When giving an NPC a PC class, how much more powerful does it become relative to NPC classed NPC's of the same level?
In general, an NPC with (only) NPC classes has CR equal to his level-2; an NPC with (only) PC classes has CR equal to his level-1, and an NPC with (only) PC classes and with PC wealth-by-level has CR equal to his level.
So a 6th level warrior is CR 4, a 6th level fighter is CR 5, and a 6th level fighter with the equivalent equipment to a 6th level PC is CR 6.
If you want to split half-and-half, a 3rd level warrior/3rd level fighter would be somewhere between CR 4 and CR 5. I recommend not splitting partly for that reason.
By CR one, but there is no way that a level of Commoner and a level of Warrior are equal.
A first level PC class is CR 1/2, a first level NPC class is CR 1/3 (with the exception of Kobolds that would be CR 1/4).
Fast replies, thanks.
I realized as soon as I posted that there might have been a thread on this recently. I think I even might have posted in it. Brain fart I guess.
The reason this came up is because I was working on the setting for my home game.
I have a rough sense of the power level I want to keep my world at. I'm thinking I want the power level a little lower then the typical assumptions of 3.x/PF. I'm working on settlements right now and one settlement in particular needs a council of rangers that act as it's wardens.
They have to be rangers for flavor reasons, but I was wondering how quickly they would fly out of balance with my typical warrior classed men-at-arms in other settlements.
|
What exactly do they need to be a ranger for? Favored Enemy? Spell Casting? Combat Style? Skills?
Combat style can be covered with feats on a warrior.
Spells can be covered by Warrior X/ Adept x.
Skills can be covered by Expert 1 / Warrior X.
Favored Enemy can only be done by Ranger, but you can easily go Ranger 1/ Warrior X.
Ranger is just a job title. That role and flavor can be filled by any class, especially if you are talking about NPCs.
Depends the NPC classes are of variable power. Roughly speaking Expert & Warrior levels are only slightly weaker than PC class levels, Aristocrat and Adept levels are about 3/4ths as good as PC class levels, while Commoner levels are about 1/2 as good as PC class levels. This is just rough though, a good guideline - but a level 8 NPC Warrior is almost as powerful as a level 8 NPC Fighter.
Ummm Warrior is significantly worse off than a fighter. Warriors are don't get bonus feats, Armour / weapon training or bravery. That's a huge power drop in my books. Similarly Expert vs Rogue.... Expert is a rogue that looses rogue talents and sneak attack (and other minor bits of gravy), with the only redeeming feature that they have a good will instead of Reflex.
Comparatively, an 8th level fighter will have 1 Weapon training (so +1 Attack / Damage) 2 rounds of armour training (potential +2 AC from Dex) and 5 additional combat feats. That isn't "slightly" weaker in my books. That beaten with a nerf stick until it cries itself to sleep.
In terms of BAB and saves they are identical. With the exception of the adept, NPC classes ONLY have that though. They don't have other class features.
What exactly do they need to be a ranger for? Favored Enemy? Spell Casting? Combat Style? Skills?
Combat style can be covered with feats on a warrior.
Spells can be covered by Warrior X/ Adept x.
Skills can be covered by Expert 1 / Warrior X.
Favored Enemy can only be done by Ranger, but you can easily go Ranger 1/ Warrior X.
Ranger is just a job title. That role and flavor can be filled by any class, especially if you are talking about NPCs.
They pretty much only need to be rangers for fluff/story reasons.
Interesting point though about the possibility of calling them rangers by name but mechanically still giving them NPC classes. I get what you're saying and it's a nice reminder that class names are only names.
In this case though it seems like it would be reinventing the wheel a little since the ranger class already comes prepackaged with everything that makes a ranger feel like a ranger. Also PC's that play rangers will likely have emerged from among the ranks of these rangers in terms of backstory, so it makes sense for the NPC rangers to be as mechanically similar as possible starting out, with the PC ranger eventually far exceeding the capabilities of his peers by dint of adventuring.
|
|
Also, if the NPC aren't going to be in combat with the PCs or sweeping in to save them, it doesn't really matter what their stats are. Detailed NPC stats only matter if they will be involved in combat on-stage with the PCs. Otherwise, you can just set a DC or a Skill level for an opposed social check on the fly. If you want to stat them out in advance in case of that eventuality, then you can give them PC levels. Their enhanced CR rating won't matter if the PCs don't fight them.
Also, if the NPC aren't going to be in combat with the PCs or sweeping in to save them, it doesn't really matter what their stats are. Detailed NPC stats only matter if they will be involved in combat on-stage with the PCs. Otherwise, you can just set a DC or a Skill level for an opposed social check on the fly. If you want to stat them out in advance in case of that eventuality, then you can give them PC levels. Their enhanced CR rating won't matter if the PCs don't fight them.
Thanks, that is good practical advice. One of my goals is to be ready for anything my players might decide to do but sometimes I get carried away trying to liv up to that ideal and I have a feeling sometimes I'm making things harder on myself then they need to be.