I haven't played E6, I have only just recently even heard of its existence. But, I thought the point of it was to make even first and second level NPC's formidable and relavent. If every NPC you encountered was already "epic" doesn't that kind of take away from the characters? Why shouldn't the average ruler just be "noble 2" and max out the skills he uses most? (mostly rhetorical questions :P )
I would think 6th would be more common in E6 than 20 is in the Golarion setting, say about the amount of NPC's in Golarion that are 10-15 would be the 6 crowd in E6.
I would put most guards at 1st level with experienced veterans at at second or third. Maybe the rare 4th, that is something of a local hero. Most everyday people are first and second level commoners and experts.Just my thoughts, I want to run an E6 but having "issues" with one person in the group.
Greg
In Epic6 games, a 6th level character is famous. You bcome an expert at level 3 or 4.
In your example, the king can only be level 3 or 4, his son is level 2, the personnal guard is level 5 or 6, the master of arms is level 6 highly experienced ...
I generally have most regular people be 1st level, but reaching 2nd level in their life time, so most old people are 2nd level. I don't use the npc classes, but instead, if someone doesn't have that kind of specialization, I use a single HD of humanoid. If they gain a second level, it's always of a PC class (though I've made an additional PC class that's basically a PC-fied expert class).
Generally, it's a principle of 1/4 of a higher level. In a town with a population of 1000 people, there's probably about 752 first level, 188 second, 47 3rd third, 11 fourth, 2 fifth level, and no-one above that. I've got a quick open office calc sheet for this.
In Epic6 games, a 6th level character is famous. You bcome an expert at level 3 or 4.
In your example, the king can only be level 3 or 4, his son is level 2, the personnal guard is level 5 or 6, the master of arms is level 6 highly experienced ...
That really depends from DM to DM. I know some have the same level range as usual up to level 6, then adds a feat instead of a level for every level above. So if a town would usually have a level 13 governor and a level 7 mage, they're instead a level 6 with one and 7 feats respectively. If the old king had been in office for several decennia and fought wars and the like, he might very well be 6th level.
The level of a king depends wholly on how old he is and how long he's been in office in my games. More taxing jobs (adventuring, being a king or whatever) generally causes the NPC's to level faster, but a young king that just got appointed due to the murder of his father might very well be a 1hd humanoid in my games. Maybe more likely to be a 1st level Gifted, our replacement of the expert.
First I've heard of E6. Looks interesting.
Thread link on a Pathfinder E6 discussion:
Pathfinder E6Link to RPGnet in depth review of E6 (includes optional PDF download ):
E6: The Game Inside D&D
Greg
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the advice. I really like the one quarter rule.
So, from what I've read, usually people get a new feat every 5000 xp after 6th level, but is that really the case?
It seems too quick for me.
The person who designed e6 did a lot of testing and 5000 XP provided a steady rate of advancement (They were originally using 3000 XP).
Interesting, shouldn't this be moved to OGL forum or house rules? It still is Dungeons & Dragons. Just stopping at 6th level. Confused about it being in OTHER RPG's since that is for games that are in no way D&D. Is a moderator showing some bias against E6 conversion of Pathfinder? :P
Greg
Thanks for the advice. I really like the one quarter rule.
So, from what I've read, usually people get a new feat every 5000 xp after 6th level, but is that really the case?
It seems too quick for me.
Well, the 5000xp (in standard 3.x D&D where the rules originated) is like leveling from 5th to 6th over and over. Remember that in a "standard" E6 game the challenges that 6th level heroes face generally remain around EL6 increasing gradually, but not normally above EL10 (really tough).
When you run an e6 game, how many high level people do you have?
What does it take to be in the top level? Are all Spartans 5th or 6th level? Do you have to be 5th or 6th to be considered an expert? Are 6th level people as rare as 20th level people in a normal game?
Is the king 6th, his son 5th and the guard 4th, or is everyone 6th -- and highly experienced 6th to boot?
While this article talks specifically about D&D, and is also very long, I think it provides some spectacular insight, and may help answer some of your questions.
While this article talks specifically about D&D, and is also very long, I think it provides some spectacular insight, and may help answer some of your questions.
Good article, thanks for the link.
Greg
I would populate your world with about as many level 6 characters as you would typically see level 10+ characters in a 'normal' D&D / Pathfinder realm.
Then you add feats to differentiate them further.
At least that is how I see it making the most sense.
Many important people should be level 3-5, depending on how many feats you want them to have.
Thanks for the advice. I really like the one quarter rule.
Yeah, that sounds about right to me too, give or take.
* EDIT * Some of the things I mention below have already been mentioned in the thread. **
When you run an e6 game, how many high level people do you have?
Hi, cranewings!
Gary Gygax wrote:
"Inform those players who have opted for the magic-user prefession that they have just completed a course of apprenticeship with a master who was of unthinkably high level (at least 6th!)" -- Gary Gygax, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Master's Guide, page 39.
In my opinion...
Even in non-E6 D&D, 6th level should still be considered unthinkably high. A 6th level character is very powerful and should be rare.
E6 is one of the best houserules of the entire 3.x ruleset that I've seen. In my opinion, to get a good idea of how many 5th or 6th level people there should be in an E6 world (or any other D&D world), this essay is quite beneficial.
The Alexandrian: Calibrating Your Expectations
Once it is accepted that the world your playing in has an abundance of characters even over 3rd level, the way things work on the whole planet changes, in my view.
A good question to ask, is how many 2nd or 3rd level people should be in an average town? 4th level characters should be really rare. And, 5th or 6th level characters are the stuff of legends.
What does it take to be in the top level?
Depends on the campaign and the GM. But, the top level is EPIC in Epic Sixth.
Are all Spartans 5th or 6th level?
No. Most of the Spartans would have been 2nd or 3rd. A few would have been 4th. A couple 5th. And, none of them were 6th level. Leonidas? Might have advanced to 6th had he survived.
Another thing to remember about the Spartans... At least according to the movie version... Legend said they were descended from Hercules, himself. That said, combined with their practice of selecting only the healthiest children... Would probably guarantee that the Spartans had higher than average scores (possibly beyond the elite array in traditional d20). Perhaps, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10.
Do you have to be 5th or 6th to be considered an expert?
No. 2nd would be enough. Einstein can be modeled at 5th level. And, it takes far less than being Einstein to be an expert.
Are 6th level people as rare as 20th level people in a normal game?
Relatively speaking? Yes. And, with additional feats beyond 6th, definitely.
Is the king 6th, his son 5th and the guard 4th, or is everyone 6th -- and highly experienced 6th to boot?
No. The king, unless he earned the kingdom by his own hand is probably only a 2nd or (at most) 3rd level noble. If he earned it by his own hand, he might be a 4th level fighter.
The king's son? Unless there's reason to believe he's experienced? The king's son is probably 1st. Definitely no more than 2nd.
The guard? 1st level warrior. Elite guards are 2nd level (maybe 3rd, if they're really legendary (like some of the lesser knights of Arthur's Round Table)).
I think grasping Gygax's view that 6th level is "unthinkably high level" will guide you as to how many 6th level characters there should be in any campaign (E6 or otherwise).
I just don't see the apeal of E6 I just would have no intrest in playing the game that way. I would just play a different game. But I guess its just me and the group I play with
Gary Gygax wrote:
"Inform those players who have opted for the magic-user prefession that they have just completed a course of apprenticeship with a master who was of unthinkably high level (at least 6th!)" -- Gary Gygax, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Master's Guide, page 39.
I'm pretty sure that you're misinterpreting this. He's dead, so we can't ask, but since he wrote a huge pile of rules allowing very high level play it seems to me that this was a tongue-in-cheek statement - he probably rolled his eyes as he said it.
However, it does fit the e6 concept exactly so feel free to take it as you like.
|
I take Justin Alexander's article very close to heart on the matter. Albert Einstein(!) is 5th level. I the best in the world is only 5th level, you have to move down from that. 3rd level folks are world-famous. The only reason to have any 6th level NPCs is to give the PCs rivals, and the PCs have heard of them.
I do agree with e6 in the arena of balance. The classes are generally most balanced in power at this level. I also feel that it would be a very good way to run a role-play heavy campaign.
And, thinking about it you're probably right Cranewings - just look at the Monk class progression in AD&D. Basically, above 8th level you had to challenge your superiors to progress in your class. Druids had a similar mechanism if I recall.
Since this seems to be turning into something of a general E6 thread, I'll ask: has anyone put out adventures specifically with E6 in mind?
EDIT: I mean, clearly the low-level stuff in general will fly, but I'd be curious to see what things look like for much more detailed things.
Gary Gygax wrote:
"Inform those players who have opted for the magic-user prefession that they have just completed a course of apprenticeship with a master who was of unthinkably high level (at least 6th!)" -- Gary Gygax, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Master's Guide, page 39.I'm pretty sure that you're misinterpreting this. He's dead, so we can't ask, but since he wrote a huge pile of rules allowing very high level play it seems to me that this was a tongue-in-cheek statement - he probably rolled his eyes as he said it.
However, it does fit the e6 concept exactly so feel free to take it as you like.
Sure, I could be. But, I don't think I am. Reason why? 9th level was generally "Name" level in AD&D. And, the monsters? In the AD&D Monster Manual(s), most of them weren't really tough enough to challenge characters of over 9th level. Not even the dragons (like someone said, Huma Dragonbane killed Maitat, Queen of Darkness (the Krynn version of Tiamat), at 9th level). And, at 9th level, most classes stopped gaining hit dice.
Furthermore, most NPCs were incapable of advancing beyone a certain level. Also, demihumans (such as dwarves, elves, half-orcs, etc...) were level capped (could not advance beyond 6th, 7th, or 8th level, on average).
I believe Gygax's game was a lower level game than many people realize. Sure, there were higher level PCs and NPCs, but those were the exception, NOT the rule.
And, one more thing... The XP charts compared to XP rewards. XP rewards were smaller in AD&D for slaying monsters (at least at low levels... and it took a lot more XP to advance at higher levels). For instance, a typical orc in AD&D would net a figher 30 XP, if he got double XP for slaying it single-handedly. Compare that to the 135 XP the fighter would have gotten for killing a similar orc in Pathfinder. Then, to take matters a step farther, the fighter in AD&D needed twice as many XP to get to 2nd level than the Pathfinder fighter.
Sure, treasure counted for XP, but how much treasure was up to the DM. A fighter could face a lot of orcs for very little treasure. So, advancement could be quite slow. Espcially, if the DM timed the larger treasure hoards to when a character was within just a few XP of gaining the next level (because you couldn't gain extra XP beyond the minimum needed to advance to the next level without... all extra was lost).
So, I tend to think he meant that 6th level was the lower end of "unthinkably high level." The higher end being 9th to 12th.
Yeah, Hrothgar - you'll see in my post about 5 up from here that I rescinded that thought based on the Monk and Druid class progression mechanics, and I agree with what you're saying about the racial level restrictions as well.
In fact, the racial level restrictions caused most of my campaigns at the time to be very "human-centric." Later we simply ignored them because we couldn't for the life of us figure out how a human with 60-90 years of useful lifespan could progress farther than an elf with hundreds of years to master their profession.
I also remember it taking us over a year of playing all weekend every week to get a party of characters into the 12-16th level range. We weren't big on the ad-hok xp idea so it was almost entirely combat xp. On the other hand, there was no sliding scale for xp - that 30xp was awarded whether you were level 1 or level 10 when you killed that orc....
The "sweep" rule... lol - remember that one?
On the other hand - the PC's are supposed to be the exception to the rule.