Player Characters Can't Do Anything


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

551 to 600 of 655 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

A 3rd level caster with glitter dust could ruin his day.

Liberty's Edge

A 10th level character can, theoretically, wipe out 10,000 low level soldiers. He just doesn't do it with a sword or a bow. Heck, if he's smart he never even lets them know he's after them. He does it with poison, disease, fire, and a host of other things.

An army marching on you? Evacuate the town and foul the wells. Burn the fields and the live stock so they can't forage. (Heck, burn them if you're so lucky.) Poison some of anything that's left. Spread disease ridden blankets in nice houses so they look like choice loot. Hire disease ridden harlots to join the enemy camp and, well, play the harlot. Lead them into bad weather, destroy bridges and force them to cross through rivers, etc.


Alienfreak wrote:

Like how far he is away. How do they know which weapon exactly he used? How do they know which range increment he is in? He can be anywhere from 10ft to 1200ft away. Or even 2400ft away if he has a distance weapon. What is kinda lol. Because with far shot you have a solid -3 to hit on 1200ft distance (with a Distance weapon) while having about 10bab+7dex+4fav enemy+2enhancement-4distance = +19 to hit. Which is enough for a guaranteed hit (and kill that is with 1d10+2enhancement+4fav enemy).

Since you like it cheesy lets just go with 1200ft distance from now on :P

As someone who has worked with weapons and with true experts with weapons, I can telll you that it is easy to figure out a lot of this.

Look at the angle the arrow struck. Look at the depth. Look at the direction it came from. All of this would take a moment to let you know where to start your observing.

When I was in thhe Army, we had Master Gunners on the M2 Bradley IFV. If a round was accidently fired, we could stop and find out where the round landed within less than 10 feet. To do that takes less than a minute but that's not much time and we were looking for a 25mm round. Doing the basics, angle of elevation and direction, it takes less than a second to figure out.

If someone is firing arrows into a trained army encampment, what do you expect these trained soldiers to do? Run in random directions? Be paralyzed with fear? Be completely confused and decide that they should just wait until the sniper leaves? These are soldiers. They intuitively understand some things.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:

Like how far he is away. How do they know which weapon exactly he used? How do they know which range increment he is in? He can be anywhere from 10ft to 1200ft away. Or even 2400ft away if he has a distance weapon. What is kinda lol. Because with far shot you have a solid -3 to hit on 1200ft distance (with a Distance weapon) while having about 10bab+7dex+4fav enemy+2enhancement-4distance = +19 to hit. Which is enough for a guaranteed hit (and kill that is with 1d10+2enhancement+4fav enemy).

Since you like it cheesy lets just go with 1200ft distance from now on :P

As someone who has worked with weapons and with true experts with weapons, I can telll you that it is easy to figure out a lot of this.

Look at the angle the arrow struck. Look at the depth. Look at the direction it came from. All of this would take a moment to let you know where to start your observing.

When I was in thhe Army, we had Master Gunners on the M2 Bradley IFV. If a round was accidently fired, we could stop and find out where the round landed within less than 10 feet. To do that takes less than a minute but that's not much time and we were looking for a 25mm round. Doing the basics, angle of elevation and direction, it takes less than a second to figure out.

If someone is firing arrows into a trained army encampment, what do you expect these trained soldiers to do? Run in random directions? Be paralyzed with fear? Be completely confused and decide that they should just wait until the sniper leaves? These are soldiers. They intuitively understand some things.

You are confusign reality with D&D. In reality a sniper needs cover. He moves slow.

And inspecting the arrow is nice if every 6 seconds someone drops next to you...


ShadowcatX wrote:


A 10th level character can, theoretically, wipe out 10,000 low level soldiers. He just doesn't do it with a sword or a bow. Heck, if he's smart he never even lets them know he's after them. He does it with poison, disease, fire, and a host of other things.

An army marching on you? Evacuate the town and foul the wells. Burn the fields and the live stock so they can't forage. (Heck, burn them if you're so lucky.) Poison some of anything that's left. Spread disease ridden blankets in nice houses so they look like choice loot. Hire disease ridden harlots to join the enemy camp and, well, play the harlot. Lead them into bad weather, destroy bridges and force them to cross through rivers, etc.

I think you're typical peasant would prefer the invasion to your solution. Disease isn't restricted in who it effects. Burned fields don't feed anyone. Poison can be indiscriminate as well. Why not just kill all your peasants and get it over with? Start an undead nation :)

Some of these solutions have been used with enormous costs to the civilians. Usually by people who don't give a damn about the "lower orders" (nobles or commisars). The elite doesn't usually suffer from these tactics, just common people who live and die with their fields and animals. Unless you are on the wrong end of a war of extermination I'd avoid the modern extremes. Or, you're tenth level guy can do it and p*ss off every peasant in the region...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

what we have here is Guardsman Marbo syndrome.

for those not familiar with the reference, Guardsman Marbo is a special character in warhammer 40K. his special ability is to appear anywhere on the board by emerging from stealth, with no chance of appearing in the wrong place, and follow that up with a big, powerful explosion as he throws a massive satchel of explosives at his target (at least that's the most common use for him). this can theoretically wipe out a full squad of the most powerful infantry it is possible to field in the game (Gray knight paladins, provided they're bunched up, all wounded then all fail their invulnerable saves), but it isn't considered gamebreaking. why? because even an inexperienced general will take basic precautions and minimise the guardsman's effectiveness. as a side note, once spotted Marbo tends to die within a round.

as for this ranger (henceforth 'Marbo'), if he's been min-maxed for stealth then by tenth level he'll be able to sneak past the sentries. if the army knows that he's coming (not unreasonable. by 10th level he's a legendary hero by almost any definition, and even basic intelegence gathering will let them know that he's likely to come against them) then they'll take simple precautions to lower the risk of him successfully killing everyone, including in-camp patrols and sewing bells to the tent-flaps (yes he can bypass that, but that'll either cost time to disable the trap or leave evidence as he cuts a hole in the tent). now he's in the tent, and de-stealths for a kill. the rest of the tent get a perception check (at -10 for sleeping) to notice him and wake up (probably requiring a natural 20 assuming an average perception of +0 base). once one wakes up and sounds the alarm, Marbo'd better get out of their quickly. so he's able to get in and do some damage, likely serious damage, because he's a mighty hero who's specialised at that. however, that doesn't mean he'll auto-win against a large army by a long way.

for an example, take the scene in The Crystal Shard where Drizzt infiltrates the barbarian encampment. he's a high-level ranger, stealthing into a millitary camp. even so he doesn't kill all of them, and in fact needs a distraction and a little magic to get out of there undetected. what he does do is even more damaging than slitting throats until someone notices him, as he finds out the enemies plans and tells his friends, allowing them to prepare accordingly and win a decisive victory.

PS: even if no-one sees the Marbo, someone's going to notice when 'big' Jimmy's snoring suddenly cuts off. that's going to get someone curious, and the alarm isn't far away.

Liberty's Edge

R_Chance wrote:
I think you're typical peasant would prefer the invasion to your solution. Disease isn't restricted in who it effects. Burned fields don't feed anyone. Poison can be indiscriminate as well. Why not just kill all your peasants and get it over with? Start an undead nation :)

War is hell. No part of the challenge of a 10th level character vs. the army said the 10th level character should be nice.

Undead would be a part of my plan if I'm doing this with a caster. (Especially if people are afraid of undead.) And I haven't even started in on the skills I'd use: diplomacy, bluff, intimidate, stealth, and maybe craft (forgeries).

Of course, a lot of that would depend upon the enemy I'm fighting. A good intimidate and craft (forgeries) and a willingness to kill the first five or so people who question your orders and you really don't have to kill the other 9,995. (And by all means, aid another on sense motive. The first person who speaks up (aids another) will be killed on the spot. How many others do you think will?)

"My orders are from the king, you dare question them? You dare question me? Die." Followed by any spell capable of dealing with a 3rd level character. Makes a suitable impression.

Quote:
Some of these solutions have been used with enormous costs to the civilians. Usually by people who don't give a damn about the "lower orders" (nobles or commisars). The elite doesn't usually suffer from these tactics, just common people who live and die with their fields and animals. Unless you are on the wrong end of a war of extermination I'd avoid the modern extremes. Or, you're tenth level guy can do it and p*ss off every peasant in the region...

Actually, these were common tactics in warfare, not "modern extremes". Small pox blankets to the indians, dead and rotting animals catapulted into castles to spread disease or dumped into wells. Burning oil. Salting fields.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
karkon wrote:

Another mechanic for profession is making rolls to do things your profession might do.

Problem is most of the things that you might roll these for are either so minute or rare that it doesn't matter anyway, or is already covered by an existing - more useful - skill. For example...

Quote:
So Profession sailor lets you make rolls on sailing a boat.

This is the iconic example for the profession skill being used in this way. Sailing has been heralded as an example of an adventure-useful profession, but there are also no set DCs, so really it's a matter of setting the DCs based on the 5 (easy), 10 (fair), 15 (hard), 20 (very hard), 25 (near impossible), and 30 (impossible) markers; and most sailing DCs are probably only going to be about DC 5-15, with only stuff like successfully navigating a giant whirlpool in the middle of a hurricane while dodging tornadoes being somewhere about 30-40.

Most adventurers aren't going to buy their own ship unless they already are sailors, or will rely on a trusty NPC sailor, or will buy passage to somewhere. Only in very specific campaigns will you want more than a hired NPC to help you sail somewhere.

Quote:
Profession Barrister lets you roll to make legal arguments in a courtroom (came up in one game).

Diplomacy, Bluff, and Knowledge skills also cover these things, and are more likely to be possessed by the party. Unless your character is a lawyer, again, this is something that is going to be more likely to be used by a hired NPC.

Quote:

Whatever that profession does you can make a roll to do it.

clerk (figure out filing system in the county clerks office so you can find a document)

12th Level Paper Pusher? Lame.

Quote:
fisherman (aka survival on the ocean)

Only if you're a deep sea fisher, which would also be a matter of sailing instead (so a profession makes this profession pointless).

Quote:
gambler (gambling, duh)
Most gambling is negated by cantrips or a 1st level cleric spell....

Well, I think what is being missed here is that profession can cover a wide range of skills.

For example: I am a librarian, You might not think about it but I have to know an awful lot about a good many things and a little bit about an amazing number more just to be able to navigate certain topics that my patrons may need. In game terms that means I could dump a few points into a bunch of knowledge skills, to represent wide passing knowledge, or I could put all of those points into profession and get the same effect.

I grew up on a farm, Profession in farmer lets me sink points in a being able to: heal with herbs, cookery, riding, healing animals, survival, animal handling, biology, botany, carpentry, lore of plant, earths, rocks, minerals, weather, basic blacksmithing, as well as diplomacy with other farmers, appeaser for the market both to sell and buy, wagon wain righting, etc... etc...

profession lets you have a ton of skills for few points.

the way I keep this from being broken is that these skills are all general level and cannot be used in combat without me giving it a nod, so usually these are used in conjunction with taking 10 or 20. a person who points all their points in ride is a SUPER rider, where as a farmer who rides a horse from time to time isn't usually in combat doing it. Exceptions might be diplomacy against a like member of the profession, needed in a hurry to bluff by the NPC or some such. doesn't happen often.

Basically if your running a ROLE-PLAYING group, this is really useful, if your playing hack and slash, likely not. My games are about story telling more than killing things, so It's a great skill at my table.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Holy cow an on topic post!


karkon wrote:
Holy cow an on topic post!

Don't believe your eyes, they lie. it's just an illusionist playing tricks on us.

so who cast silent image on the thread? come on, own up!

Grand Lodge

karkon wrote:
Holy cow an on topic post!

I guess that's what I get for not checking the "posted" date vs. the "last post" date.

>sigh< old age is hell, screw war!


I don't even have to poke holes anymore, they're getting so obvious. :)


Alienfreak wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:

Like how far he is away. How do they know which weapon exactly he used? How do they know which range increment he is in? He can be anywhere from 10ft to 1200ft away. Or even 2400ft away if he has a distance weapon. What is kinda lol. Because with far shot you have a solid -3 to hit on 1200ft distance (with a Distance weapon) while having about 10bab+7dex+4fav enemy+2enhancement-4distance = +19 to hit. Which is enough for a guaranteed hit (and kill that is with 1d10+2enhancement+4fav enemy).

Since you like it cheesy lets just go with 1200ft distance from now on :P

As someone who has worked with weapons and with true experts with weapons, I can telll you that it is easy to figure out a lot of this.

Look at the angle the arrow struck. Look at the depth. Look at the direction it came from. All of this would take a moment to let you know where to start your observing.

When I was in thhe Army, we had Master Gunners on the M2 Bradley IFV. If a round was accidently fired, we could stop and find out where the round landed within less than 10 feet. To do that takes less than a minute but that's not much time and we were looking for a 25mm round. Doing the basics, angle of elevation and direction, it takes less than a second to figure out.

If someone is firing arrows into a trained army encampment, what do you expect these trained soldiers to do? Run in random directions? Be paralyzed with fear? Be completely confused and decide that they should just wait until the sniper leaves? These are soldiers. They intuitively understand some things.

You are confusign reality with D&D. In reality a sniper needs cover. He moves slow.

And inspecting the arrow is nice if every 6 seconds someone drops next to you...

Are you saying that because characters don't have facing that an arrow that strikes someone in the chest could have come from any direction? If you are simply unwilling to apply a drop of common sense because you don't want to be wrong, I understand. It's not easy admitting one made a mistake.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Out of curiousity why are you guys all assuming that this is a trained army?

I mean at least in the medieval time period trained standing armies were fairly non existent(Rome did it but they went bust and most of the monarchical societies didn't).

The actually trained soldiers were very limited in general.

Also I'd probably hit them from the skies as a wizard with teleport fly and greater invis with fireballs for days then you just port out rest for the night and come back until you finish the job. Just make sure to kill any casters/clerics first and you should be fine.


gnomersy wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Out of curiousity why are you guys all assuming that this is a trained army?

I mean at least in the medieval time period trained standing armies were fairly non existent(Rome did it but they went bust and most of the monarchical societies didn't).

The actually trained soldiers were very limited in general.

Also I'd probably hit them from the skies as a wizard with teleport fly and greater invis with fireballs for days then you just port out rest for the night and come back until you finish the job. Just make sure to kill any casters/clerics first and you should be fine.

Because it is 10k in size. The leadership alone would have enough training to deal with a lot of what is proposed. In addition, it was the AF and Ariel that mentioned these were warriors, which are trained.

Of course there are a variety of armies. In a fantasy setting, we should assume that some of the army consists of more than just commoners.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:
gnomersy wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Out of curiousity why are you guys all assuming that this is a trained army?

I mean at least in the medieval time period trained standing armies were fairly non existent(Rome did it but they went bust and most of the monarchical societies didn't).

The actually trained soldiers were very limited in general.

Also I'd probably hit them from the skies as a wizard with teleport fly and greater invis with fireballs for days then you just port out rest for the night and come back until you finish the job. Just make sure to kill any casters/clerics first and you should be fine.

Because it is 10k in size. The leadership alone would have enough training to deal with a lot of what is proposed. In addition, it was the AF and Ariel that mentioned these were warriors, which are trained.

Of course there are a variety of armies. In a fantasy setting, we should assume that some of the army consists of more than just commoners.

Oh definitely, but the trained soldiers in an army that size aren't going to be the majority you'll probably have at least 35% level 1 Commoners 35% level 1 Warriors, Maybe 1% each for war mages, priests/medics, and bards(trumpeters and what not), 10% Rangers(Archery spec)/Rogues as your scouts that's 83% then 2% are leadership ,the Generals and high ranked officers probably in the level 5-10 range and the remaining 15% are trained soldiers probably level 2 or 3 Fighters/Barbarians/Rangers

Edit: Whoops math fail


1 person marked this as a favorite.

...uh.

You would.

Spend all day.

Under Greater Invisibility.

Which lasts a full minute at level 10.

And assume that nobody in this army would cast See Invisibility, over the course of several days?

Or that you could keep it up for FULL DAYS and rest for the ENTIRE NIGHT FOR EIGHT HOURS with an ARMY SEARCHING FOR YOU.

Well I guess Teleport for that.

...

But still, there are several holes in this plan.


gnomersy wrote:


Oh definitely, but the trained soldiers in an army that size aren't going to be the majority you'll probably have at least 35% level 1 Commoners 35% level 1 Warriors, Maybe 1% each for war mages, priests/medics, and bards(trumpeters and what not), 10% Rangers(Archery spec)/Rogues as your scouts that's 83% then 2% are leadership ,the Generals and high ranked officers probably in the level 5-10 range and the remaining 15% are trained soldiers probably level 2 or 3 Fighters/Barbarians/Rangers

Edit: Whoops math fail

35% level 1 commoners? Where do you get that figure? The average farmer is a level 1 commoner level 1 expert according to Paizo's numbers -- and if we are to fall back on just the Core Rulebook then there is nothing to support any such position at all.


Trinam wrote:

...uh.

You would.

Spend all day.

Under Greater Invisibility.

Which lasts a full minute at level 10.

And assume that nobody in this army would cast See Invisibility, over the course of several days?

Or that you could keep it up for FULL DAYS and rest for the ENTIRE NIGHT FOR EIGHT HOURS with an ARMY SEARCHING FOR YOU.

Well I guess Teleport for that.

...

But still, there are several holes in this plan.

It was a rough plan and the idea was Port in and out invised up drop your biggest aoe nukes and then bail out before they catch you. Also see invis is only 10 minutes per level assuming these guys aren't hiring archmages to follow them around they'll probably only have a maximum of 1 hour of vision per spell casting so they can either choose to see you themselves and use their spells to fight you or they can cast it on the other guys and hope they kill you.

In the meantime you respond by dropping a maximized fireball on the casters face and watching him die then you leave and come back after an hour has passed to use up the rest of your spells.

PS: @ Abraham - The reason I use level 1 commoner is because paizo's npc stats are terrible after all your average farmer is better than your first level PC why the hell is anyone hiring these useless chumps to save their daughter instead of rounding up some farmers and handing them like 20 gold?


ShadowcatX wrote:


War is hell. No part of the challenge of a 10th level character vs. the army said the 10th level character should be nice.

Nor did it say you should starve your own peasants and obliterate their livelihoods. Unless you're up to compensating them :) Otherwise they are going to have a hard time figuring out what side they're on...

ShadowcatX wrote:


Undead would be a part of my plan if I'm doing this with a caster. (Especially if people are afraid of undead.) And I haven't even started in on the skills I'd use: diplomacy, bluff, intimidate, stealth, and maybe craft (forgeries).

That all figures based on what you previously posted.

ShadowcatX wrote:


Of course, a lot of that would depend upon the enemy I'm fighting. A good intimidate and craft (forgeries) and a willingness to kill the first five or so people who question your orders and you really don't have to kill the other 9,995. (And by all means, aid another on sense motive. The first person who speaks up (aids another) will be killed on the spot. How many others do you think will?)

They're peasants, not idiots. They're just going to bow obsequiously and do the medieval equivalent of dropping the dime on you later. Then they get the fun of watching you get hung, drawn and quartered, impaled etc.

ShadowcatX wrote:


"My orders are from the king, you dare question them? You dare question me? Die." Followed by any spell capable of dealing with a 3rd level character. Makes a suitable impression.

Tarnishing the King's image, eh? :)

ShadowcatX wrote:


Actually, these were common tactics in warfare, not "modern extremes". Small pox blankets to the indians, dead and rotting animals catapulted into castles to spread disease or dumped into wells. Burning oil. Salting fields.

I'm aware of the provenance of these various atrocities (although I wouldn't count burning oil in a siege as one of them). When they're your fields it's a problem. Sure, the Romans salted Carthage. Not their turf. The British used small pox against Native Americans. The animal / disease thing was always a problem in seiges because disease spreads and when you capture the castle you're in the middle of germ ground zero. These things stand out because they were unusual, not the norm (except for the oil and maybe, on occasion, the dead animals). These types of things are more common in the modern world because the modern world can compensate for the damage / losses without starving everyone to death. Not that we are better / worse people.


Because farmers farm, and PCs murder things.

Farmers are not well-spec'd for murdering, and PCs are not well spec'd for farming.

Also, what's your contingency plan for the other casters? This plan seems very dependent on the army being a bunch of idiots.

If I were generalizing(And I do love generalizing, so I guess I am) we'd be dealing with 10,000 people in several squads, each of which probably having multiple casters and clerics spread through the group. I'd also probably be financing wands if I'm going to war.

Not to mention using Gather Information from Diplomacy to, y'know, see who the rumors say doesn't much like my army so I know who I'll likely see.


Trinam wrote:

Because farmers farm, and PCs murder things.

Farmers are not well-spec'd for murdering, and PCs are not well spec'd for farming.

Also, what's your contingency plan for the other casters? This plan seems very dependent on the army being a bunch of idiots.

If I were generalizing(And I do love generalizing, so I guess I am) we'd be dealing with 10,000 people in several squads, each of which probably having multiple casters and clerics spread through the group. I'd also probably be financing wands if I'm going to war.

Not to mention using Gather Information from Diplomacy to, y'know, see who the rumors say doesn't much like my army so I know who I'll likely see.

Whoa there. The defense isn't allowed tactics. Haven't you been paying attention? Also, the army isn't allowed to have any of their troops in offense mode even when under attack. Please try to keep up. PC = permissible carnage. NPC = not permitted choices


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh.

I guess that means this was a...

Dons sunglasses.

Poor Generalization.

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!


gnomersy wrote:
PS: @ Abraham - The reason I use level 1 commoner is because paizo's npc stats are terrible after all your average farmer is better than your first level PC why the hell is anyone hiring these useless chumps to save their daughter instead of rounding up some farmers and handing them like 20 gold?

I disagree with you about Paizo's stats being terrible. Instead I would suggest your methods are horrible. I've been using Paizo's stats just fine with no problems since they've come out -- so anecdotal evidence is that you are wrong (TONGUE IN CHEEK!).

Also a lot of this thread in the start actually plays into just that. Remember that most PCs basically have the advanced template thrown on top of actual levels of use (read PC class levels). Now have no doubt that if the PCs weren't there a posy of farmers might have handled the problem just fine. In fact I've seen several campaigns where the PCs are just that posy -- people in town that volunteered to help find the daughter.

The idea that the PCs have to be approached hat in hand with money being offered to do something is... lacking in my opinion.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Trinam wrote:

Because farmers farm, and PCs murder things.

Farmers are not well-spec'd for murdering, and PCs are not well spec'd for farming.

It's almost like this thread has come full circle.


A circle, like 10,000 soldiers holding hands and letting themselves be killed. Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya!

A friend suggested the funniest counter to the ranger. Torches and fighter (archer) barbarians. Fighter barb (he doesn't have to be more than level 3 if that is a problem), sits in his wooden watchtower. His feats are in skill focus percep, and in ranged. If he is higher levels, he is better at ranged. Like others around the main army, he is tasked with watching a certain area, an area lit with torches, an entrance to the camp, a point supplies and troops arrive and leave. Now he can make perception checks, and if someone shoots him in the chest, past the cover bonus of the tower, it is quite possible he can survive it (10+d10+d12+con hit die). If he is shot, he sounds alarm, looks for the attacker, shoots back. If someone tries to sneak past him, into the camp, they have to go through the torch lit area, which is under observation by this professional. Now if you stealth through a well lit area, while someone is observing, you are seen unless invisible. There is the concealment, but there is also being directly looked at, with no shadows. There is a serious limit to the power of a concealment cloak.

Shoot the guard, raises the alarm if survives, looks for you on some bonuses now, shoots back if spots.
If you attempt to enter camp, and try to stealth through well lit area, are likely spotted.
If you attempt to stealth up, enter watchtower through well lit entrance below the archer, likely spotted.
If ranger bolts through or attempts to assault up the tower, ranged fighter barb rages, makes a lot of noise and bravely tries to kill the ranger. Allies are within earshot and sight of the tower, tower is in range of a similar tower with a similar somewhat skilled ranged professional in it.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:

A circle, like 10,000 soldiers holding hands and letting themselves be killed. Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya!

A friend suggested the funniest counter to the ranger. Torches and fighter (archer) barbarians. Fighter barb (he doesn't have to be more than level 3 if that is a problem), sits in his wooden watchtower. His feats are in skill focus percep, and in ranged. If he is higher levels, he is better at ranged. Like others around the main army, he is tasked with watching a certain area, an area lit with torches, an entrance to the camp, a point supplies and troops arrive and leave. Now he can make perception checks, and if someone shoots him in the chest, past the cover bonus of the tower, it is quite possible he can survive it (10+d10+d12+con hit die). If he is shot, he sounds alarm, looks for the attacker, shoots back. If someone tries to sneak past him, into the camp, they have to go through the torch lit area, which is under observation by this professional. Now if you stealth through a well lit area, while someone is observing, you are seen unless invisible. There is the concealment, but there is also being directly looked at, with no shadows. There is a serious limit to the power of a concealment cloak.

Shoot the guard, raises the alarm if survives, looks for you on some bonuses now, shoots back if spots.
If you attempt to enter camp, and try to stealth through well lit area, are likely spotted.
If you attempt to stealth up, enter watchtower through well lit entrance below the archer, likely spotted.
If ranger bolts through or attempts to assault up the tower, ranged fighter barb rages, makes a lot of noise and bravely tries to kill the ranger. Allies are within earshot and sight of the tower, tower is in range of a similar tower with a similar somewhat skilled ranged professional in it.

Fine fine be that way. How about this as an answer to the 10,000 man army with a level 10 character I just take everything he owns and trade it to a level 20 wizard to Wish the entire army into one of the Planes full of demons that will eat their faces off?

Silver Crusade

3.5 Loyalist wrote:


A friend suggested the funniest counter to the ranger. Torches and fighter (archer) barbarians. Fighter barb (he doesn't have to be more than level 3 if that is a problem), sits in his wooden watchtower. His feats are in skill focus percep, and in ranged. If he is higher levels, he is better at ranged. Like others around the main army, he is tasked with watching a certain area, an area lit with torches,[b] an entrance to the camp, a point supplies and troops arrive and leave.[b] Now he can make perception checks, and if someone shoots him in the chest, past the cover bonus of the tower, it is quite possible he can survive it (10+d10+d12+con hit die). If he is shot, he sounds alarm, looks for the attacker, shoots back. If someone tries to sneak past him, into the camp, they have to go through the torch lit area, which is under observation by this professional. Now if you stealth through a well lit area, while someone is observing, you are seen unless invisible. There is the concealment, but there is also being directly looked at, with no shadows. There is a serious limit to the power of a concealment cloak.

The ranger does not need to take the obvious way in. He could climb a wall or possibly jump over it with the 80 movement Alien is suggesting. Torches are cheap but they use up other carrying capacity. Also they only last 1 hour so you would basically need a guy always out there replacing them. The sneaky ranger could probably kill that chump and then climb over a wall while they look for him by the entrance.

You might as well make your guy a half orc who sees in the dark. If your guard tower is only 10 feet off the ground then you never need torches and the ranger might not notice until he is spotted.

But for fun let us shift the discussion a bit. Could a 10th level party take out a 10,000 strong army of mixed player races? I think so for certain party compositions.


Depends, is the army realistic in D&D/PF terms? Or is it the silly E6 concept army where the highest person in it is a 3, and 8,000 of the army is village idiots?

Silly Army : Yeah, probably.

Realistic Army : No, but they can probably cause enough mischief to earn their pay slowing them down.

Silver Crusade

Define your own army and your own group. My general rule would be several thousand <3. Maybe a thousand elites (4-6). A dozen champions (6-8).

If you want to use a different break down then go for it.

edit: Just to be clear the 10th level party should have a chance at beating the army. If you drop a 15th level party in there that chance is effectively zero.


My own would be :

5,000 infantry : various classes, NPC classes for common soldiers, PC classes for commanders. I'd say that the common soldiers would range from 1 (raw recruits pressed into service) to level 3. I'd say most would be level 2 or 3. Nobody in their right mind sends out unblooded troops all by themselves. You want to seed them out with blooded and tested troops, so they can learn and not die. The commanders would be 4 to 6 level, and a mix of NPC/PC classes. Then the batallion commanders would be PC classes, probably levels 7 to 10. Breakdown would be around 4500 common soldiers, 490 commanders, and 10 batallion commanders. Those titles are just off the cuff, but they give the idea.
2,000 cavalry : various classes, but you don't waste expensive equipment on people who can't use it (horses!). So these would all be classes that can use mounts and get bonuses to their mounts. So these would all be Druids, Rangers, Paladins, and Cavaliers. Possibly a few summoners as well if they went with mountable summons. Probably 1750 at the 1 to 3 level, another 240 in the 4 to 6 range, and 10 in the 7 to 10 range.
2,000 archers : various classes, broken down in percentages along the same way the infantry are. So 1800 level 1 to 3's, 190 4 to 6's, and 10 7 to 10's.
1,000 support : various classes, this would be the casters, blasters, healers, cooks, blacksmiths, etc. This one would break down as probably 500 casters of various types (wizards, sorcerers, summoners, witches), probably 400 healers (clerics, oracles, druids), and the other 100 specialists of one type or another (spies, cooks, blacksmiths, staff officers, logistics specialists, etc). The levels on these would vary widely, but the healers and casters would probably break down to 80% 1 to 3, 19% 4 to 6, and 1% 7 to 10.

Now, it may sound like the group of level 10's don't stand a chance to disrupt the army. And if they go plowing in reproductive organ first into the wasp nest, then yeah, they're gonna get ground to paste. There's at least a dozen level 10's in the army. But, those level 10's are spread out and in different positions within the army, and every one of them has NPC equipment (thus lowering their CR by one).

If the PCs are smart, they can cause a massive amount of problems. Disrupting supply lines, interfering with communications, picking off isolated patrols and leaving no trace of the bodies (portable hole!), including the horses! Poisoning the supplies, things like that.

One of the best ideas I ever had in a game, back a long time ago, was to use binary poisons on an army. It was a Twilight 2300 game, and we infiltrated the enemy base. We had 2 components to a binary poison. Ingest either one, and nothing happened to you, get both, and you die. So we adulterated 10% of the supplies with one half, and 10% of the supplies with the other half, and then scrammed out.

Enemy soldiers were dieing, but they couldn't figure out what was poisoned or not, and they were throwing away good stuff with the bad. People would refuse to eat, and were starving. Finally they figured out what we'd done, but the effect on morale was horrible, and we didn't even kill all that many, but we blew their morale out of the water, and we made them destroy half their supplies because they got rid of a lot before they figured out what we did and how to find the tainted stuff.


Oh, and the PC group would be :

Wizard with a big ol nasty spell book. Universalist (I want him to have maximum flexibility). No multiclassing.

Alchemist (for mixing up nasty stuff). Specced out for bomb tossing and alchemy crafting (poison making). Possibly multiclassed with rogue to pick up the poison talents.

Ranger (for maximum attack/sneak capability, also for scouting ahead of the group). Alternately, a fighter built for stealth, although the ranger usually does this better.

Cleric (can't beat a cleric for healing spells). But probably one specced out for combat. Alternately, an oracle of battle or an oracle of metal with the tongues flaw, and everyone knowing the language.

If I have a fifth, I'd take a druid, as a backup healer, scout, and general rain down destruction (call lightning rocks!).

Silver Crusade

Twilight 2300..that is bringing back memories of Twilight 2000. Good times.

So with your army would a 10th level PC party be able to make the army retreat? Could they cause enough disruption to stop it?

Also, could a single 20th level character do the same thing?


Depends on how much time they had, and whether they had a safe base to fall back to if anything went wrong. If they have sufficient time and a way to restock supplies (assuming they can't replenish from their enemies) then yeah, they could do enough to disrupt the army. I don't know that they could make them retreat, but they could do enough damage that they'd reduce the effectiveness of the army to the point where they'd be the equivalent of half strength.

As to a level 20, I assume you mean by himself. Again, it depends. A level 20 has access to a LOT of options nobody in the army has. It's not as if he's twice as powerful as a level 10, he's as powerful as two dozen level 10's at once. That's not to say he's invulnerable, just dangerous in the extreme.

If he's an alchemist, meh, maybe, maybe not. A summoner with the right feats and spells could likely do it, mainly by making his eidelon a combat monster, casting the spells that let him untether it temporarily, and send it into the middle of the army at maximum speed to rampage and destory as much as it can before it goes down. Then resummon the next day, heal it up, and do it again. Alternately, he could use his SLA special ability to summon up nasty creatures that last for minutes, say CR 15 creatures, 4 or 5, and send them crashing into the army over and over again every day while he hides in stealth just in line of sight to the camp.

Wizard? Yeah, he can. He can, if he blows resources, wish tornado's to burn through the army. That's pretty hard to fight. He can gate in extraplanar creatures who are CR 18 and send them after the army. A level 20 wizard has a lot of juice and all the options in the world.

A fighter? Probably not. Same with a barbarian. I hate to say it, but even a level 20 fighter, by himself, can get brought down by a dozen level 10 casters. They just have too much magic on him.

The rest of the classes are dangerous to try it, but could disrupt them if nothing else. I can only think of the summoner and wizard as the ones that could actually rout the army single handed, in different ways.


mdt wrote:

My own would be :

5,000 infantry : various classes, NPC classes for common soldiers, PC classes for commanders. I'd say that the common soldiers would range from 1 (raw recruits pressed into service) to level 3. I'd say most would be level 2 or 3. Nobody in their right mind sends out unblooded troops all by themselves. You want to seed them out with blooded and tested troops, so they can learn and not die. The commanders would be 4 to 6 level, and a mix of NPC/PC classes. Then the batallion commanders would be PC classes, probably levels 7 to 10. Breakdown would be around 4500 common soldiers, 490 commanders, and 10 batallion commanders. Those titles are just off the cuff, but they give the idea.
2,000 cavalry : various classes, but you don't waste expensive equipment on people who can't use it (horses!). So these would all be classes that can use mounts and get bonuses to their mounts. So these would all be Druids, Rangers, Paladins, and Cavaliers. Possibly a few summoners as well if they went with mountable summons. Probably 1750 at the 1 to 3 level, another 240 in the 4 to 6 range, and 10 in the 7 to 10 range.
2,000 archers : various classes, broken down in percentages along the same way the infantry are. So 1800 level 1 to 3's, 190 4 to 6's, and 10 7 to 10's.
1,000 support : various classes, this would be the casters, blasters, healers, cooks, blacksmiths, etc. This one would break down as probably 500 casters of various types (wizards, sorcerers, summoners, witches), probably 400 healers (clerics, oracles, druids), and the other 100 specialists of one type or another (spies, cooks, blacksmiths, staff officers, logistics specialists, etc). The levels on these would vary widely, but the healers and casters would probably break down to 80% 1 to 3, 19% 4 to 6, and 1% 7 to 10.

Now, it may sound like the group of level 10's don't stand a chance to disrupt the army. And if they go plowing in reproductive organ first into the wasp nest, then yeah, they're gonna get ground to paste....

Are we talking about 3.5 Faerun or Golarion here?

And are you sure a 20th level character has options they don't have?
I mean you draw a magic line at 10th level. Why? NPCs are 1-20th level by the rules I see. How do you assume the NPCs of an army will only range to level 10 and not up to 20?

So 75% 1-3, 11% 4-7, 7% 8-11, 5.9% 12-15, 1% 16-18, 0.1% 19-20 is a reasonable number for an army compisition.

So each army of 10.000 individuals has about 10 level 19-20s with them.

Silver Crusade

Does not matter. Define your own army.

Edit: Which I guess also means define your world. Maybe you like a more high powered Golarian or you like Eberron or what ever. I guess an army of devils could be rather tough. They only caveat is that an arbitrary 10th level party has a non-zero chance of defeating it.

double edit: We are putting the 20th character against the army for the 10th level group.


I don't play Golarian or Eberron.

I play a homebrew. The world has an average level of about 8.5. Basically, most of the world is between 3 and 18. People who start at 1st level in my campaigns are quite literally starting out on their first adventure as adventurers. Some just left home and said by to mommy, some just graduated, whatever. Basically, you reach 18, you're level one (prior to that, you're level 0, and you have 6 hp, 1 skill rank, and -2 to physical stats).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You give them a skill rank? Coddler!

I can't talk, one of the reasons I've stayed out of the stupidity, I mean conversation, is that I play E8, and I just knew everyone would point and laugh once that came out while I was talking about a level 10 character.

I also have unclassed children and 0 level young adults, but I digress.

I will say this, (somewhat) on topic: I really like the idea of armies functioning as swarms; that's interesting...

That's right folks, 12 pages of thread, one good idea: WORTH IT!!


Hitdice wrote:

You give them a skill rank? Coddler!

I can't talk, one of the reasons I've stayed out of the stupidity, I mean conversation, is that I play E8, and I just knew everyone would point and laugh once that came out while I was talking about a level 10 character.

I also have unclassed children and 0 level young adults, but I digress.

I will say this, (somewhat) on topic: I really like the idea of armies functioning as swarms; that's interesting...

That's right folks, 12 pages of thread, one good idea: WORTH IT!!

This Idea isn't exactly new... AD&D had mob rules?


mdt wrote:

I don't play Golarian or Eberron.

I play a homebrew. The world has an average level of about 8.5. Basically, most of the world is between 3 and 18. People who start at 1st level in my campaigns are quite literally starting out on their first adventure as adventurers. Some just left home and said by to mommy, some just graduated, whatever. Basically, you reach 18, you're level one (prior to that, you're level 0, and you have 6 hp, 1 skill rank, and -2 to physical stats).

This is the problem with our entire conversation. We who have been discussing an army are talking about an army of normal people, and based on the vast majority of campaign settings where your average person is 1st level, and higher level characters are progressively rarer than low level characters, like a pyramid. This is in fact the very expectancy of the 3.x system, and how the game was designed at its core.

I wouldn't even want to play in a world where the average level of people is about 8.5. A world where everyone and their dog is a superhuman just doesn't really sound interesting nor fun; and I'd have to re-stat everything from the ground up in the various monster manuals and bestiaries just to reflect that normal people are in fact abnormal. For example, the stats for orc warriors and such are effectively useless, because average people could trash excessively large groups of them.

In such a world, OF COURSE no 10th level character could take on an army. To insinuate that would be asinine, and stupid beyond comprehension. That would be like saying that a 2nd or 3rd level character could take on an army of 1st level characters. No one here would argue such a thing, but that is essentially what mdt is arguing.

See, if the average level of the world's population is 8th-9th level, then that means 10th level characters aren't special at all. It would be like comparing a 2nd level character to a 1st. An improvement but not a major one. Mdt is arguing based on a screwy scale. To have a similar scale with these numbers, you would need a character around 30th level, complete with WBL and post 9th level spell slots progression.

We (Alienfreak and I) were discussing Superman vs WW-II Nazis, while Mdt is discussing Superman vs The Mutant Brotherhood. Sure, superman is stronger than almost everyone in the Mutant Brotherhood, but they all are of super-hero strength, and vs a mass of them plus their leaders, Superman would get crushed.

Sidenote: Skyrim is awesome. Missed you guys though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:


This is the problem with our entire conversation. We who have been discussing an army are talking about an army of normal people, and based on the vast majority of campaign settings where your average person is 1st level, and higher level characters are progressively rarer than low level characters, like a pyramid. This is in fact the very expectancy of the 3.x system, and how the game was designed at its core.

I don't see that as the problem with the conversation. What saw as the problem in the conversation is that you were actually NOT following that pyramid structure when facing a 10th level character off against the army and assuming they're all 1st level warriors (or 1st level commoner conscripts).

If you were looking at an army of 10,000 men, about the same size as a small city, you're going to probably have fighters/warriors up to 14th level in it (based on 3.5's highest-level local tables and using the small city modifier based on a population of 10,000). It may have a core of army chaplains whose highest level could be 12th. The army arcanists may be led by a 10th level wizard.
Sure, the vast majority may be 1st level, but there are considerable spikes scattered about that will put paid to any shenanigans of a 10th level PC trying to murder the army.

For what it's worth, I think the 3.5 populations tables are too spikey and would actually prefer a smoother pyramid all the way around.


Ashiel wrote:


Rant

Ashiel, the fact that *I* play in a homebrew rather than Golarian has nothing to do with a discussion about the core rules, which are world agnostic.

You keep trying to force everyone else to acknowledge that everyone should be level 1. Then you trot out statements like 'the vast majority'. Please provide proof of that. The only thing you've pointed to so far is the Alexandrian Texts and E6 or E8.

If you go back to D&D, it was pretty obvious this was not the situation. They gave breakdowns on on large cities having level 14s, as pointed out above, and most of the city was in the 1st to 6th range.

If you look at Pathfinder, the GMG lists NPCs as ranging from 1st to 19th, and most are over 3rd. Only the raw recruits and lowest of the low are 1/3rd.

You are basically doing what you are accusing me of doing, imposing your houseruled version of reality on everyone else. You should probably quote Adam Sessler, 'You reject our reality and substitute your own.'

If you want to argue CRB rules, then rules say nothing about levels, so any interpretation is valid. If you want to argue core rules, which would be all books by Paizo, then they specifically list NPCs at higher levels than you wish to accept.

Shadow Lodge

mdt, 'core rules' is shorthand for 'PHB, DMG, and MM'. In other words, the minimum books required to play. Not 'all 1st party books'. Complete Warrior is not part of core 3.5.


TOZ,
Where I used to play, Core was anything by the publisher, so CW was core in 3.5. I'm willing to agree that different people have different definitions of 'core', which is why I specified what I meant by CRB vs Core in the above.

If we only use CRB, then NPCs are undefined, and anyone saying 'the core rules only support npcs being below 5th level' is making things up that are not in the book.

If we only use Paizo Pathfinder RPG sources, then NPCs are varied and range from 1 to 19.


mdt, that's been my understanding of 'core' too.


I know WotC had a specific definition of "Core" but I don't know if Paizo does. I would think that, for simplicity, "Core" should be whatever is in the PRD. Not everything Paizo published is there. I would think "Core" would be whatever everyone has access to.


That's pretty much my definition of core, the PRD material. Anything from a Golarian book is Golarian specific.

Now, some of that core is optional core (like sectional armor for example, or hero points). But it is, to me, core rules.


mdt wrote:
Ashiel wrote:


Rant

Ashiel, the fact that *I* play in a homebrew rather than Golarian has nothing to do with a discussion about the core rules, which are world agnostic.

You keep trying to force everyone else to acknowledge that everyone should be level 1. Then you trot out statements like 'the vast majority'. Please provide proof of that. The only thing you've pointed to so far is the Alexandrian Texts and E6 or E8.

Not quite. I pointed out that every campaign setting I've ever seen assumes people are in fact people, and that high level characters are in fact special, and beyond human norms; which is easy to see that they are merely by looking at what they are capable of in context of the world. If in your world the average person can fight hell hounds, survive 60 ft falls without much trouble, and your average person is capable of slaughtering several default skeletons, zombies, orc warriors, hobgoblin fighters, and so forth in open combat, then that's great - but it's definitely out of whack with what most expect.

Quote:
If you go back to D&D, it was pretty obvious this was not the situation. They gave breakdowns on on large cities having level 14s, as pointed out above, and most of the city was in the 1st to 6th range.

In 3.x, the average level of the absolute highest level Fighter in a metropolis of 25,000+ people was 16th level. It would then have two fighters at 8th level, then four at 4th, eight at 2nd, and the rest 1st level Fighters. Let's recount that again. 2 8th level Fighters out of 25,000+ people.

So while there were high level individuals, they were just that. Individuals. They're the kind of people that it describes as having their own keeps, castles, and so forth. Big wigs. Not your average soldier by any means. Hell, if you wanted to pay one of these guys to join your army as your big guns. The same book describes a mercenary leader as being a 2nd level warrior typically. That would be CR 1/2 in Pathfinder.

An example of one of these inordinately high level people in one of Paizo's adventure paths? Sabina from CotCT is a 10th level Fighter, and the queen's personal bodyguard.

So now we have seen that high level individuals are intended to be very rare in the system. There's a handful of characters in the largest of large cities who carry the high level badge. So we can see that in a metropolis there is a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of that population above 1st level. Next, it's logical to assume that they aren't all going to join the military or engage in wars unless they agree with those wars, because as the highest specimens that our generic fantasy offers, they have no need for soldierly wages, nor can they simply be drafted up into the military.

Finally, after determining the highest level PC classes and such, the remaining population is 91% commoners, 5% warriors, 3% experts, and .5% adepts and aristocrats.

So yeah, I don't put a lot of stock into the idea that the average army is awash with lots of 8th level characters, or even singular 16th level characters and such. More than likely, it's mostly filled with 1st-3rd level people, and a couple of 5th or 6th as commanders, and the majority of them with be Warriors, followed by Experts, followed by Adepts.

Quote:
If you look at Pathfinder, the GMG lists NPCs as ranging from 1st to 19th, and most are over 3rd. Only the raw recruits and lowest of the low are 1/3rd.

And I think the GMG NPC statistics are full of crap. I've pointed this out in some other threads, but they don't fit with any adventure path or anything else either. Every street bum is a 2nd level character with a level of rogue? Every prostitute is a master of skills with levels in rogue? No, sorry, just no. Again, I'm not buying that everyone is so close to the pinnacle of human conditioning.

Quote:

You are basically doing what you are accusing me of doing, imposing your houseruled version of reality on everyone else. You should probably quote Adam Sessler, 'You reject our reality and substitute your own.'

If you want to argue CRB rules, then rules say nothing about levels, so any interpretation is valid. If you want to argue core rules, which would be all books by Paizo, then they specifically list NPCs at higher levels than you wish to accept.

It's not rocket science man. One book says "CORE RULEBOOK" in big bright letters on it. Everything else doesn't. It's not hard to see where the core begins and ends. Everything in the 3.5 SRD isn't core, and never was, as even in 3.x you had three core rulebooks (PHB, DMG, MM, marked Core Rulebook I, II, and III respectively). Arguing that every book Paizo puts out is part of the core rules is like arguing that Unearthed Arcana was core because it was released on the SRD as well, or that arguing that the vast majority of the DMG wasn't core because it wasn't OGL and thus not on the SRD.

That's just silly.

Actually, that's why when I was discussing the differences in NPC CRs in another thread a while back, I recommended going with the rules from the Bestiary as opposed to the rules in the Core Rulebook, because the Bestiary's rules fit better for any NPC who is low-mid to high level. It's why I generally call out any material that I'm using that is derived from outside core when I refer to it. As a courtesy for anyone else, or anyone playing a core-only game.

EDIT: Also, stuff printed in adventure paths, and other rulebooks for Golarion is no more or less core than anything else beyond the core rulebook. It's merely another option if your GM allows it. Obviously fluff doesn't translate from game to game very well, but mechanics do. Mechanics are mechanics, so it doesn't usually matter what campaign they are used in (with specific exceptions such as mechanics that represent something specific to a campaign such as taint or insanity).

For example, the Big Game Hunter feat was released in an AP. It is the same thing regardless of campaign. Just a mechanical rule, and is just was easily added to the game as any of the archtypes from the various splat books. Likewise, Elves of Golarion has alchemical arrows to be bought and purchased. Any world that uses alchemical items could conceivably have arrows loaded with nasty stuff. Etc, etc.

None of that is core, but it is no less core than anything out of the Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, or Ultimate Combat. It is merely an addition to the rules from another source, as with all splat material.

Liberty's Edge

Ashiel wrote:
In 3.x, the average level of the absolute highest level Fighter in a metropolis of 25,000+ people was 16th level. It would then have two fighters at 8th level, then four at 4th, eight at 2nd, and the rest 1st level Fighters. Let's recount that again. 2 8th level Fighters out of 25,000+ people.

First, didn't 3.x do this for every class, so while there may only be 1 high level fighter, there's also 1 high level everything else in that group of 25,000 people.

Secondly, that is a city. Taking a sample from another area, say a military (who specialize in doing the exact thing that grants levels) it should not be surprising that the levels will be schewed on the high side.

Finally, 3.x shouldn't be the go to for pathfinder level and class distribution. Its may be a decent place to start, alternatively, you may choose to start with premade npcs and see what they look like, which will throw your numbers vastly out of wack.

Quote:
Finally, after determining the highest level PC classes and such, the remaining population is 91% commoners, 5% warriors, 3% experts, and .5% adepts and aristocrats.

Again, schewed because you're examining an army, not a city. And again 3.5, not pathfinder.

Quote:
So yeah, I don't put a lot of stock into the idea that the average army is awash with lots of 8th level characters, or even singular 16th level characters and such. More than likely, it's mostly filled with 1st-3rd level people, and a couple of 5th or 6th as commanders, and the majority of them with be Warriors, followed by Experts, followed by Adepts.

Here I partly agree, though with the caveat that the army is unseasoned. If it is a seasoned army, mdt's example is much more reasonable.

Quote:
And I think the GMG NPC statistics are full of crap. I've pointed this out in some other threads, but they don't fit with any adventure path or anything else either. Every street bum is a 2nd level character with a level of rogue? Every prostitute is a master of skills with levels in rogue? No, sorry, just no. Again, I'm not buying that everyone is so close to the pinnacle of human conditioning.

Rather than assuming they're "the pinnacle of human conditioning" perhaps you should drop 3.x's ideas of classes and levels and embrace Pathfinder's ideas of classes and levels.

And I greatly suspect more people will agree with mdt's definition of core than will with yours. I know I certainly do.


Ashiel, your opinion of the premade NPCs is irrelevant. They are the official NPCs we have to work with.

Also as ShadowcatX pointed out, your comparison numbers start with a flawed assumption. Yes, that city has an expected number of high level characters, but just like with any other statistic, things change when you change the assumption. In this case, you shouldn't look at a large group of non-combatants. You should find a reference to combatants only. I no longer have access to the book about war from WotC (I don't even remember the title). I would think that it would be a much better resource than the DMG for this comparison.

551 to 600 of 655 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Player Characters Can't Do Anything All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.