I think the summoner is a little too complicated is my problem with it. I have been reading the rules for summoner archtypes and then gotten a headache.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I won't run strictly political (human-centered in particular) campaigns or anything that doesn't involve some kind of supernatural evil.
Not that I hate them, but I perceive them as a waste of time, when I can have nice (or nicer) plots with inhuman things.
I: Wishes are 9th-level magic spells and are limited in power accordingly; Limited Wishes are 7th-level spells which are even more limited.
I may or may not fully agree with some of the following points, but that first one... if only more people could understand it...
I'm just curious, what exactly were the mechanical differences between a man-at-arms and Fighter 1? From my memory, the only real difference was the size of the HD and the ability to go to level 2. That's it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno, I might get used to it, but I'd feel weird if the only people with certain skill sets were the PCs.It goes back to the AD&D days when the vast majority of people in the world were 0-level characters, who were specialists in a given profession but had no training in adventuring.
A 1st-level fighter was a "Veteran", and stood above the run-of-the-mill man-at-arms. PCs were special, and only very special "adventurer" NPCs ever gained class levels.
A PC magic-user could still go to an NPC sage to research magic, or to an NPC alchemist to get special materials.
The 1E DMG has all the information about this you need. You an create an entire society using the various chapters. It all has that wonderful flavor that set D&D apart from other fantasy RPGs back in the day.
After many years of the "New D&D", I decided to go back to the old formula. :D
I cut my teeth on AD&D 1e. The tiny Village of Hommlett had a dozen or so mid level (for AD&D) PC class NPCs (Otis is my brudder!), heck, SPOILER ALERT FOR A THIRTY + YEAR OLD ADVENTURE, Lareth was a fifth level cleric as the end boss.
The slaver series would have been a vastly different animal had the main slavers been warriors and adepts instead of billy badasses.
Eclavdra. 'Nuff said.
I can go on and on with the trip down memory lane.
Me thinks you may have played AD&D differently than I ;-)
|
|
Well, the operative world was "almost".
And modules weren't the world at large. Most of the foot soldiers for the slavers were straight, by the book, orcs, hobgoblins, gnolls, etc. Basically first and second level warriors. But a criminal organization like that would attract predators who were powerful enough to exert their will on the world around them, to an extent. And the game would be pretty boring if there were never rival humans, half orcs, elves and the like for the party to oppose. If it were always otyughs and umber hulks, staleness would set in rather quickly, I think.
Most places in the Flanaess would be populated by only 0th level commoner types, and most places wouldn't have more than petty criminals plaguing the population. If you assume the adventures set there represent most of the trouble spots the characters would encounter, you'd barely dent the percentage of beings that advance in character levels using the charts.
As to "absolutely no reason", heroes and villains came before the PCs, and they'd come after, so the NPCs with levels could have several reasons to have come by them. It stands to reason they'd gravitate towards areas adventurers gather, even if to just vicariously feel some of the juice they enjoyed ion their past lives.
But, you know, I could be over thinking all of that. ;-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm, guess I could add worlds populated with chiefly 0th level people except the PCs to the list of things I'd never run. The very idea is abhorrent to my sense of an internally consistent world. ;)
What I find abhorrent is the idea that the PCs are the only special snowflakes capable of growing in skill and experience, and that the world operates as if magic doesn't exist even when it clearly does. I've seen way too many GMs treat the game world as medieval Europe without thinking thru the consequences of magic being a real thing.
|
Do worlds where a large percentage of the population is as skilled in combat as any 30 of its 18 year old armed men put together, or where they still bother with sailing ships and castle walls when every village has a flying invisible guy who can shoot 60' r blast fireballs?
I've never seen such a world. Even if there is, you obviously don't pit those thirty 18 year olds against the battle hardened vets. :P Any army is going to have a mix of both.
As for internal consistency, if you have a rule that 20% of the population has a class, and of those people, 20% advance to the next level, you need a population over 100,000 people before you get a single 7th level NPC.
You'd need 1 billion people to average 1 13th level something.
You'd need 100 trillion people to average 1 20th level something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if you have a rule that 20% of the population has a class, and of those people, 20% advance to the next level...
Unless the progression is nonlinear...
Uh...
|
|
I am down with basically everything you are saying houstonderek, I only have one bit I want to add some thought to:
As to "absolutely no reason", heroes and villains came before the PCs, and they'd come after, so the NPCs with levels could have several reasons to have come by them. It stands to reason they'd gravitate towards areas adventurers gather, even if to just vicariously feel some of the juice they enjoyed ion their past lives.I say "absolutely no reason" because I feel differently than Gary did on a pretty fundamental level - he would write NPCs that were former adventurers that have since retired and would leave them with some or all of their class levels (see Homlett's farmer that is a 4th level Fighter for example)... I would write the same NPC, with the same backstory, and he would be a 0-level character with an extra hit die or two and better gear than you would expect.
There isn't an inherent reason to leave the guy a 4th level fighter in order to have an NPC with that backstory, and all it does in practice is muck up the view of the world - a "use it or lose it" approach makes more practical sense.
I can dig it. Skills atrophying from lack of use makes sense.
|
|
It is actually worth noting that the advice for worldbuilding found in the DMG and the way every module ever written (especially by Gary Gygax) were actually NOT in line with each other.
The DMG said that almost everyone in the world besides the PCs is 0-level, and yet the official modules through in countless characters among the NPCs that had character classes for absolutely no reason.
Mostly because Gary was the type to refuse to follow rules consistently, even the ones that he made up.
In Gary's defense, I have to point out that he didn't write most of the modules you're talking about.
But you are correct about the plethora of NPCs with levels.
My gaming group seldom if ever used modules. The first campaign I played in was based on Middle-Earth (big shock there), and the DM never used canned adventures, mainly because it was too much work getting them to fit the game world.
I.C.E. made a bunch of stuff that (obviously) was perfect for a ME game. Even included a handy "d20" type conversion guide in the front of most of their MERP 1e supplements.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I.C.E. made a bunch of stuff that (obviously) was perfect for a ME game. Even included a handy "d20" type conversion guide in the front of most of their MERP 1e supplements.ICE didn't acquire the Middle-Earth License until the mid-80s. The campaign I speak of began in 1976.
I use the MERP stuff when I run a Middle-Earth campaign (a couple of my players are big Tolkien fans), especially the maps and Fonstad's Atlas.
Ah, gotcha.
And I love love LOVE the MERP maps. Next to the Harn maps, they're my all time favorite fantasy maps.
Currently, the only thing I have outright banned in my game is evil alignments for player characters. Aside from that, I haven't had to ban anything else because my players haven't caused me any problems yet. Though, that may change soon now that an actual experienced role-player has joined my group...
Though, I am tempted to ban guns and gunslingers simply because I flat out hate the idea of a Full BAB class that can hit touch AC with a full round attack. That, and it really bothers me that they choose to give guns the ability to ignore armor. It may or may not be overpowered; I just don't like it on principle. The idea that a normal bullet is often more likely to damage an armored opponent than even the most powerful magical arrows just destroys my suspension of disbelief.
Edit: I might as well mention that I'm not against the idea of simply having guns in my campaigns, I just would need to find a ruleset that doesn't involve Touch AC to use with them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I.C.E. made a bunch of stuff that (obviously) was perfect for a ME game. Even included a handy "d20" type conversion guide in the front of most of their MERP 1e supplements.ICE didn't acquire the Middle-Earth License until the mid-80s. The campaign I speak of began in 1976.
I use the MERP stuff when I run a Middle-Earth campaign (a couple of my players are big Tolkien fans), especially the maps and Fonstad's Atlas.
Ah, gotcha.
And I love love LOVE the MERP maps. Next to the Harn maps, they're my all time favorite fantasy maps.
Seconded. Recently got my hands on the big big MERP map. Methinks a burning wheel campaign may yet come of it.
Seriously, if Peter C. Fenlon Jr is still with us, Paizo should consider getting him on some campaign setting material. He made the best maps of Middle Earth in existence, and that is saying a whole lot!
|
Currently, the only thing I have outright banned in my game is evil alignments for player characters. Aside from that, I haven't had to ban anything else because my players haven't caused me any problems yet. Though, that may change soon now that an actual experienced role-player has joined my group...
Though, I am tempted to ban guns and gunslingers simply because I flat out hate the idea of a Full BAB class that can hit touch AC with a full round attack. That, and it really bothers me that they choose to give guns the ability to ignore armor. It may or may not be overpowered; I just don't like it on principle. The idea that a normal bullet is often more likely to damage an armored opponent than even the most powerful magical arrows just destroys my suspension of disbelief.
Edit: I might as well mention that I'm not against the idea of simply having guns in my campaigns, I just would need to find a ruleset that doesn't involve Touch AC to use with them.
Can't you simply houserule that they get a +5 bonus to hit instead of needing only to hit touch ac, or +2?
Gunslingers generally don't fit with the look/feel of my campaigns, nor do Samurai, Ninja, or the stock Monk.
Outsidde that I am fairly flex.
Oh and I threw out the CR and XP system; very liberating!
Can't you simply houserule that they get a +5 bonus to hit instead of needing only to hit touch ac, or +2?
I've considered that actually, but I'm just worried that it would slow the game down a bit. Specifically, I'm worried about having to constantly check and see if the difference between the touch ac and normal ac is large enough to get the full "armor piercing bonus".
I dunno, I might get used to it, but I'd feel weird if the only people with certain skill sets were the PCs.It goes back to the AD&D days when the vast majority of people in the world were 0-level characters, who were specialists in a given profession but had no training in adventuring.
Doesn't that make it weird[er] when a PC dies or retires, and then another super-rare adventurer happens to show up to replace the old one? In a world where adventuring is relatively common, it's already often pretty goofy when the party just happens to find a replacement after losing a PC; I imagine it gets even sillier in a world where adventuring is rare.
No battle maps or figures--I run RPGs as games of imagination, not tabletop strategy.
This. I play in three different groups, with almost all different players between them. They all play Pathfinder. None of them use grids/minis. And that's the way I like it.
As far as content allowed, I'm pretty lenient. I allow anything put out by Paizo, though a non-core race requires a good amount of backstory and player foresight for me to give the go-ahead. But I have pretty creative players, so among my games I do have a tiefling, an aasimar, a dhampir, a drow, etc... though most do end up tending towards the core.
As I said, I only allow for content put out by Paizo. The only exceptions come in the form of me researching and owning a 3PP supplement in which I find something I feel would really enhance someone's character, in which case I will present it to them as an option. This happens very rarely, however, as I myself have very little 3PP (if for no other reason than I simply can't afford more PFRPG stuff on top of that which is put out by Paizo).
Doesn't that make it weird[er] when a PC dies or retires, and then another super-rare adventurer happens to show up to replace the old one?
Indeed, so there is a built in campaign penalty for players:
Early retirement or death means you will be curtailed on what I can allow as a GM, no you don't come from the nearby village, you will need to have travelled quite a distance, which usually means you were 'sent' and that means you might 'owe or be obliged'.
There are a LOT of advantages in not having to endure the lower levels, dying or retiring should not be rewarded really.
|
|
Can't you simply houserule that they get a +5 bonus to hit instead of needing only to hit touch ac, or +2?I've considered that actually, but I'm just worried that it would slow the game down a bit. Specifically, I'm worried about having to constantly check and see if the difference between the touch ac and normal ac is large enough to get the full "armor piercing bonus".
Why? It's simple arithmetic. Add a +2 until level 10 and a +5 from there on, until level 20. Simple, problem solved. Won't slow down the game one whit. It's a single bonus.
Your club membership is in the mail.
I did away with those things years ago...they get in the way of a good game most of the time.