I was looking at some of the NPCs listed in Volo's Guide, and I'd like to know if there are official corrections for the mistakes.

• Archdruid - 18th level caster, 24th level for hit points
• Bard - 4th level caster, 8th level for hit points
• Blackguard - 10th level caster, 18th level for hit points
• War Priest - 9th level caster, 18th level for hit points
• Warlock of the Fiend - 17th level caster, 12th level for hit points

The reason I think these are mistakes, is that most of the other NPCs have the same level for spells and hit points: abjurer, conjurer, diviner, enchanter, evoker, illusionist, necromancer, transmuter, warlock of the archfey, warlock of the great old one

(It is also odd that the Monster Manual has the Druid as 4th level caster/5th level hit points, but that mismatch does not exist for the archmage, mage, or priest.)

(I should start off that everything I am saying applies to the source books, not DnDBeyond, who are faithfully reproducing that information. I don't have Twitter, so I can't ask Jeremy Crawford or other game designers like him this question.)

I realize it is easier to rationalize why an NPC is a certain way instead of fixing a typo. But that is why I was asking if there was any kind of official acknowledgment of this from WotC, with a preferred official adjustment, instead of me (as an individual DM) figuring out what changes I want to make for my local campaign. If the answer is that there is no such notice, then so be it.

You've ignored my comment that 13 of these spell caster NPCs hew closely to how PCs are constructed, compared to the 5 that have absurdly bumped hit dice. Why does the Archdruid need artificially high hit dice to be CR 12, while the Archmage does not (and is still CR 12)? And one, the Warlock of the Fiend, where the hit dice are greatly reduced. Isn't it more likely that the 12 is a typo/bad handwriting that should have been 17 ?

I know that game designers are free to have a 20th level spell caster with only 1d8 hit points, but doing something like that would be a head scratcher, and make it harder for players to properly judge how to deal with an encounter. At the top of Appendix B in the Monster Manual, it describes how to customize these NPCs to make them tougher or easier. (For example, increasing the CON stat would increase the average hit points.) That section does not have a recommendation like "double the hit dice".

I was just about to edit this into the comment: I should have thanked you first for responding, before launching into my semi-tirade. :-) Thank you for posting.

I did edit that I don't have Twitter, and I don't see an alternative way to contact the game designers, which is why I posted in these forums. I am hoping that someone else can bring this to their attention at some point.

At least 1 argument in favor of changing dice is that if you change the CON stat, it would also change the CON save which would impact the creature's challenge in an unintended way.

It is also quite possible that the monster has an unrepresented multiclass that has bolstered it's hit dice.

Or it could just be that monsters and characters are designed under different criteria and hit dice and spell caster level are not directly related in monster stat blocks.

DxJxC - I've already addressed everything you mentioned, except the first one. I don't see how a +1 in CON save is going to wildly skew the results.

There is one way things are different from the PCs: all NPCs use d8 for hit dice as a medium sized creature. But as I already stated, that doesn't explain why 2/3rds of the NPCs do have hit dice equal to their spell casting level, while the others don't (and don't have skills that would indicate they are multi classed). Any explanation you come up with would have to explain why two 18th level spell caster NPCs are CR 12, but the Archdruid has 6 more hit dice and 4 better AC. Or why the warlock of the fiend has 5 less hit dice compared to other warlocks.

The players need a handle on how the game works, in order to make smart choices during the game. To make an exaggerated example, if the players come across a 1st level wizard who has 30 extra hit dice (but no other indications of being multi classed), how are they supposed to know that they are overmatched and should run away? They will expect something close to a 1st level wizard in threat.

The simplest explanation is that mistakes crept in (understandable, given the complexity and depth of the books), which haven't been corrected yet.

(Edit: To be clear, it isn't like the game designers can't do whatever they want. But they set up guidelines so that D&D games are played with similar rules, and any new DM creations will be consistent with what other DMs are doing. For these almost-like-PC NPCs, a third of them are inconsistent with the other 2/3rds, which in turn makes it more difficult for the average DM to know what is preferred.)

Quote from Stormknight >>

Quote from Quasimodal >>

The simplest explanation is that a mistake crept in (understandable, given the complexity and depth of the books), which hasn't been corrected yet.

I'm confident that it's not a mistake - it's just a design variation as explained above.

 

I'm confident that it is not a design variation. It makes little sense that a Priest uses 5th level cleric spells with 5 hit dice, but a War Priest uses 9th level cleric spells with 18 hit dice. Does a home brew 7th level NPC cleric get 7 hit dice or 14?

I already mentioned that Appendix B has a section called "Customizing NPCs", and includes the comment that the CR will be altered by changing the armor, weapons, or magic items (and says to refer to the DMG). Despite several paragraphs of other alterations, there is nothing about "add (random) number of hit dice". If that was an intended variation, it would have been simple to include it in the list, or or have it as a variant for that NPC ("give Tougher Archdruid 6 more hit dice and increase CR to 12") instead of baking it into the "typical" example for that kind of NPC.

The npcs in the monster books are all balanced around the combination of HP, CR, AC, damage output, damage resistances, number of control/support abilities, etc.

You are confusing them being similar to player classes as having to follow the same rules as player characters, and this is simply not the case.

Quote from DxJxC >>

The npcs in the monster books are all balanced around the combination of HP, CR, AC, damage output, damage resistances, number of control/support abilities, etc.

You are confusing them being similar to player classes as having to follow the same rules as player characters, and this is simply not the case.

I'm not confusing anything.  I'll go with the second point, then the first.

The NPCs don't follow the same rules as the PCs, because that would be too complicated for the DM to handle in real time. But they are a close representative of what a character of that level is like. The spell casters have the same number of slots. The rogues have abilities that match up with their hit dice. Even though it is a simplified version of what is in the PHB, their purpose is, if the DM needs a 5th level cleric, they can drop in a Priest as a quick representative, instead of custom creating a 5th level cleric.

Now to your first point. What is balanced? Why is it balanced that way? I'm guessing you mean with respect to a certain CR. I think you are putting the cart in front of the horse. Stormknight has mentioned that an Archdruid needs more hit dice to be comparable to other CR 12 creatures. (Why the Archmage doesn't need it... let's ignore that for now.) Why does the Archdruid have to be CR 12? Instead of balancing this 18th level Druid NPC to be comparable to CR 12 creatures, why not leave it balanced as an 18th level Druid, and then determine the appropriate CR for that NPC?

You will have an easier time convincing me, if you can explain (without handwaving) the reason why the warlock of the great old one (14th level caster) has 14 hit dice, while the warlock of the fiend (17th level caster) has 12 hit dice.

Quote from Stormknight >>

I see where you're coming from - approaching the design of npcs in a logical manner and I don't think you're going to find a satisfying answer.

I'm pretty sure that the answer is, "because those are the stats that whoever designed that npc decided to give it, to make an encounter work the way they wanted."

 Fair enough. (So the answer to my question is: no official word on this, so I should accept that there is no desire to modify it in future book errata.)

The reason warlock of the fiend has less hp than warlock of the great old one probably has to do with its resistance to nonmagic weapons, and ability to cast False life at will (but mostly the resistance).