Why concrete levels in Inner Sea Magic?


Lost Omens Products

1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

I just looked at Inner Sea Magic and noticed a rather extensive gallery of NPCs, most with (very high) concrete levels. What prompted the change from the previous policy of not including that in detail unless the NPC received a full statblock? I am frankly a bit disappointed here, since this furthers the "Forgotten Realms" feeling that anything worth doing should probably be done by an epic NPC.

I for one would much prefer a reversion of that (new?) decision and put classes of NPCs in their description, but no concrete levels.

Dark Archive

Seekers of Secrets had levels. And shouldn't be this in the Campaign Setting section?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

TerraNova wrote:

I just looked at Inner Sea Magic and noticed a rather extensive gallery of NPCs, most with (very high) concrete levels. What prompted the change from the previous policy of not including that in detail unless the NPC received a full statblock? I am frankly a bit disappointed here, since this furthers the "Forgotten Realms" feeling that anything worth doing should probably be done by an epic NPC.

I for one would much prefer a reversion of that (new?) decision and put classes of NPCs in their description, but no concrete levels.

Because, levels or not, those NPCs exist in Golarion. And because Golarion assumes a 1st through 20th level spread (since that's what Pathifnder gives us). And because we want our world's NPCs to feel more like actual characters in the world, not just names.

Furthermore, the levels we've given the NPCs aren't all that new—many of them already had their classes and levels listed in other books. Putting them all here in one spot is a nice way to consolidate them.

And on top of that, the majority of those NPCs are either "bad guys" who won't be swooping in to solve the PCs' problems or aren't active NPCs because they're dead or missing.

Those levels are the ones we've pretty much been running with internally all along, and we have managed to avoid having the "Forgotten Realms" syndrome so far. Letting people outside of the Paizo Offices know what those NPCs levels are shouldn't change much at all.

And FINALLY... don't forget to note the paragraph near the start of that whole section that pretty much says, "Don't like the levels we assigned these NPCs? Feel free to change them in your game!"

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Seekers of secrets had levels, true - but that is quite a long time ago, and I thought the model had been abandoned (without a hint of regret, I might add).

Good point about the section, though. Maybe Paizo staff will move it if they ever peek into this thread.

Liberty's Edge

I can’t recall which other campaign setting books did or didn’t have levels, but Rule of Fear, the one I am reading currently, does have classes and levels listed for named NPCs.

I’m all in favour of this, as I generally prefer to play ‘by canon’ and knowing what levels the Paizo designers had in mind for various NPCs is quite helpful.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

TerraNova wrote:

Seekers of secrets had levels, true - but that is quite a long time ago, and I thought the model had been abandoned (without a hint of regret, I might add).

Good point about the section, though. Maybe Paizo staff will move it if they ever peek into this thread.

Nope; we've been putting levels in Pathifnder and several other products for quite a while.

But since we're already telling you pretty much everything else about Golarion, why WOULDN'T we tell you key NPC levels?

The policy of "not showing a character's level" earlier on was mostly due to 2 things:

1) We were still settling into Golarion and getting a feel for the world.

2) We had not yet published all of the base classes we wanted. We've known we wanted witches and oracles and alchemists and magi so on for a long time, but until we finally got all those base classes out, we didn't want to nail down class levels. Now that we've got all the base classes we need to name those levels, though... no reason to keep holding back.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

James Jacobs wrote:

And on top of that, the majority of those NPCs are either "bad guys" who won't be swooping in to solve the PCs' problems or aren't active NPCs because they're dead or missing.

Those levels are the ones we've pretty much been running with internally all along, and we have managed to avoid having the "Forgotten Realms" syndrome so far. Letting people outside of the Paizo Offices know what those NPCs levels are shouldn't change much at all.

I'll give you that the "Where's Elminster" moments have been few and far between so far (in fact, usually there is at most the "reverse Elminster" on why the Bad Guys do not organize more efficiently, and bring their big guns out before their plans are pretty much ruined anyway).

It just seems like a somewhat arbitrary limiting of further possibilities. You now set in stone that Artokus Kirran is an "epic" Alchemist, and that alone removes plots that involve him being (e.g) a prisoner in his own fortress, forced to produce the elixir despite thinking better of it.

James Jacobs wrote:
And FINALLY... don't forget to note the paragraph near the start of that whole section that pretty much says, "Don't like the levels we assigned these NPCs? Feel free to change them in your game!"

Well, I may be burned quite badly here, but as soon as something even "disclaimered official" has been printed, it generally becomes impossible to deviate from it one inch with a certain kind of player. Seems like a pretty weak argument in writing, I know - but it is a pain.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Mothman wrote:

I can’t recall which other campaign setting books did or didn’t have levels, but Rule of Fear, the one I am reading currently, does have classes and levels listed for named NPCs.

I’m all in favour of this, as I generally prefer to play ‘by canon’ and knowing what levels the Paizo designers had in mind for various NPCs is quite helpful.

I don't have a copy of the book handy, but also, a LOT of those NPCs are characters who have showed up in adventures or other locations where their stats are presented. Or in the case of things like gods and runelords, have stats that we already know are beyond 20th level.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

TerraNova wrote:
It just seems like a somewhat arbitrary limiting of further possibilities. You now set in stone that Artokus Kirran is an "epic" Alchemist, and that alone removes plots that involve him being (e.g) a prisoner in his own fortress, forced to produce the elixir despite thinking better of it.

Actually, it doesn't "remove" plots at all; we've known, internally at least, that Artokus is one of the, if not THE, most powerful alchemists in the region. He beat death, after all. That's pretty huge. Whether or not we printed his level wouldn't have changed the fact that we already knew what kind of plots we wanted to use with him and what kind were just plain inappropriate.

TerraNova wrote:
Well, I may be burned quite badly here, but as soon as something even "disclaimered official" has been printed, it generally becomes impossible to deviate from it one inch with a certain kind of player. Seems like a pretty weak argument in writing, I know - but it is a pain.

That type of player would be annoying with or without our help, I suspect...


TerraNova wrote:
Well, I may be burned quite badly here, but as soon as something even "disclaimered official" has been printed, it generally becomes impossible to deviate from it one inch with a certain kind of player. Seems like a pretty weak argument in writing, I know - but it is a pain.

There are instances of the same NPC being stated out at different levels in different adventures. How would this player who can't handle the change from something published deal what is obviously a paradoxical time shift?

The Exchange

Since the NPC stats are things that a character wouldn't really be aware of, even though a player might, it doesn't really matter what they present. Use the NPC as you see fit for your campaign.

Yes, official stats will lock it in for certain players, but if they let that get in the road of "in game" experience, then they are presenting a bigger issue at the table with their metagaming.

I think providing the stats satisfies a whole slew of people who enjoy knowing that type of thing. The disclaimer passage they included satisfies the DM's like me, who take those things as "more of a set of guides than a rule".

As for the Elminster Effect, oft times plots are seemingly trivial at first, and it's not until the PC's get involved at very high levels that the big guys in the world may become aware. They are not omnipotent after all (except the gods of course, those guys are in the know). Golarion is a big place, and many of these folk have their own ting going on that may take all their time so that the plots the PC's get involved in just aren't coming in to their sphere of influence.

That's how i reconcile this type of thing in my campaigns at least TN, if it helps you any bud.

Cheers

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Sean Mahoney wrote:
TerraNova wrote:
Well, I may be burned quite badly here, but as soon as something even "disclaimered official" has been printed, it generally becomes impossible to deviate from it one inch with a certain kind of player. Seems like a pretty weak argument in writing, I know - but it is a pain.
There are instances of the same NPC being stated out at different levels in different adventures. How would this player who can't handle the change from something published deal what is obviously a paradoxical time shift?

We actually cover that in the book as well. There are indeed some NPCs listed in Inner Sea Magic that also appear in Adventure Paths. The reason you give those players is this:

"You started this Adventure Path at 1st level. At that point, Foozle was a 10th level wizard, as spelled out in that book. But by the time you fight Foozle at the end of the Adventure Path, you've had time to become 15th level–in that time, Foozle himself had PLENTY of time to become 20th level."

In other words: the levels listed in Inner Sea World Guide are the levels those NPCs are at when you start your first campaign in Golarion. How quickly the NPCs progress depends on you, or depends on the needs of whatever adventure you might run. (Unless, of course, you as the GM decide to lower an NPC's level... but even if you do, we give you that baseline so you can adjust the level knowingly.)

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Wrath wrote:

Since the NPC stats are things that a character wouldn't really be aware of, even though a player might, it doesn't really matter what they present. Use the NPC as you see fit for your campaign.

Yes, official stats will lock it in for certain players, but if they let that get in the road of "in game" experience, then they are presenting a bigger issue at the table with their metagaming.

I think providing the stats satisfies a whole slew of people who enjoy knowing that type of thing. The disclaimer passage they included satisfies the DM's like me, who take those things as "more of a set of guides than a rule".

As for the Elminster Effect, oft times plots are seemingly trivial at first, and it's not until the PC's get involved at very high levels that the big guys in the world may become aware. They are not omnipotent after all (except the gods of course, those guys are in the know). Golarion is a big place, and many of these folk have their own ting going on that may take all their time so that the plots the PC's get involved in just aren't coming in to their sphere of influence.

That's how i reconcile this type of thing in my campaigns at least TN, if it helps you any bud.

Cheers

I suppose this is where I point out that we revealed the NPC levels in a Pathfinder Campaign Setting book and not a Player Companion book, yeah? We did that on purpose so a GM who doesn't want to run with those numbers and doesn't let his players read non-player-friendly books (there are a fair number of campaign "spoilers" in Inner Sea Magic) doesn't have to worry about messing with player expectations.

The Exchange

Fully understood James.

The players in my face to face games do read the world stuff as well though, since they like to use information like that as inspiration for charcter backgrounds and such. They know that its player knowledge though, and not character knowledge. We've gotten pretty good at keeping those things separate in our gaming now.

My two PbP's have players I don't even know in real life however, so this is where my principal comes in to play. I suspect there'll come a time where I'm going to have to call a player on using metagame knowledge, but doubt it'll be for NPC stats. I think they've all worked out by this stage that I change NPC's in your published games all the time to better suit the story I've got going or the character make up in the game. None of them have gotten upset by it yet that I've seen, but again I'm sure it won't take long until someone at least asks.

I've no qualms about you guys providing stats or levels, but I can see where TN is coming from as well. I think you covered your bases well enough though.

Cheers

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

James Jacobs wrote:
I suppose this is where I point out that we revealed the NPC levels in a Pathfinder Campaign Setting book and not a Player Companion book, yeah? We did that on purpose so a GM who doesn't want to run with those numbers and doesn't let his players read non-player-friendly books (there are a fair number of campaign "spoilers" in Inner Sea Magic) doesn't have to worry about messing with player expectations.

Ummm ... Does that actually work?

How is it possible to believe that the wall of GM/Player knowledge could (or even should) be so absolute?

Often (at least in my own 30+ year experience in gaming) the players in one GMs campaign are GMs of their own campaigns - which the original GM acting as a player in the other GM's games.

Liberty's Edge

Out of interest, what sort of, and how many, NPCs are in the 8 to 14 level range? E.g. are there any level 10 fighter tavern owners?

Are there many NPCs level 15+?

I am used to Eberron where higher level characters are fairly rare, and I believe the only 20th level NPC named in the setting guide is the Great Druid Oalian, who is an awakened great pine tree and so simply cannot go gallavanting around the world solving issues.


DigitalMage wrote:

Out of interest, what sort of, and how many, NPCs are in the 8 to 14 level range? E.g. are there any level 10 fighter tavern owners?

Are there many NPCs level 15+?

I am interested in the answers to these questions as well, but I also thought of a funny little anecdote related to the tavern owner question.

I know it is generally referred to as "Forgotten Realms Syndrome" when there are a lot of high-level NPCs in a setting that are just "around" and don't have a strong, setting established, reason why they aren't performing all of the heroics...

But I call it "Greyhawk Syndrome" because that is where you see silly stuff like a tavern in a major city owned by a level 24 fighter who is still an active adventurer (named Robilar, you may have heard of him), that is run by a level 9 fighter that once accompanied Robilar on an adventure or two... and this city basically has a level 30 wizard (whose name was removed from spells such as magnificent mansion to prevent IP infringement issues) hanging out being a sort of mayor.

...at least that's how it worked out in 3.5...

I really miss the days when Drizzt Do'Urden's official write up said "10th level Elven Ranger." ...of course, even then Elminster was way out of line at 26th level. (1989, for those that didn't know - found in FR7 Hall of Heroes)

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

In Golarion, tavern owners are expert/commoners. There's a great section on page 253 of the Inner Sea Guide that tackes the problem. Bascially, "mundane" NPCs are level 1-5, "exceptional" NPCs (leaders, heroes, notables, sages) are level 6-10, "powerful", unique and important NPCs are level 11-15, while the 16+ territory is "legendeary", with likes of Runelords, nation leaders and supervillains.

Liberty's Edge

Gorbacz wrote:
In Golarion, tavern owners are expert/commoners. There's a great section on page 253 of the Inner Sea Guide that tackes the problem. Bascially, "mundane" NPCs are level 1-5, "exceptional" NPCs (leaders, heroes, notables, sages) are level 6-10, "powerful", unique and important NPCs are level 11-15, while the 16+ territory is "legendeary", with likes of Runelords, nation leaders and supervillains.

That spread sounds about what I like, so does the Inner Sea Magic book change that a little (or a lot)?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thenobledrake wrote:


But I call it "Greyhawk Syndrome" because that is where you see silly stuff like a tavern in a major city owned by a level 24 fighter who is still an active adventurer (named Robilar, you may have heard of him), that is run by a level 9 fighter that once accompanied Robilar on an adventure or two... and this city basically has a level 30 wizard (whose name was removed from spells such as magnificent mansion to prevent IP infringement issues) hanging out being a sort of mayor.

Actually I'm famillar with Robilar and Rary and they had moved on to much bigger things. Rary had turned on the Circle of Eight killing at least two or three of them. (Tenser, Otiluke, and Bigby) at the signing of the accords which ended the Greyhawk Wars. He then set up his own private empire in the Bright Desert with Robilar as general of his armies.

Shadow Lodge

From what I heard, ISM just gives faces to some of those exceptional and legendary folks.

For instance, the alchemist mentioned had been in the setting for a while now, but we knew hardly anything about the until this book. Sure, everyone knows that there's a famous fortress housing an even more famous alchemist in the mountains bordering the Mwangi Expanse, but his inner workings were never revealed before.


James Jacobs wrote:
And FINALLY... don't forget to note the paragraph near the start of that whole section that pretty much says, "Don't like the levels we assigned these NPCs? Feel free to change them in your game!"
TerraNova wrote:
Well, I may be burned quite badly here, but as soon as something even "disclaimered official" has been printed, it generally becomes impossible to deviate from it one inch with a certain kind of player. Seems like a pretty weak argument in writing, I know - but it is a pain.

With this kind of player, changing the statblock goes from optional to mandatory. If you change everything and let them know that they can never learn about NPCs by reading up on them surreptitiously, you solve that problem. Interestingly, this makes a bunch of work for you, but that's basically what you were asking for anyway.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
DigitalMage wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
In Golarion, tavern owners are expert/commoners. There's a great section on page 253 of the Inner Sea Guide that tackes the problem. Bascially, "mundane" NPCs are level 1-5, "exceptional" NPCs (leaders, heroes, notables, sages) are level 6-10, "powerful", unique and important NPCs are level 11-15, while the 16+ territory is "legendeary", with likes of Runelords, nation leaders and supervillains.
That spread sounds about what I like, so does the Inner Sea Magic book change that a little (or a lot)?

The characters mentioned in ISM are all named mages of reasonable power, so spread accross the higher levels with somer as a generic 20+ waiting on what the mythic rules may turn out to be.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Evil Lincoln wrote:

With this kind of player, changing the statblock goes from optional to mandatory. If you change everything and let them know that they can never learn about NPCs by reading up on them surreptitiously, you solve that problem. Interestingly, this makes a bunch of work for you, but that's basically what you were asking for anyway.

Its a bunch of work I can do in advance- not "work" I need to do at the table with a bunch of other players (rightfully) getting annoyed at the situation.

Unfortunately "Miss Canon" is a dear friend otherwise, and I can't just uninvite her - but even besides that one (peripherial) benefit to me, I would rather not have these specifics nailed down too tightly. :)


TerraNova wrote:

Its a bunch of work I can do in advance- not "work" I need to do at the table with a bunch of other players (rightfully) getting annoyed at the situation.

Unfortunately "Miss Canon" is a dear friend otherwise, and I can't just uninvite her - but even besides that one (peripherial) benefit to me, I would rather not have these specifics nailed down too tightly. :)

I acknowledge your concerns (and you're a handsome devil, BTW) but repeat after me: "I've re-spec'd (the NPC) and he's leveled since the campaign started. To learn what's changed, you'll have to do some reconnaissance." This statement has always worked for me.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Wrath wrote:

Fully understood James.

The players in my face to face games do read the world stuff as well though, since they like to use information like that as inspiration for charcter backgrounds and such. They know that its player knowledge though, and not character knowledge. We've gotten pretty good at keeping those things separate in our gaming now.

My two PbP's have players I don't even know in real life however, so this is where my principal comes in to play. I suspect there'll come a time where I'm going to have to call a player on using metagame knowledge, but doubt it'll be for NPC stats. I think they've all worked out by this stage that I change NPC's in your published games all the time to better suit the story I've got going or the character make up in the game. None of them have gotten upset by it yet that I've seen, but again I'm sure it won't take long until someone at least asks.

I've no qualms about you guys providing stats or levels, but I can see where TN is coming from as well. I think you covered your bases well enough though.

Cheers

Having players who can keep player knowledge and character knowledge seperate is nice. I'd almost say it's a requirement for a healthy game, in fact.

And I do understand where folks are coming from also... but I have to decide on whether or not I want to hide information from everyone who plays in Golarion or from no one. Since folks buy Golarion books BECAUSE they want to know more about it, I tend to err on the side of giving those people what they want and what they pay for—information.

What I will do though, is to keep the more spoilery bits of world info out of the actual Player Companion books. The rest of what we publish, though? Open territory for spoilers. It's the way it is.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lord Fyre wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
I suppose this is where I point out that we revealed the NPC levels in a Pathfinder Campaign Setting book and not a Player Companion book, yeah? We did that on purpose so a GM who doesn't want to run with those numbers and doesn't let his players read non-player-friendly books (there are a fair number of campaign "spoilers" in Inner Sea Magic) doesn't have to worry about messing with player expectations.

Ummm ... Does that actually work?

How is it possible to believe that the wall of GM/Player knowledge could (or even should) be so absolute?

Often (at least in my own 30+ year experience in gaming) the players in one GMs campaign are GMs of their own campaigns - which the original GM acting as a player in the other GM's games.

If you have a GM who's super controlling about what players do and don't read, or if you have a player that is specifically trying to avoid spoilers, yes, it can work.

But sometimes letting a player know more than his character knows is good for the game.

I'm not going to hide information from GMs who want and need that information just because of the worry that some player out there is going to learn information his character doesn't know. If that player then uses that information to "cheat" and/or can't handle the separation between player knowledge and character knowledge, maybe that player needs to switch over to a different hobby.

These are campaign setting books first and foremost. While there's information for players in there, that information is as much or MORE important for GMs who want to run games set in the world. I'm not going to cripple the GM content just to keep players in the dark. We already have a line of books that does that.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I thought I published this list here on the website before, but here's a breakdown of how many NPCs there are listed in Inner Sea Magic with class levels.

Spoiler:

1st to 5th level NPCs: 1
6th to 10th level NPCs: 5
11th to 15th level NPCs: 22
16th to 20th level NPCs: 5
Above 20th level/deity: 17

Most of them are bad guys. About half of the "above 20th level ones" are inactive, either because they're dead, missing, or hibernating. Also, the list itself is there to portray the most important and most significant spellcasters of the Inner Sea region, so naturally it'll skew high. Hard to be come important and significant if you're lower level.

One of the many reasons we nailed down classes and levels, by the way, was so going forward we can introduce "named" spells into Golarion. Things that are directly attributed to our NPCs, in the same way D&D had spells like "Otiluke's Freezing Sphere" or "Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion."

If we don't know the levels and classes of our spellcaster NPCs, we can't do that. And I'd rather share that information with the world than hide it and only show it to authors we pay to design spells for Golarion.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

thenobledrake wrote:

But I call it "Greyhawk Syndrome" because that is where you see silly stuff like a tavern in a major city owned by a level 24 fighter who is still an active adventurer (named Robilar, you may have heard of him), that is run by a level 9 fighter that once accompanied Robilar on an adventure or two... and this city basically has a level 30 wizard (whose name was removed from spells such as magnificent mansion to prevent IP infringement issues) hanging out being a sort of mayor.

...at least that's how it worked out in 3.5...

If you see us start to put 24th level fighters in charge of a tavern, let me know.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Enlight_Bystand wrote:
The characters mentioned in ISM are all named mages of reasonable power, so spread accross the higher levels with somer as a generic 20+ waiting on what the mythic rules may turn out to be.

Just stepping in to be pedantic a bit.

They're all named "spellcasters." The only spellcasting class not represented in the list are summoners, and that's just because there's not a big role for summoner NPCs in the Inner Sea region.

Inner Sea Magic is about arcane AND divine magic.


James Jacobs wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:

But I call it "Greyhawk Syndrome" because that is where you see silly stuff like a tavern in a major city owned by a level 24 fighter who is still an active adventurer (named Robilar, you may have heard of him), that is run by a level 9 fighter that once accompanied Robilar on an adventure or two... and this city basically has a level 30 wizard (whose name was removed from spells such as magnificent mansion to prevent IP infringement issues) hanging out being a sort of mayor.

...at least that's how it worked out in 3.5...

If you see us start to put 24th level fighters in charge of a tavern, let me know.

I most certainly will, though I don't expect the need should ever arise.

To clarify the situation in Greyhawk (according to the last 3.5 module I ran set there): Robilar (the 24th level fighter) isn't actually in charge of the tavern - he just owns it. He has given all other responsibilities to his old pal, who happens to be a 9th level fighter.

...and if I start seeing 9th level Fighters running taverns in Golarion, I'll be sure to mention the obvious typo on their level/class.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

thenobledrake wrote:

I most certainly will, though I don't expect the need should ever arise.

To clarify the situation in Greyhawk (according to the last 3.5 module I ran set there): Robilar (the 24th level fighter) isn't actually in charge of the tavern - he just owns it. He has given all other responsibilities to his old pal, who happens to be a 9th level fighter.

...and if I start seeing 9th level Fighters running taverns in Golarion, I'll be sure to mention the obvious typo on their level/class.

I actually don't think it's unusual for a 9th level character to run a tavern. As summarized on page 253 of the Inner Sea World Guide, 6th to 10th level characters are "exceptional" and make up a significant number of a nation's movers and shakers. Why couldn't that include a well-known tavern owner? In fact, that's more or less the EXACT place I'd put an important (probably retired) adventurer as a tavern owner in a big city.


TerraNova wrote:
I am frankly a bit disappointed here, since this furthers the "Forgotten Realms" feeling that anything worth doing should probably be done by an epic NPC.

Wasn't even true in FR. But my fellow players and I consider the idea of the above a very good thing.

Quote:
Seems like a pretty weak argument in writing, I know

Because it is.

Aside:
The 14th level player characters in our game run an inn/tavern. They're working their way to becoming merchant nobles.


James Jacobs wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:

I most certainly will, though I don't expect the need should ever arise.

To clarify the situation in Greyhawk (according to the last 3.5 module I ran set there): Robilar (the 24th level fighter) isn't actually in charge of the tavern - he just owns it. He has given all other responsibilities to his old pal, who happens to be a 9th level fighter.

...and if I start seeing 9th level Fighters running taverns in Golarion, I'll be sure to mention the obvious typo on their level/class.

I actually don't think it's unusual for a 9th level character to run a tavern. As summarized on page 253 of the Inner Sea World Guide, 6th to 10th level characters are "exceptional" and make up a significant number of a nation's movers and shakers. Why couldn't that include a well-known tavern owner? In fact, that's more or less the EXACT place I'd put an important (probably retired) adventurer as a tavern owner in a big city.

I can see a retired PC classed character running a tavern, if the running of that tavern made him at least a prominent and influential figure within a large city...

unfortunately, the case of the NPC I mention is that he is presented as basically just a tavern owner that happens to be successful - A number of other Inns are mentioned in the same module, and more than half are more prestigious than the place this guy runs... the only draw to actually stay at his Tavern & Inn is that you get a big discount for saving his life in the opening scene of the module... even though the situation he needs saved from is amazingly implausible considering that he is higher level than the party at the time, is equipped with a powerful magic sword, and the encounter that takes him down is one that the PCs will treat as a cakewalk while still being lower level.

I'm all for story, and knowing what adventurers do when they retire - I only have a problem with slapping "fighter 9" on a character that is obviously no more potent (story-wise) than the "expert 3" running the bar 3 blocks down the street.


thenobledrake wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:

I most certainly will, though I don't expect the need should ever arise.

To clarify the situation in Greyhawk (according to the last 3.5 module I ran set there): Robilar (the 24th level fighter) isn't actually in charge of the tavern - he just owns it. He has given all other responsibilities to his old pal, who happens to be a 9th level fighter.

...and if I start seeing 9th level Fighters running taverns in Golarion, I'll be sure to mention the obvious typo on their level/class.

I actually don't think it's unusual for a 9th level character to run a tavern. As summarized on page 253 of the Inner Sea World Guide, 6th to 10th level characters are "exceptional" and make up a significant number of a nation's movers and shakers. Why couldn't that include a well-known tavern owner? In fact, that's more or less the EXACT place I'd put an important (probably retired) adventurer as a tavern owner in a big city.

I can see a retired PC classed character running a tavern, if the running of that tavern made him at least a prominent and influential figure within a large city...

unfortunately, the case of the NPC I mention is that he is presented as basically just a tavern owner that happens to be successful - A number of other Inns are mentioned in the same module, and more than half are more prestigious than the place this guy runs... the only draw to actually stay at his Tavern & Inn is that you get a big discount for saving his life in the opening scene of the module... even though the situation he needs saved from is amazingly implausible considering that he is higher level than the party at the time, is equipped with a powerful magic sword, and the encounter that takes him down is one that the PCs will treat as a cakewalk while still being lower level.

I'm all for story, and knowing what adventurers do when they retire - I only have a problem with slapping "fighter 9" on a character that is obviously no more potent (story-wise) than the "expert...

Free suggestion, you clearly don't understand jack about the history of the Greyhawk setting, how it came to be, and where MANY of the important NPC's came from. Essentially they came from the home campaigns of Gary Gygax and a few others. You might want to spend some time reading - it's mostly online by now.

Quij, the orc F9 in question, is a henchman of Robilar's. Robilar was a PC in Gary's original campaign and became very high level. Quij was along for the ride, surviving, among other things, the release of the demi-god Iuz from his prison under the remains of Zagyg's castle...Folk's who survive that kind of thing get experience and levels. At the time, there were no NPC classes, so a 1/2 orc goon with a sword picked up some fighter levels...

As to why he doesn't own the best tavern in town - 1) he's an orc, pretending to be a 1/2 orc, in a city where the locals don't like orcs. 2) He's not a commercial genius (low cha) - he's a fighter with limited skills and he's not all that bright (low int)...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have never understood the whole, "Why isn't <insert high lvl npc here> handling this/everything?!" issue. It's a fairly silly objection on its face.


I don't play in Golarian, so I don't have a horse in this race, except that I don't particularly care to read attacks pointed at a poster who posts about something he doesn't like.

pad300, the history of FR has got jack to do with a poster's desire not to run in a campaign where his character isn't special/notable unless at really high level. The fact is that some tables like to play low class level (less to keep track of) while still keeping the PCs as ubermen. FR doesn't allow that. The OP just realized that the default world, without GM intervention, doesn't allow it either (and once a GM goes off RAW, there's some concern that he's in uncharted territory - comfort in doing that has everything to do with degree of experience of the human beings sitting at the table).

The OP is understandably upset.

The core issue is the decision by Paizo to stick to one and only one published setting. This was a great idea when Paizo was still trying to get started. But, Pathfinder is at the top of the industry now. A few extra options (not a whole lot) wrt published settings would be a good thing at this point.

Alternatively, a community developed and maintained world (like Dark Sun now is) with unofficial support by Paizo might be something to look into.

Dark Archive

TerraNova wrote:
It just seems like a somewhat arbitrary limiting of further possibilities. You now set in stone that Artokus Kirran is an "epic" Alchemist, and that alone removes plots that involve him being (e.g) a prisoner in his own fortress, forced to produce the elixir despite thinking better of it.

It seems to me that Artokus is a bad example here.

Making sun orchid elixir must be hard. No one else has ever been able to duplicate Artokus's work, even though the financial rewards for doing so would be immense. In Pathfinder terms, Artokus must surely be a high level alchemist.

Artokus is 3,000 years old and has been practising alchemy all his life. There are no rules for how NPCs gain XP, but I'd expect him to have picked up at least a few more alchemist levels in all that time.

However, you can still have Artokus as a prisoner if you really want to. He's been taking the elixir for 3,000 years. As far as I can tell, nobody else has ever taken it for anything like that length of time. Such an extended period of use could have had crippling side effects; perhaps he has suffered brain damage and has gradually forgotten how to do anything other than make more elixir.


pad300 wrote:
Free suggestion, you clearly don't understand jack about the history of the Greyhawk setting, how it came to be, and where MANY of the important NPC's came from. Essentially they came from the home campaigns of Gary Gygax and a few others. You might want to spend some time reading - it's mostly online by now.

I don't appreciate your insulting insinuation that I haven't already done that reading, especially when I am already bringing up details one would find in that reading.

I don't care if an NPC is one of the designers' characters - I care that the designer includes the character at a point in their evolution that is actively harmful to the feel of the setting: that they haven't taken the character as it existed in their home campaign and adapted it to serve a campaign purpsoe.

pad300 wrote:
Quij, the orc F9 in question...

If it were Quij I were talking about, then I would agree there are reasons he isn't a big success.

But no, I refer to Ricard Damaris - a human. Quij is only mentioned in the most recent incarnation of Greyhawk (that I know of) in that the house special at the Inn Robilar owns and Ricard runs is "Quij's Plate."

Things may have been different in a previous incarnation (such as back when Drizzt was a 10th level ranger instead of being over twice that level), but in Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk, high-level former adventurers occupy the places that would normally be filled with low-level NPCs unheard of outside of the adventure itself.

Not to mention that Mordenkainen is hanging around town at 30th level, and the adventure gives the reason why he is unable to be helpful in any direct way - despite that an evil god and/or and army of his followers might attack the city at any moment - is that he promised Zagyg he would never set foot in his mortal home again.

My complaint is not that Mordenkainen, Rary, Tenser, Robilar, and all the other characters from Gary's home campaigns get to be in the setting - it's that they all retain the levels they earned while PCs, and do not fill positions in the setting befitting those levels.

An example of what I would want: I once played a Wizard character from 1st to 14th level in a 4 year long AD&D campaign - later, I used this character as an NPC meant to be helpful to the party encountering him during the adventure while not being capable of just taking on the adventure by himself... so I made him a 6th level NPC to compare to the 7th level PCs, instead of making up some thin excuse as to why he wouldn't be doing everything in his power to help out. I just wish that more designers had the same idea, like it seems that the Paizo crew do.


thenobledrake wrote:
instead of making up some thin excuse as to why he wouldn't be doing everything in his power to help out

NOTE that Mordenkainan's desire not to go back on a promise to Zagyg isn't a thin excuse. Zagyg is like Joker (from the Batman comics) in that, if you are lucky to escape your first encounter with him, you sure don't want to risk a second.

Other than that, I agree with everything you posted. BUT keep in mind that it's to Paizo's best interests to promote characters of all levels.

Grand Lodge

I like that the levels have returned, much more inspiring than just reading names.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

James Jacobs wrote:

I thought I published this list here on the website before, but here's a breakdown of how many NPCs there are listed in Inner Sea Magic with class levels.

** spoiler omitted **

One of the many reasons we nailed down classes and levels, by the way, was so going forward we can introduce "named" spells into Golarion. Things that are directly attributed to our NPCs, in the same way D&D had spells like "Otiluke's Freezing Sphere" or "Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion."

If we don't know the levels and classes of our spellcaster NPCs, we can't do that. And I'd rather share that information with the world than hide it and only show it to authors we pay to design spells for Golarion.

Hmmm ... is this a prelude to introducing the much requested EPIC level rules? :)


Mar'c wrote:
I like that the levels have returned, much more inspiring than just reading names.

I liked the levels listed for the rulers of various countries in the Greyhawk boxed set, FWIW. So I don't have a problem with saying so-and-so is an 8th level wizard.

I would probably be less interested in having 9th level taven-keepers being "not unusual" as James suggests, however.


James Jacobs wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:

I most certainly will, though I don't expect the need should ever arise.

To clarify the situation in Greyhawk (according to the last 3.5 module I ran set there): Robilar (the 24th level fighter) isn't actually in charge of the tavern - he just owns it. He has given all other responsibilities to his old pal, who happens to be a 9th level fighter.

...and if I start seeing 9th level Fighters running taverns in Golarion, I'll be sure to mention the obvious typo on their level/class.

I actually don't think it's unusual for a 9th level character to run a tavern. As summarized on page 253 of the Inner Sea World Guide, 6th to 10th level characters are "exceptional" and make up a significant number of a nation's movers and shakers. Why couldn't that include a well-known tavern owner? In fact, that's more or less the EXACT place I'd put an important (probably retired) adventurer as a tavern owner in a big city.

Plus, we have the whole Name of the Wind setup. (mild spoiler follows) Which I like, and is a good model for high-level tavern owners. Why wouldn't a high-level character occasionally want to just retire and stay out of trouble?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mynameisjake wrote:
I have never understood the whole, "Why isn't <insert high lvl npc here> handling this/everything?!" issue. It's a fairly silly objection on its face.

Totally agree. The world is an enormous place and one individual can only be aware of so many things happening at once. Even with teleport and divination spells at the ready, evil organisations should be excelling at creating red herrings and multiple fronts that can ensure that they don't run the risk of having one target that a character wielding brute power can take out.

It takes a lot of time to find out when and where the showdown/dark ritual/seizure of the macguffin occurs and often it is just too much effort, logistically and in consideration of time, for a number of high level PCs to be able to make it to the party unless they've been following 'the case' 100% since the beginning. Which they might not be able to do if they're meant to be lobbying world leaders about greater threats instead.

If you were a high level wizard on Earth right now, would you be:
a. Hunting for Gaddafi?
b. Attending to the enormous Ethiopian famine?
c. Fighting Taliban?
d. Investigating potential corruption in the leaders of your home nation?
e. Closing the Iranian nuclear enrichment program?
f. Rescuing political prisoners in non-democratic countries?
g. Protecting your family?
h. Spending your recently won riches in one of the great cities of the world?
i. Pursuing any number of personal interests?

There's so much happening at any given moment and the idea that one mortal can be aware of all this stuff, just because they have the most damage dice and spell options, isn't a strong one.

Now if you had enough legendary heroes that shared very similar priorities and motivations, with access to strong divination magic, this could be an issue, but otherwise it's not too concerning.

Sovereign Court

LilithsThrall wrote:
The core issue is the decision by Paizo to stick to one and only one published setting. This was a great idea when Paizo was still trying to get started. But, Pathfinder is at the top of the industry now. A few extra options (not a whole lot) wrt published settings would be a good thing at this point.

It would be a bad idea.

TSR

Dark Archive

GeraintElberion wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
The core issue is the decision by Paizo to stick to one and only one published setting. This was a great idea when Paizo was still trying to get started. But, Pathfinder is at the top of the industry now. A few extra options (not a whole lot) wrt published settings would be a good thing at this point.

It would be a bad idea.

TSR

There were lots of contributing factors to the collapse of TSR.

"A few extra options", as suggested above, wouldn't have brought down TSR. And Paizo could stop any time they wanted ....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KestlerGunner wrote:
Mynameisjake wrote:
I have never understood the whole, "Why isn't <insert high lvl npc here> handling this/everything?!" issue. It's a fairly silly objection on its face.
Totally agree. The world is an enormous place and one individual can only be aware of so many things happening at once. Even with teleport and divination spells at the ready, evil organisations should be excelling at creating red herrings and multiple fronts that can ensure that they don't run the risk of having one target that a character wielding brute power can take out.

Actually, the very idea is ludicrous, because it's selective realism. People don't like high-level characters, but instead of saying "I want to be the mostest powerfullest character in the campaign", they try to mask it by a half-baked thought:

"Why aren't those high level heroes solving everything." They thought that far and then immediately stopped thinking, because if they had thought it through, they'd have found all the other problems that lie that way:

  • "Why won't the characters, once they have reached high level and beaten this BBEG, defeat every other evil?" If high-level characters immediately destroy any possibility for other adventurers to ever find jobs, there can only ever be one set of heroes per world (you could say "one per generation", but once you get to high levels, old age ceases to be a problem). Basically, you either have to stop playing forever once you finished a campaign, or you always have to do the Final Fantasy thing, i.e. play a campaign setting for one world and then never return to it, completely re-inventing the wheel each time. And while that's an interesting thing, too, persistent worlds are very popular for a reason.

  • "If the heroes, once they get high-level, will nip evil in the bud whenever it rears its head, why hasn't evil done the same before the heroes ever got high-level?" In many cases, those BBEGs you face at the very last encounter in the very last session in the very last adventure in the campaign doesn't really start up 1st-level alongside the heroes, and then they race to level 20 or something. No, in a lot of cases, the BBEG is level 20 (or whatever level he is when they face him) before any pen or pencil hits a character sheet.

    If high-level heroes compulsively seek out the opposition right away, why won't do the same? Why isn't the evil archmage sitting in front of his crystal ball finding out where guys meet up in a bar and then go beat up some skeletons, and just port over and powerword kill them before they get to level 2? Or are only good-aligned characters allowed to do something like that?

    No, in a world that thinks things through, you could only have cliché villains who never heard of the Evil Overlord List and could never think of any of that stuff. But that doesn't really fit the world itself, where people think things through, so either we suspend our disbelief a bit, or we have a situation that lets Midnight look like Utopia, with near-omniscient, near-omnipotent villains killing everyone who isn't a potential evil collaborator.


  • amethal wrote:


    "A few extra options", as suggested above, wouldn't have brought down TSR. And Paizo could stop any time they wanted ....

    And they did. The time they wanted was "before we even started".

    As far as I know, they still aren't exactly bored out of their heads over there. There's certainly not enough free time lying around to do another campaign setting that is anything other than a one-shot book with no support. And even that might be asking for too much.

    RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Note that Mordenkainen is officially, i.e. from Gary's lips, about level 24, not level 30, and he doesn't live in Greyhawk City at all, he's got his own stronghold and supporters. The limit of his involvement with Greyhawk City is that two members of the Circle of Eight lived there.

    They reskinned the LE Robilar as a Mirror/Opposition duplicate, the real Robilar has been trussed up in the same prison that held Iuz. Surely you read the module with the Simulacarum of Iggwilv trying to become 'real', right?

    Rary's NE mindset vanished after he sundered the Scorpion Crown. His 'empire', if not unraveling, is taking on a different tone. Them dem artifacts and stuff, always messing with yer mind.

    Elminster was level 26 from his initial write-up in issue 100 of Dragon Magazine...and he had a slew of powerful 1E psionic abilities, too. While FR has always had too many archmages and not enough archclerics and archfighters and archrogues, the fact that archmages who get uppity tend to wipe one another out in spectacularly destructive methods means they don't tend to interfere with one another. Best to let noobs do that. When they do take one another on, castles fall, powerful leaders die, armies are crushed, etc...all things for sensible folk to avoid.

    And the thing about what high level characters can do. Just take one major city adn all the stuff going on in there, and you think they have time to go messing about all over a country, or a continent? Eesh.

    ===Aelryinth

    1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Lost Omens Campaign Setting / Lost Omens Products / Why concrete levels in Inner Sea Magic? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.