| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PC's should not be playing the NPC classes. However I have been thinking of the farmboy turns hero trope in context of the commoner, and led me to an adventure idea.
Instead of starting all PC's out at 1st level, I would let them start as say 10th level commoners, and as they gain experience they replace their highest commoner level with an adventurer level.
For example Mike the 10th level commoner, achieves 2000 xp. This would normally of course raise his 1st level character to level 2. Instead at 2000 XP he gets his 1st level of Base Class. He chooses fighter and so becomes a level fighter 1/commoner 9. This would continue until all of his levels are replaced through lvl 1-10 (or really 2-11) experience progression, at which time he will advance normally.
In the example above, I would let the players pick an NPC class, and they would start at level 10 (with all ability adjustments and normal advancement feats). As they gain in level they would replace the NPC saves and BAB with the new saves and BAB. For example Mike the commoner would recalculate FRW and BAB with Level 1 fighter bonuses; he would replace any gains made at level 10 commoner with level 1 fighter.
The BAB of a level 10 commoner is +5. f/r/w = 3/3/3 respectively
Upon attaining level one fighter he would now have bonuses of:
Fighter 1/Commoner 9: BAB= +5. f/r/w = 5/3/3 respectively. +1 Bonus feat for fighter.
It would keep the game around CR 8-10 for quite awhile. Essentially your starting at 10th level but actual level advancement is halted while still giving rewards.
Even if the character was a fighter 1/Warrior 9 he would still be more powerful because though his BAB and Save progression does not change he gets fighter bonus feats and powers.
I imagine Golarion NPC's with a mix of NPC/Base Class levels to have achieved levels in this way.
It would not be like Gestalt. If an expert chose to replace a level with Fighter or wizard he would LOSE skill points.
I would give the PC's the choice to start out as any NPC class, maybe offering a bonus feat for taking commoner.
Thoughts on this?
As someone who finds the notion of a world populated predominantly by 1st level NPCs absurd, I find this idea intriguing. There was recently another thread about level limits based on age where I repeated my notion of 'passive XP' for non-adventurers.
I think that premise might be a good fit for what you are proposing here and vice-versa. Basically, determine a correlation between age+intellect and what character level that translates to. Once you have that worked out, I'd say you have the framework needed to make this internally consistent. I used to have this all worked out by race, maybe I need to find my notes on it again...
The biggest issue that I see is one of balance, but since 'monsters' who are built using just NPC classes are considered to be CR-2, that should give you a pretty good rule of thumb to work off of.
EDIT: As nosig points out, this could run into some oddness with skill points, however there is a pretty simple solution for this — use Gestalt or 2nd Edition style advancement. :)
this is kool!
not sure if I would go as high as 10th... for me I would start at maybe 5 or 6.What about the other classes? (Aristo, or Adept or Expert)
and I can see a possible problem with skill points - if you use like Expert who gets 6 a level I think.
It really depends on what level you want to play. You can really keep that CR 3-8 period for awhile starting them at lvl 5 NPC class.
I would allow all of the NPC classes. If a player wanted to play an EXPERT and advance as fighter, he is going to take a skill hit. I imagine a player would only choose expert if he was going for alchemist, rogue, bard, ranger or another high skill class. But if a player wanted to play an expert and become a fighter, I would not have a problem with it.
The players ultimately choose the NPC classes as background. So though a level 5 commoner is suboptimal to a level 5 warrior, by the time the character reaches level 5 fighter(in your preference for instance)there would be no difference.
(example)
John has always been picked on in the village by Giorgio. John is a level 5 commoner, Giorgio is a level 5 warrior. A crisis to the village occurs and the two yungins have to go face it. At first John is not as talented as Giorgio, yet John is all they have. Where Giorgio hones his skills, John proves he had just as much potential by the time they are level 5. Giorgio no longer finds it easy to pick on John. They started with BAB and Saves John: +2 1/1/1 Giorgio: +5 4/1/1 so Giorgio had the clear advantage. Once the crisis is taken care of and they both prove their mettle john turns out just as good as giorgio:
John FTR5 +5 4/1/1 Giorgio FTR 5 +5 4/1/1
John's replacement levels added bonuses plus feats
Giorgio just got Bonus feats
In the end it is a matter of how the player envisions his background.
Yes lvl 5 probably would prove better just for background, but I think this idea would work for keepin a CR longer. Only disadvantage is you have to start at a higher CR.
As someone who finds the notion of a world populated predominantly by 1st level NPCs absurd, I find this idea intriguing. There was recently another thread about level limits based on age where I repeated my notion of 'passive XP' for non-adventurers.
I think that premise might be a good fit for what you are proposing here and vice-versa. Basically, determine a correlation between age+intellect and what character level that translates to. Once you have that worked out, I'd say you have the framework needed to make this internally consistent. I used to have this all worked out by race, maybe I need to find my notes on it again...
The biggest issue that I see is one of balance, but since 'monsters' who are built using just NPC classes are considered to be CR-2, that should give you a pretty good rule of thumb to work off of.
EDIT: As nosig points out, this could run into some oddness with skill points, however there is a pretty simple solution for this — use Gestalt or 2nd Edition style advancement. :)
I thought about using Gestalt for those first levels.
Still I would like to read your ideas about the age+intellect correlation to level.
What do you think is absurd, that people populating the world are NPC classes at all, or that the vast majority is 1st level NPC classes?
My thoughts are that you might be able to find that 20th level commoner somewhere.
(Example)
"Oh that guy? He's BIG john! NOONE messes with him even the royal guards!"
Big John Lvl 20 commoner. Royal guards lvl 8 fighter. Big John might be able to take out a royal guard through years of farming, enduring weather, and Momma and Wifey's good stew. Never seen an orc, but boy can he smash heads.
And he grows one hell of a pumpkin.
I think this could work though...
Esp. if it was mostly Commoner and maybe one or two levels of the other NPC classes. So you would have a party make up of
1) second son of the local Duke be a Aristo/Com 1/4
2) young wise woman Adapt/Com 1/4
3) Jurneyman blacksmith Expert/Com 1/4
4) Tavern Bouncer Warrior/Com 1/4have them swap thier Com levels last as they add levels? yeah, I like this.
Yeah that's a good idea, to force some commoner level.
I think it also works for those players that just don't like 1st level for whatever reason.
|
It's also an idea I have toyed with. Everyone with some experience has levels in my campaign, normally 2 to 4 levels in an NPC class.
The backward conversion works just fine. The only issue was with class skills.
Total skill points do not increase until your level surpasses them, same with other class features such as saves and base attack.
Thus you could be a level 3 warrior who trained as a wizard in the most unlikely situation. You just would not advance base attack until level 8 when it hit +4.
It is however open to abuse and optimisation.
It leaves lingering abilities such as weapon and armour proficiencies, spell casting in the case of the adept and class skills. I never played it through for these reasons...
|
|
As for levels of NPC's, consider the following:
To become 2nd level a commoner must face, 15 CR1/3, 5 CR1 or 4 CR2 Challenges.
To become 3rd level a commoner must face, 37 CR1/3, 13 CR1 or 9 CR2 Challenges.
To become 5th level a commoner must face, 112 CR1/3, 38 CR1 or 25 CR2 Challenges.
To become 10th level a commoner must face, 778 CR1/3, 263 CR1 or 175 CR2 Challenges.
To become 20th level a commoner must face, 26667 CR1/3, 9000 CR1 or 6000 CR2 Challenges.
That is single handed...
So I can see an argument for 2, 3 or even 5th level commoners. Much beyond that their achievements become less than common and you may expect them to be sought out by others who would harness their skill, meaning they leave the path of commoner.
I rarely see any NPC class character experiencing the challenges to reach level 10 or 20. But thats my personal opinion.
What do you think is absurd, that people populating the world are NPC classes at all, or that the vast majority is 1st level NPC classes?
That the vast majority are 1st level. To me it breaks verisimilitude along with far too many story tropes.
I would like to read your ideas about the age+intellect correlation to level.
I don't seem to have my old guidelines handy anymore so I'm currently rebuilding them using an Excel spreadsheet. I'll reply a bit later once I'm finished. :)
PC's should not be playing the NPC classes. However I have been thinking of the farmboy turns hero trope in context of the commoner, and led me to an adventure idea.
Instead of starting all PC's out at 1st level, I would let them start as say 10th level commoners, and as they gain experience they replace their highest commoner level with an adventurer level.
For example Mike the 10th level commoner, achieves 2000 xp. This would normally of course raise his 1st level character to level 2. Instead at 2000 XP he gets his 1st level of Base Class. He chooses fighter and so becomes a level fighter 1/commoner 9. This would continue until all of his levels are replaced through lvl 1-10 (or really 2-11) experience progression, at which time he will advance normally.
In the example above, I would let the players pick an NPC class, and they would start at level 10 (with all ability adjustments and normal advancement feats). As they gain in level they would replace the NPC saves and BAB with the new saves and BAB. For example Mike the commoner would recalculate FRW and BAB with Level 1 fighter bonuses; he would replace any gains made at level 10 commoner with level 1 fighter.
The BAB of a level 10 commoner is +5. f/r/w = 3/3/3 respectively
Upon attaining level one fighter he would now have bonuses of:
Fighter 1/Commoner 9: BAB= +5. f/r/w = 5/3/3 respectively. +1 Bonus feat for fighter.
It would keep the game around CR 8-10 for quite awhile. Essentially your starting at 10th level but actual level advancement is halted while still giving rewards.
Even if the character was a fighter 1/Warrior 9 he would still be more powerful because though his BAB and Save progression does not change he gets fighter bonus feats and powers.
I imagine Golarion NPC's with a mix of NPC/Base Class levels to have achieved levels in this way.
It would not be like Gestalt. If an expert chose to replace a level with Fighter or wizard he would LOSE skill points.
I would give the PC's the choice to start...
10th level commoners are still pretty high level. They can beat up most of the town guard. They are really good at what skills they do have with 10 ranks. They would not represent the farmers(insert other lowly extra) that get beat up and killed by the bad guys since these guys can fight back, but then again the stars of the show are often special in some way.
Darn it I hate arguing with myself. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alright, it took me a few hours to recreate it, but linked below is the spreadsheet showing how I determine the level of NPCs based upon how old they are. Here are a few definitions that help to explain the calculations involved...
.
.
.
- Sentient: The age at which you can begin reasoning with a member of this race. Roughly preschool age.
- Child: The age at which a member of this race begins gaining XP. Roughly elementary school.
- Adolescent: Onset of puberty. Roughly junior high.
- Full-Grown: The age at which a member of this race reaches physical and mental maturity. Roughly high school.
- Starting: The age at which their culture will generally allow a member of this race to enter the work force, get married, be treated as an adult, etc.
- Max: The average max age for a member of this race.
- XP per Day: This principle is based on the theory that you learn something new every day. Compared to adventuring, this amount is quite small, but it adds up over time.
- Mental Ability Score Modifier: My supposition is that characters who are more intelligent or more wise are able to learn from the life's experience more quickly or more efficiently than others.
Note that there are NO racial ability score modifier applied to the calculations. Therefore if you decide to use Int as the mental ability score, you'll need to manually give elves a +1. I have limited this modifier to -3 (i.e. Int 5) to +10 (Int 30). Allowing for lower modifiers simply results in characters who are incapable of learning.
Starting at childhood, characters earn a configurable amount of xp per day. Additionally, they gain 1 xp per point of their Mental Ability Score Modifier at a configurable interval. If desired, you can configure a negative starting XP to effectively make children 0th level.
The functionality that allows intellect to be factored into the XP calculations is modified by a character's current age category to take into account aging modifiers:
- Children: -2 modifier
- Adolescent: -1 modifier
- Middle Age: +0.5 modifier
- Old Age: +1 modifier
- Venerable: +1.5 modifier
NPC Level by Age Category: http://wiki.worldsunknown.com/wiki/File:NPC-Level-by-Age.xls
And apparently MediaWiki refuses to allow the upload of xlsx files because MIMEMAGIC doesn't understand that the 2010 versions use the Open XML format. SO even when you have EXPLICITLY ALLOWED the file type AND made an exception in the blacklist AND told it not to give a flying f*** about file types at all AND hacked the MIME types to TELL it WTF the file is, it STILL gives you the finger.
Yay for having to hack software to make it work the way it's supposed to at 2:30 in the g#&%$*n morning. >.>
I had to reupload the file. Please use the following link instead. My apologies to any Office 2003 users, but saving to the older version breaks stuff...
NPC Level by Age Category: http://wiki.worldsunknown.com/wiki/File:NPC-Level-by-Age.xlsx
** spoiler omitted **
I had to reupload the file. Please use the following link instead. My apologies to any Office 2003 users, but saving to the older version breaks stuff...
NPC Level by Age Category: http://wiki.worldsunknown.com/wiki/File:NPC-Level-by-Age.xlsx
many thanks!
Sure thing. I might make a view showing the ages at which NPCs of various races hit each level, but I figured this gives a better high-level view of things.
Originally I'd done this under the 3.5 XP track, so the results are MUCH different now, but I think the results are still believable. Let me know if you find a settings combo that produces results you like. Perhaps using 3.5 for 3.5×2 XP for non-adventuring NPCs then switching over to Pathfinder Medium if they take up adventuring would work...
By the way Laithoron you might want to take a look at this , if you haven't already.
A simple solution to those problems is to increase save DCs by +1 or +2 and perhaps double the HD affected by such spells to account for most adults having 2 to 4 HD.
Another approach would be to rule that every 2 NPC HD count only as a single normal HD, and to replace the Good saves for NPC classes with the Average/Fair progression from d20 Modern:
.
.
.
Level 1: +1
Level 2: +2
Level 3: +2
Level 4: +2
Level 5: +3
Level 6: +3
Level 7: +4
Level 8: +4
Level 9: +4
Level 10: +5
EDIT: Thanks for the heads-up Void!
I was refered to this thread by "Rules for playing a child".
2 posts up i am refered back to "rules for playing a child".
One could get dizzy with this. ;)