Commoners still get class skills that let them specialize in thatching, or farming, or baking, or butchering, or pretty much any other Craft or Profession (because look, they get Craft and Profession). Just because they don't get their pick of extra skills like Spellcraft to specialize in doesn't mean they all try to do everything at once and never work together or specialize in anything.
But doesn't that validate my argument? What is the difference, at the end of the day, between from the Commoner and the Expert? It's so minute that you could sacrifice the Commoner class with NO impact to the game. If you like the poor pathetic buggers, cool. If you want to waste precious time making universally incompetent NPCs using the Commoner class, more power to you. But they are pointless, thematically and mechanically.
NPC classes as a whole just waste a lot of time.
Agreed.
Commoners still get class skills that let them specialize in thatching, or farming, or baking, or butchering, or pretty much any other Craft or Profession (because look, they get Craft and Profession). Just because they don't get their pick of extra skills like Spellcraft to specialize in doesn't mean they all try to do everything at once and never work together or specialize in anything.But doesn't that validate my argument? What is the difference, at the end of the day, between from the Commoner and the Expert? It's so minute that you could sacrifice the Commoner class with NO impact to the game. If you like the poor pathetic buggers, cool. If you want to waste precious time making universally incompetent NPCs using the Commoner class, more power to you. But they are pointless, thematically and mechanically.
NPC classes as a whole just waste a lot of time.Agreed.
The difference is the difference between Emeril Lagasse and the guy running the grill at your local diner. Lagasse is an Expert and the guy at your diner is a Commoner. It's no insult to the guy at the diner, because he is very good at what he does, but he doesn't have the array of different cooking skills that Lagasse has.
The difference is the difference between Emeril Lagasse and the guy running the grill at your local diner. Lagasse is an Expert and the guy at your diner is a Commoner. It's no insult to the guy at the diner, because he is very good at what he does, but he doesn't have the array of different cooking skills that Lagasse has.Commoners still get class skills that let them specialize in thatching, or farming, or baking, or butchering, or pretty much any other Craft or Profession (because look, they get Craft and Profession). Just because they don't get their pick of extra skills like Spellcraft to specialize in doesn't mean they all try to do everything at once and never work together or specialize in anything.But doesn't that validate my argument? What is the difference, at the end of the day, between from the Commoner and the Expert? It's so minute that you could sacrifice the Commoner class with NO impact to the game. If you like the poor pathetic buggers, cool. If you want to waste precious time making universally incompetent NPCs using the Commoner class, more power to you. But they are pointless, thematically and mechanically.
NPC classes as a whole just waste a lot of time.Agreed.
wouldn't that be better represented by greater leveling and chosen feat/ skill allotment?
I, because I have no experience cooking professionally, would be a "commoner" in a kitchen. Diner chefs cook an average of 8 hours straight five days a week. Its there job, they are trained and experienced. I work at a 24 hour dinner across the street from a bar. At 2am, when our diner is packed with one hundred drunkards and our one cook on duty is pumping out burgers, fries, steak and eggs, breakfast burritos, waffles, fried chicken, and everything else ordered, I have NO DOUBT in my mind that he is an expert. Emeril may have better training and more opportunities as a "celebrity chef", but the local diner cook knows his way around the kitchen infinitely better than I do. They both possess the same basic training. I could counter your argument by saying Emeril is a 15th level expert, and the local diner cook is a 5th level expert. They are both specialized in their profession. They are both experts.
And that is my point, if some stubborn numb-skull GM like me can argue any theoretically commoner would be better suited as some other NPC class, then why have the class at all. What PRACTICAL reason is there for the commoner or the aristocrat? Cause I'm pretty sure its just nostalgia. Keep them if you want, I don't need the excess paperwork.
So... Anyone actually ever really roll to see how well their NPCs cook for their boss?
I, because I have no experience cooking professionally, would be a "commoner" in a kitchen. Diner chefs cook an average of 8 hours straight five days a week. Its there job, they are trained and experienced. I work at a 24 hour dinner across the street from a bar. At 2am, when our diner is packed with one hundred drunkards and our one cook on duty is pumping out burgers, fries, steak and eggs, breakfast burritos, waffles, fried chicken, and everything else ordered, I have NO DOUBT in my mind that he is an expert. Emeril may have better training and more opportunities as a "celebrity chef", but the local diner cook knows his way around the kitchen infinitely better than I do. They both possess the same basic training. I could counter your argument by saying Emeril is a 15th level expert, and the local diner cook is a 5th level expert. They are both specialized in their profession. They are both experts.
And that is my point, if some stubborn numb-skull GM like me can argue any theoretically commoner would be better suited as some other NPC class, then why have the class at all. What PRACTICAL reason is there for the commoner or the aristocrat? Cause I'm pretty sure its just nostalgia. Keep them if you want, I don't need the excess paperwork.
No, you have no, or 1 or 2 ranks in cooking. I would argue that the short order cook is a 15th level Commoner with his skill maxed out, and the Emeril is a 15th level Expert with multiple skills maxed out in whatever different styles of cooking that he does. (I choose Emeril as someone you would recognize.) But I doubt that Emeril could, at 2 AM, keep up with your short order cook. They are both 'master' chefs, as opposed to using the word expert, it is just that the extra schooling and training has given Emeril Expert levels as opposed to the equal number of Commoner levels that the short order cook has.
Line cook = profession (cook), Emeril = craft (recipe)? :)
If someone wants the Commoner or the Aristocrat classes, more power to them. I was originally responding to the call for more NPC classes. I still don't think we need more. In fact, I think we can survive just fine a few less.
I'm admittedly pig-headed enough to debate why the expert can and should replace the commoner til the end of time. But, someone would just use the inverse of my argument to justify their existence. Ad infinitum. I will never use them. Others will always use them.
In the end, its a beautiful thing either way. Gotta love RPGs.
I think the difference would be a Commoner wouldn't take Skill Focus(Profession: Baker) but the Expert would.
I think we just need the Adept/Acolyte as a Divine NPC Caster then a Apprentice/Adept class for an Arcane NPC Caster.
If someone wants the Commoner or the Aristocrat classes, more power to them. I was originally responding to the call for more NPC classes. I still don't think we need more. In fact, I think we can survive just fine a few less.
I'm admittedly pig-headed enough to debate why the expert can and should replace the commoner til the end of time. But, someone would just use the inverse of my argument to justify their existence. Ad infinitum. I will never use them. Others will always use them.
In the end, its a beautiful thing either way. Gotta love RPGs.
I agree fully, and I would say that neither of us are wrong, it is just a difference in style.
Now about that Aristocrat...
I think we just need the Adept/Acolyte as a Divine NPC Caster then a Apprentice/Adept class for an Arcane NPC Caster.
Well, the Adept already is a divine NPC? (Your wording is a little confusing I'm sorry)
But it sounds like you're calling for an arcane NPC?You could just build an arcane spell list equivalent to the Adept, give them the arcane bond feature rather than a familiar, and call them Magicians.
I think we just need the Adept/Acolyte as a Divine NPC Caster then a Apprentice/Adept class for an Arcane NPC Caster.Well, the Adept already is a divine NPC? (Your wording is a little confusing I'm sorry)
But it sounds like you're calling for an arcane NPC?
If so, just rebuild the Adept. You can make an arcane spell list equivalent to the Adept's, give them the arcane bond feature rather than a familiar, and call them Magicians. Done.
Commoners still get class skills that let them specialize in thatching, or farming, or baking, or butchering, or pretty much any other Craft or Profession (because look, they get Craft and Profession). Just because they don't get their pick of extra skills like Spellcraft to specialize in doesn't mean they all try to do everything at once and never work together or specialize in anything.The real problem with the NPC classes is that they're a really slow way to build NPC's, and forcing them to follow the same skill system as the PC's leads to silliness like the king's Baker being an objectively important person resistant to many weak (HD-dependent) forms of magic (and much harder to kill than most people) because otherwise the system doesn't give you any way to get his Craft (Pies) score high. As opposed to just saying "Screw it, this dude bakes really well" and giving him a high skill bonus without needing to assign five feats and make him hard to kill.
Also it's stupid because come on who cares what the king's baker's baker score is. Between a system that makes stating up most NPC's harder than it needs to be and a game in which most of those stats don't make a difference anyhow, NPC classes as a whole just waste a lot of time.
I don't see NPC classes as being too wasteful of time because I have standard builds for most NPC roles / professions by age / level. I always leave a couple of things to randomize for a bit of flavor. It's a pain to set up, but if you are churning out the NPCs, or you suddenly need a typical farmer or laborer it saves a lot of time. Especially in the long run.
As for those bakers being harder to kill as they go up, well so are Wizards. How much close combat does the typical low level Wizard engage in? But he's still harder to kill in a knife fight as he goes up level by level. It is both an abstraction and, imo, an expression of the basic concept of experience making everyone better at their jobs and harder to kill. Whether they do a lot of fighting or not. Somehow, in the D&D / PF verse being good at anything makes you harder to kill. I can live with that, and I don't really expect my game world to map perfectly to real life in this respect anymore than I expect real world physics to map perfectly to game physics.
What I was saying were possible names for each.
I am thinking just converting Eberrons Magewright to PFRPG and then dropping in the Adepts class features (Summon Familiar). Call them Apprentice. You now have Divine Adepts and Arcane Apprentices.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that Varisians are a good call, not using the controversial name "gypsy" (which is pejorative for the people concerned, just like that n-word for the Afro-Americans) and emphasizing the more romanticized/idealized aspect of the Traveller culture (family virtues, joy of the road, dance and arts) instead of focusing on the "lazy dirty horse thief" stereotype. It's actually the same road that TSR took with Ravenloft's Vistani.
Contrast this with the World of Darkness "Gypsies" book which pretty much made the Romani a cabal of supernatural thieves of shady agenda. One of the worst blemishes in White Wolf's publishing history, blergh.
As for Mwangi, the same black people count Old Mage Jatembe, one of the greatest wizards and biggest "Good Guy No Strings Attached" personalities in Golarion. You pretty much can't do the "heart of darkness jungle" setting without having black-skinned natives. Less advanced does not mean "worse", the Bhutan people in our world (despite their technological backwardness) are one of the happiest nations on the planet, more than most of "Western" nations.
Everything is OK as long as the setting doesn't imply that <ethnicity, race> = inferior, criminal, nuisance.
While I agree in general that Varisians are FAR better designed than the WoD "gypsies", I want to say that not all PoC are okay with golarions portrayal. It IS exoticizing them in a way, and generally puts culture = skin color whenever the skin color isn't white. Whites are still the norm everything is centered around in Golarion. Of course, that's the case in most of society and paizo isn't worse than people in general (personally I'd say they're among the best when it comes to the larger RPG publishers, but I'm quite lucky in the race lottery so I might miss a lot of things others would see).
So basically, I agree with most of the points, but I'd not say "everything is okay as long as it's not race = inferior". Generalizing about races/ethnicities is bad regardless of how it's done, though of course some ways are worse than others.
See for example the Ethnic Magician trope.
I adore the NPC classes; I think they give real flavor to a setting.
I think the Adept, Expert and Warrior should each comprise about 10% of any population while PC classes should only be 1% of any population. (Aristocrats would be 2-5% of the pop; the rest would be Commoners.)
I would give Adepts the ability to spontaneously cast Orisons (similar to an ability possessed by all other spellcasters); I would also give bonus feats at 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th and 18th levels: metamagic for Adepts, combat for Warriors, and skill bonuses for Experts and Aristocrats. ( I am attempting to increase the challenge for PCs since most of those they encounter should be NPC classes.)
Some are reinventing the wheel in terms of NPC classes. In the D&D wiki, there's a 3.5 feat Arcane Adept that transforms the divine Adept into and arcane class. I would simply take 1st level in Expert, take that feat, and then proceed as an Arcane Adept. (I am sure there is also a Arcane Adept NPC class there as well as other NPC classes.)
I have no objections to adding more NPC classes. Although Expert could cover as an NPC thief, I am fond of the Thug - a combination warrior/thief NPC class. On these boards, an Adept variant NPC class called the Soothsayer was updated from Mongooses's Ultimate NPCs (I think).
I think we just need the Adept/Acolyte as a Divine NPC Caster then a Apprentice/Adept class for an Arcane NPC Caster.Well, the Adept already is a divine NPC? (Your wording is a little confusing I'm sorry)
But it sounds like you're calling for an arcane NPC?
You could just build an arcane spell list equivalent to the Adept, give them the arcane bond feature rather than a familiar, and call them Magicians.
Exactly.
Commoners still get class skills that let them specialize in thatching, or farming, or baking, or butchering, or pretty much any other Craft or Profession (because look, they get Craft and Profession). Just because they don't get their pick of extra skills like Spellcraft to specialize in doesn't mean they all try to do everything at once and never work together or specialize in anything.The real problem with the NPC classes is that they're a really slow way to build NPC's, and forcing them to follow the same skill system as the PC's leads to silliness like the king's Baker being an objectively important person resistant to many weak (HD-dependent) forms of magic (and much harder to kill than most people) because otherwise the system doesn't give you any way to get his Craft (Pies) score high. As opposed to just saying "Screw it, this dude bakes really well" and giving him a high skill bonus without needing to assign five feats and make him hard to kill.
Also it's stupid because come on who cares what the king's baker's baker score is. Between a system that makes stating up most NPC's harder than it needs to be and a game in which most of those stats don't make a difference anyhow, NPC classes as a whole just waste a lot of time.
I don't see NPC classes as being too wasteful of time because I have standard builds for most NPC roles / professions by age / level. I always leave a couple of things to randomize for a bit of flavor. It's a pain to set up, but if you are churning out the NPCs, or you suddenly need a typical farmer or laborer it saves a lot of time. Especially in the long run.
As for those bakers being harder to kill as they go up, well so are Wizards. How much close combat does the typical low level Wizard engage in? But he's still harder to kill in a knife fight as he goes up level by level. It is both an abstraction and, imo, an expression of the basic concept of experience making everyone better at their jobs and harder to kill. Whether they do a...
Stronger skill NPCs is a slight problem in world building. Easily compensated for IMO; just assign low or minimum HP per level.
Star Wars D20 had it best when they were using the Vitality/Wound system. The NPC classes received only their base Wound points, never and Vitality (HP per level). You could combine levels in a PC class with this in order to build differing levels of power. They added a Diplomat NPC class with poor BAB, Good Will Save, and 8 skill points per level. You could pile those levels on your "expert" and they would suck in combat and die immediately, despite having 15 ranks in Diplomacy. It was pretty cool.
I think the Adept, Expert and Warrior should each comprise about 10% of any population while each PC classes should only be 1% of any population. (Aristocrats would be 2-5% of the pop; the rest would be Commoners.)
I would give Adepts the ability to spontaneously cast Orisons (similar to an ability possessed by all other spellcasters); I would also give bonus feats at 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th and 18th levels: metamagic for Adepts, combat for Warriors, and skill bonuses for Experts and Aristocrats.
Oops twice.
Adepts would not get a bonus metamagic feat at 2nd level; they summon familiar instead.