demon generally wins, but only barely.

Its an interesting area, and a good reminder why friendly fire is bad.

>>49530556
You can also activate the skeletons and get them to fight the fire demon along with the mimic

>>49528314
Nope, the PC injected his politics into the game and derailed the campaign. When the other betas went along with it, it's fair turnabout when the Lich wins because the PCs are campaigning for gay rights that nobody cares about in that time period.

>>49529693
Here's how you solve this problem.
Have two sets of guards,
Have the town guard, these are people largely taken from the peasant population, given a badge and told to keep the law.
They are ill equipped so anything beyond a peasant or burgle they won't do shit against, they can be stupid, corrupt, and lazy, with only a few stand out examples who work with keeping the peace.
Then you have the kings guard. These are the guys you bring in to deal with PC's and trust me in a universe where adventurers are casting spells and barbarians are slaughtering hundreds a king would keep around at least a couple of these guys. There smart, well trained, fiercely loyal, but also won't help the party unless there lord commands them too.

>>49530766
How is it a problem though? I mean, for the kingdom it is, but having an incompetent guard in one city or another from a roleplaying perspective isn't exactly bad.

>>49530689
I do have to wonder what all the other motley crews of vagabonds with swords and/or magic powers were busy doing at the time that they, too, obviously considered more important than fighting The Lich.

whenever i have NPCs. i play them to win no matter whos side they're on

thats why i contrive it so that the party wont have anyone on their side. unless they try really hard to bring one along

>>49530987
Basically this.
If the PCs are fighting to protect their lives, the NPCs should be too. My NPCS pick their battles and set up traps, flank, and play to their strengths and weaknesses. They're also usually quick to run away/surrender if their lives become seriously endangered though, like real people.
They also like to track their wounded/dead back if they can. It's made my players very protective of their kills.

I run my monsters the same way. They pick their fights and run when the battle becomes unfavorable, especially if they're intelligent enough.

>>49531127
Prospective DM here, I'd like to run my NPCs the same way. A fight to the death is almost never worthwhile for those involved, and it's usually much less important to win a battle than it is to live another day. Therefore, retreat and surrender sound like perfectly reasonable options. I also think this could provide a great contrast to those enemies without self-preservation, like hordes of undead. If all enemies just fought to the death, then the stakes wouldn't feel elevated, but now they might.

However, I've heard some issues when talking about this to prospective players. The first problem is how combat can still feel threatening when enemies turn tail and end the encounter early. The encounter might last only half as long as it could have, if only everyone stood their ground and fought to the death, as is the usual expectation. The second problem is "muh loot", when combat encounters often end with a smaller body count. Good news for the NPCs escaping for their lives, bad news for the adventurers who love to rummage around dead bodies for anything of value. How do you address this?

>>49531631
first, tell them not to be spoiled. Second, tell them to fight and kill better.

If murderhobo's can't murderhobo, thats on them. They want loot, they can earn it.

>>49528314
>>49528314
The players were at fault in the Lich case from agreeing to play a game with the GM then refusing to play the story he agreed to run. The GM reacted poorly, if amusingly, but wasn't the person who broke the social contract at the heart of every rpg - the GM says what campaign he's running, and the players either agree to go along with it, making whichever choices they will in the context of that story, or don't play the game at all.

>>49531631
Maybe by throwing extremely difficult encounters at them and allowing them to run? Or, after their defeat and the "death" of one of the PCs, allow them to recover the dying body of their friend after they escaped and fix him up.

Also let them know this isn't a hardcore dnd dungeon crawl hack&slash&loot sim but a more story based and realistic sim sort of game.

>>49531714
>implying players won't invariably throw themselves against the rails and attempt to do stupid shit with only the slightest provocation

>>49531714
On the flip side of this, if a GM agrees or suggests running a certain sort of game, he should keep the game as that sort of game, rather than flip-flopping about.

Of course, bait and switch campaigns can be done well, but they should be done very early in a campaign and possibly with some vague prior warning so no one ends up playing something that doesn't interest them and dropping out mid campaign.

>>49530949
Scryber bullying.

>>49530949
not all adventurers are dumb enough to fight a lich, they are probably content to loot a wight's dungeon instead

>>49531741
>>49531741
Yeah, people are often arseholes. Doesn't make it right or a good idea.
It's why you need to find a good group of people you trust before you play any games you've put effort into.

>>49531714
Iiiiif he had said anything about a story.

This is key. I can't tell you how many 'sandbox' games suddenly have a big threat you can't possibly ignore despite it having nothing to do with anything the players actually want to do.

>>49530689
how important is fairness in your RPGs, opposed to, for example, fun?

>>49531827
Oh yeah, sure. That's part of the whole thing I mentioned about the GM needing to keep to his side of the bargain - running the campaign he promised.

But, iirc, the greentext OP is talking about had the GM establish the Lich at the very start of the game, so it wasn't like the campaign's premise was revealed part way through them trying to make the kingdom a democracy.

>>49531856
Depends on the RPG being ran and the story intended lad.

>>49531769
Under rated post.