| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, you still have the situation of the Legendary sage with 100 hp or something.The issue is (and it was an issue in PF1 as well) that I don't want a master scholar who can also take 5 crossbow shots. I want it to be believable when that scholar comes to the level 3 PCs that he has foreseen an upcoming calamity and needs their help. If he needs to be a level 7 with all the strength that entails from a full class, he could solve any issue those PCs could while hardly breaking a sweat. Thats a big problem with the world in my eyes. The two ways round it is to have either weak NPC classes or a rule stating NPCs can have any level of Skill without effecting their other statistics.Well, as a compromise, the monster creation rules seem to indicate that NPCs can count as up to 2 levels higher for skills specifically (possibly more, though I actually hope not for various reasons involving challenge calibration). If that includes Proficiency, then you can have an Expert Scholar who is level 1 but level 3 for Skills (and has 10-15 HP), and a Master Scholar who is level 5, but level 7 for Skills (and likely has 35 HP or so, though they could be as low as 30).
Your stereotypical Legendary sage is also venerable, which if aging stays the same as in PF1 loses them 3 hp/level, a pretty big hit.
Your stereotypical Legendary sage is also venerable, which if aging stays the same as in PF1 loses them 3 hp/level, a pretty big hit.Yeah, you still have the situation of the Legendary sage with 100 hp or something.The issue is (and it was an issue in PF1 as well) that I don't want a master scholar who can also take 5 crossbow shots. I want it to be believable when that scholar comes to the level 3 PCs that he has foreseen an upcoming calamity and needs their help. If he needs to be a level 7 with all the strength that entails from a full class, he could solve any issue those PCs could while hardly breaking a sweat. Thats a big problem with the world in my eyes. The two ways round it is to have either weak NPC classes or a rule stating NPCs can have any level of Skill without effecting their other statistics.Well, as a compromise, the monster creation rules seem to indicate that NPCs can count as up to 2 levels higher for skills specifically (possibly more, though I actually hope not for various reasons involving challenge calibration). If that includes Proficiency, then you can have an Expert Scholar who is level 1 but level 3 for Skills (and has 10-15 HP), and a Master Scholar who is level 5, but level 7 for Skills (and likely has 35 HP or so, though they could be as low as 30).
Plus, *Legendary*? Not master, Legendary? Because master does everything you need a sage to do and then some. Legendary has so much knowledge he knows what you'll say next and what you did this morning and what you're thinking right now, if I'm understanding what Legendary represents. It's beyond mortal capabilities, it's epic/myth-level stuff. A demigod, all told. I won't say a demigod can't have a few hps more than what I'd be expecting from an old man.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I once built an NPC Blacksmith 'by-the-book' (as well as a few other vital NPCs) for a low-level zombie-plague adventure. The individual zombies were CR 2 Variant Plague Zombies with bite attacks...
Anyway, the point is that it was annoying that I had to make him at least 7th level in order to be able to actually craft the +1 weapons and armor I wanted to make available to my 3rd level players when they reached town. Which meant that even as a Commoner his HP pool was impressive, and his base statistics were as good or better than the heroes in many cases. I think he had a level of warrior or aristocrat for martial weapon proficiencies, but he might have just used a feat on longswords instead... I don't have the adventure handy anymore.
He was one of several NPCs that for various reasons had to be higher level than the threats they 'needed' the PCs to solve. The town apothecary, a literate Goblin Alchemist 3 (used to justify the town's stockpile of healing potions and alchemist's fire). The captain of the guard, a Human Cavalier 9 (used to keep order by force if necessary). And the Lady of the Land, a human-disguised Dhampir Necromancer 9 (representing the town's highest level spellcaster) were the others.
Those six stat-blocks (Apothecary, Blacksmith, Captain O' Guard, Lady O' Land, and Plague Zombie (Adult & Child sized), nevermind the Manifestation I wrote to justify the whole adventure, took an inordinate amount of time to complete trying to do them by-the-book (and the zombies I still had to tweek to make function). There were just so many steps that skipping would have resulted in a seriously sub-par NPC, and for that result why bother doing it yourself at all. At times I feel like making a complex NPC in Pathfinder is even harder than building a complex NPCs is in Hero System (a game infamous for its extremely complex rules for generating game elements). So I really hope it won't be so hard to construct a viable NPC by yourself in the PF2. I'm getting too old to put in that many hours of hard work for so little reward.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Check out the unchained monster creation rules. Once you have them down, a new NPC takes minutes to throw together. We're almost certainly going to get some version of this as well as the ability to create NPCs the hard way.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, you still have the situation of the Legendary sage with 100 hp or something.
Anyone who's Legendary at anything is verging on demigodhood in terms of capability. They are, and should be, a superhero. I'm thus very comfortable with Legendary level skills being restricted to people who actually are fairly superheroic, HP included.
I once built an NPC Blacksmith 'by-the-book' (as well as a few other vital NPCs) for a low-level zombie-plague adventure. The individual zombies were CR 2 Variant Plague Zombies with bite attacks...
This is definitely a potential issue in PF1. With the changes in the item creation system, I bet you can make a blacksmith type capable of +1 weapons and armor as level 3 (maybe level 1 if I'm right about Proficiency being up to two levels ahead of PCs for the skill-focused).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the idea is that somebody can be legendary in some areas and not others. The sage has spent the last 105 years learning everything there is to know about (insert subject here), to the exclusion of all else in life. So why would they have high hit points, weapon proficiency and other things that come of high level PCs?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, you still have the situation of the Legendary sage with 100 hp or something.Anyone who's Legendary at anything is verging on demigodhood in terms of capability. They are, and should be, a superhero. I'm thus very comfortable with Legendary level skills being restricted to people who actually are fairly superheroic, HP included.Okay, bad example, people are getting all hung up and pedantic about Legendary being demigod territory and what-not, anyway, the same applies to a big Lore check.
So don't make it a big lore check. Make it a super specific lore check that only someone with the right lore skill (or library) can make.
Check out the unchained monster creation rules. Once you have them down, a new NPC takes minutes to throw together. We're almost certainly going to get some version of this as well as the ability to create NPCs the hard way.
For future campaigns I probably will, I do own Unchained, I just wasn't familiar enough with those rules at the time. On a light skimming it just comes across as vague and arbitrary. Which for ease of play probably works better, but I'm the kind that appreciated the potential precision of the Bestiary's system enough to give it a solid try... but I regret that decision in hind-sight because it was just too hard to use to get the result you wanted (usually something of a specific CR).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the idea is that somebody can be legendary in some areas and not others. The sage has spent the last 105 years learning everything there is to know about (insert subject here), to the exclusion of all else in life. So why would they have high hit points, weapon proficiency and other things that come of high level PCs?Yeah, this is what I'm talking about.
It's not like if we had npc classes that old sage would be any less formidable. Really, if you need an old sage whom you can kill with a single blow don't even stat them up. If you wanna stat them up use the monster rules. If you want them, for some occult reason, to be a pc class, make them a wizard with utility spells only, horrible constitution, dexterity and strength, no combat feats, and no combat gear but an unenchanted, basic quality old staff. If that still doesn't work for you, you win, I give up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the idea is that somebody can be legendary in some areas and not others. The sage has spent the last 105 years learning everything there is to know about (insert subject here), to the exclusion of all else in life. So why would they have high hit points, weapon proficiency and other things that come of high level PCs?
I dunno, I'm kind of inclined to see what legendary Lore proficiency actually does before I worry too much about this. We know it exists, but I honestly struggle a little to come up with what the heck it is useful for. Honestly, lores represent such a narrow field of focus I'd be surprised if there's much you don't know past expert or master.
Alternatively, as Chest suggests, just don't roll lore checks for NPCs. I actually can't name any books that have you do this. If the PCs fail knowledge checks the NPCs are generally there to just already know that information. The closest I have seen is NPCs who provide bonuses on PC knowledge checks, but the NPC never actually rolls. Your Stat sheet is never going to be encompass the sun total of your experience as an individual.
I actually can't name any books that have you do this. If the PCs fail knowledge checks the NPCs are generally there to just already know that information. The closest I have seen is NPCs who provide bonuses on PC knowledge checks, but the NPC never actually rolls.
The closest i can think of is the first adventure in Hell's Rebels, where you can do research on a topic (and get appropriate rewards for completing it quickly) or have the NPC make the rolls offscreen. They succeed of course, but not quickly enough that you can reap the benefits of speed.
It sticks out because I tried to convert it to the UI research rules, using the NPCs bonus in the appropriate skills to work backwards in order to set the DC and complexity.
That's what I just said...Really, if you need an old sage whom you can kill with a single blow don't even stat them up.I think the idea is that somebody can be legendary in some areas and not others. The sage has spent the last 105 years learning everything there is to know about (insert subject here), to the exclusion of all else in life. So why would they have high hit points, weapon proficiency and other things that come of high level PCs?Yeah, this is what I'm talking about.
Sorry! You're right, I messed up - I thought it wasn't you who wrote that, for some inexplicable reason. I swear my brain isn't all there. Sorry again!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would love to see NPC classes disappear.
For me, they were just one more layer of complexity in learning to GM.
I would much rather have a good handbook for creating and running "The Opposition And The Neutrals", whether it's monsters or other characters.
Sure beats trying to figure out the difference between a warrior NPC and a fighter NPC.
I don't want NPC classes, have detested them since 2000, if a blacksmith needs to have +37 to his Craft skill check or what-have-you, so be it, no artificial inflation of HD/BAB/Saves, etc, in order to achieve thus.
Sounds more like an arguement for a classless system in total, as that really isn't a problem specific to npcs.
And truth be told, I hate classes period, but if you don't give me classless rules for building everybody, then you still need to give me rules for building everybody, and I vastly prefer the rules be symetrical.
Would love to see NPC classes disappear.
For me, they were just one more layer of complexity in learning to GM.
I would much rather have a good handbook for creating and running "The Opposition And The Neutrals", whether it's monsters or other characters.
Sure beats trying to figure out the difference between a warrior NPC and a fighter NPC.
To me, the entire point of having rules for building anybody, even PCs, is to make the process easier.
And for the most part, npc classes did that. Not overly well, but I did find it somewhat easier and faster.
Though, indeed, they could have been done much better.
And yea, I wouldn't vote for warrior npc class either. Pointless overlap.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If npcs do not need classes, then why do pcs?
Besides, if havinb a +37 to a skill with artificial inflation of bab/saves/etc is a problem, why woukd it be a problem only for npcs?
That sounds like a double standard, which should not have existed in the first place, and frankly, making the double standard even worse, just undercuts the entire reason for me to use a system.
James Jacobs might love this idea of ignoring all rules for anything uninvolved with combat or skill checks (a simplification of my understanding of him, he might draw the line elsewhere), but for me, I absolutely hate that. If I use a rule, I use it for communicating about the entire narrative world. There is no point otherwise. If I'm just making everything up anyway without bothering with rules, then I might as well do the PCs the same way
I don't run pcs different from npcs, so why would I eescribe them differently? And if the way the pcs are being built is insufficient for the npcs, then the pcs are being built wrong.
The pcs are no less a part of the narrative milieu than any npc, therefore, both the pcs and npcs need to reflect the same narrative milieu, and if your character generation methodology can't handle that, then it is worthless.
No rules is niether equal to, nor better than rule 0.
The entire point of rule 0 is as a statement saying "here is a ruler with useful tick marks on it, naturally, if you need something to be between two tick marks, you are allowed to do so."
No rules just gets rid of the ruler along with all it's useful tick marks.
Anyone who feels trapped by rules, and finds themselves unable to use them as merely useful guidelines, has my pity, for they lack the central ability to being a great player/gm, and not merely adequate.
Anyone who feels trapped by rules, and finds themselves unable to use them as merely useful guidelines, has my pity, for they lack the central ability to being a great player/gm, and not merely adequate.Hahahahahaha, classic, "...I pity you!" *as said by Uncle Glenn in Raising Arizona*
I thought you don't like 80's movies, and here you go referencing a classic!I pity the fool!Anyone who feels trapped by rules, and finds themselves unable to use them as merely useful guidelines, has my pity, for they lack the central ability to being a great player/gm, and not merely adequate.Hahahahahaha, classic, "...I pity you!" *as said by Uncle Glenn in Raising Arizona*
I don't, but classics are classics for a reason...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm, getting into strange territory, and would that be?
I thought you were saddened, depressed, revolted and something else by my views, I'll let you be all that on your own.
I like NPC classes. I'm making some sailor NPCs for 5E to help the party, and yeah, I know it's a different system (can't wait for August 2nd!!!), but I don't like that these non-player-characters have PC levels and all the abilities that come with that.
I liked the Adept and Expert from PF1 because they weren't good, which was important, but they offered something distinct from the Player Classes, at least at level 1.
The Warrior and Noble did not.
So, I'd propose the following:
Noble: Probably similar hit die, weapon proficiency, and armor proficiency to a Ranger (maybe better armor) and some innate minor buffing feature. More skills than a Fighter.
Brute: Similar to a Fighter, but the Hit Die of a Barbarian, and only increases proficiency in a very limited number of martial weapons, not all. Fewer skills than Fighter.
Adept: Very limited armor and weapons training, no actual spells per se, but spell points to cast a few choice spells from each list
Expert: can choose of variety of skills to be fairly good with, OR fewer skills to be exceptional with. Lots of skills per level.
I'm not sure how much of this is doable in/with the new system, though.
Supposed reasons are always nice, to add to the sadness.Hmm, getting into strange territory, and would that be?I thought you were saddened, depressed, revolted and something else by my views, I'll let you be all that on your own.
Niece is young. She will learn, and grow, as we all should. ;)
We probably don't need rules for NPC classes as foes. The new monster building rules should cover that case adequately.
However, we do need more PC-like rules for NPC classed allies. In the absence of any actual rules about how to do this, I am assuming that we can strip down the PC classes of excess abilities to approximate such characters. I guess we will know for sure how feasible that is when we see the full rules.
Nice; message received.Niece is young. She will learn, and grow, as we all should. ;)Supposed reasons are always nice, to add to the sadness.Hmm, getting into strange territory, and would that be?I thought you were saddened, depressed, revolted and something else by my views, I'll let you be all that on your own.
Let's see if Niece received her message, too. ;)
Let's see if Niece received her message, too. ;)Nice; message received.Niece is young. She will learn, and grow, as we all should. ;)Supposed reasons are always nice, to add to the sadness.Hmm, getting into strange territory, and would that be?I thought you were saddened, depressed, revolted and something else by my views, I'll let you be all that on your own.Message Bringer 2: The Revenge, starring The Mad Comrade!
I kid, I just suddenly said that out loud, all cheesy-voiceover style.
^_____^
[Movie Guy voice]
Subtlety, the Horror, starring Ripped McHairless as ... the Messagebringer.
[/Movie Guy voice]
[Ahnold voice]"Dat vas a double entendre, you idiot!"[/Ahnold voice]
*scene of gratuitous vehicular explosions, during which a camel is punched for no apparent reason although keen eyes will pick up on the camel-loogie on Ripped's torn shirt, followed by more explosions*
[Movie Guy voice]
Coming soon to streaming video!
[/Movie Guy voice]
Niece is young. She will learn, and grow, as we all should. ;)Supposed reasons are always nice, to add to the sadness.Hmm, getting into strange territory, and would that be?I thought you were saddened, depressed, revolted and something else by my views, I'll let you be all that on your own.
Niece is young, but she doesn't take well to being told her views are revolting and depressing, Uncle, if you don't mind, not after patiently explaining them without any claim that they're the right ones.
In any case willful and uncaring rudeness is, IMVHO, much more revolting than an inability to enjoy old movies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Niece is young. She will learn, and grow, as we all should. ;)Supposed reasons are always nice, to add to the sadness.Hmm, getting into strange territory, and would that be?I thought you were saddened, depressed, revolted and something else by my views, I'll let you be all that on your own.Niece is young, but she doesn't take well to being told her views are revolting and depressing, Uncle, if you don't mind, not after patiently explaining them without any claim that they're the right ones.
In any case willful and uncaring rudeness is, IMVHO, much more revolting than an inability to enjoy old movies.
More than fair enough, Niece. My apologies. *bows*
More than fair enough, Niece. My apologies. *bows*
Thank you, uncle, no need to apologize at all ;) *curtsies*
|
|
I'm willing to bet that PF2 NPC Building is going to be something of a mish-mash between the Starfinder System (Literally NPCs just get whatever you want them to have calculated to CR) and the PF1 System (Whereby NPCs use the PC Creation rules, except they ignore all prerequisites, costs, and features they won't likely use).
I'd like to see a NPC Generation system that first relies on Racial Abilities, a variety of "Arrays" to represent various power levels, Unique Bonuses per GM Fiat Style additions, and THEN Class Grafts that let the GM bolt-on ONLY the stuff they want from the given classes, and the NPC "pays" a certain amount of their CR to add those abilities.
For example:
CR 7 Creature (Level Elite Elf Wizard)
2 CR Spent on a 20/18/16/14/12/10 Elite Ability Score Array
2 CR Spent on Additional Wizard Class Abilities; Familiar; +1 Caster Level
1/2 CR Spent on Elf Race and all Racial Features
1/2 CR Spent on Improved Initiative
1 CR Spent on Wizard Class Graft (To include the Arcane School & Base CL1 Spell Slots)
1 CR Spent on an extra 25% WBL Budget for the NPC
A lot of NPC's running around this thread. >.>
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of NPC's running around this thread. >.>
I can see that you are a great and noble hero oh mighty agent of hydra, I beseech you for help. My father has been kidnapped by the black dragon of Doomwood. Should you return with my father, perhaps he will see fit to reward you with heirlooms our family has held onto for generations, poor though we are.
Swift travels oh mighty agent of hydra, swift travels!| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Welcome to Sandpoint!
...
Welcome to Sandpoint!
...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
*walks into thread*
*looks around*
*walks out*
Am I an NPC because I feel unable to alter myself to that extent, or am I not an NPC because my stats are definitely not the NPC array?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Am I an NPC because I feel unable to alter myself to that extent, or am I not an NPC because my stats are definitely not the NPC array?
You are a butterfly dreaming you are an NPC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*walks into thread*
Hail travele...
*looks around*
We have many wares for sale, trave...
*walks out*
Safe travels, traveller!