| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would love to start a collection thread for people to post random NPC builds in. Any level, any race, as optimized as you want... just NPC classes, though. Although, they can be multiclassed with other NPC classes. I try to stick close to the basic NPC WBL guidelines, and use a 15pt buy... not that it matters, build yours how you want, I just try state the parameters they were built with. I figure this could be useful for GM's looking for minions...
Example:
Human Warrior 3
Human
... Heart of the Fey replaces Skilled, which gives us low-light vision, a +1 racial bonus to reflex and will saves, as wells as both Know:Nature and Perception as class skills.
15pt buy (w/ racial modifiers):
18 (16+2),12,12,13,10,8
Skills (2+Int): 9
Climb +8 (+3+1+4)
Craft +5 (+3+1+1)
Handle Animal +3 (+3+1-1)
Intimidate +2 (+3+0-1)
Know:nature +5 (+3+1+1)
Perception +6 (+3+3+0)
Profession +3 (+3+1+0)
Ride +4 (+3+0+1)
Swim +8 (+3+1+4)
1. Combat Expertise
1. Weapon Focus (Greatsword or Scythe)
2.
3. Swordplay Style
At 3:
BAB +3
Base saves +3/+1/+1
(+4/+3/+2 total)
HP ~19
To attack: +9
+4 (Str) +3 (BAB) +1 (WF) +1 (mwk)
To damages: ~12
2D4 (~5) + 6 (1.5 Str); 20/×4
2D6 (~7) + 6 (1.5 Str); 19-20/×2
Defense: AC~20 CMD~18
+7 (armor) +1 (Dex) +1 (dodge) +1 (shield)
Combat gear:
Mwk Greatsword or mwk Scythe, Banded Mail, misc.
Tactics...
Swift action: enter style
Non-action: Combat Expertise
Using a charge to cover ground and attack with bonuses, figuring we have enough defense to eat the charging penalty. Swordplay Style only eliminates the Combat Expertise penalty on the first attack made, but the penalty still applies to AoO. Charging up to opponents reduces the chances of the penalty to AoO coming into play.
I dunno, it always felt like the concept of NPC classes was dead on arrival since the majority of (notable) NPCs actually use PC classes.
Nobody creates their Cohort as an Aristocrat, but a bard.
Nobody adds levels of warrior to the goblin chief, but they do add fighter.
The BBEG is never a lv 20 adept, it's a wizard.
And if you want to spice up the encounters by giving class levels to the enemies then you'll never choose the NPC classes since they're usually worse than literally just adding HD to whatever you wanted buffed. Which is a very low bar.
If you're interested in mook builds with NPC stats and wealth that can provide interesting challenges to the party, but still uses PC classes, then that's probably more relevant for most games imo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was just looking for minions, more than interesting challenges, honestly. The above Human Warrior 3 is, in no way, meant to be an interesting challenge or memorable fight... it's literally just a 3HD minion with heavy armor and a 2H weapon... a generic soldier or guard or bandit. You would have four of these exact Human Warrior 3 minions playing cards at the same table... they would be like the lowest baseline enemy in the dungeon... they would be everywhere. Lol.
And I am more just curious what others have done with NPC classes. Yeah, NPC classes are silly and lame, even in concept... but still, a lot of GM's rely on NPC-classed NPC's for minions or cannon fodder or whatever. NPC classes cost way less when calculating the overall CR of an encounter, so you can add way more enemies using NPC classes... sometimes you want overwhelming numbers, or whatever the situation might call for.
I have seen some fun Kobold Adept builds posted before, and I want to compile a collection of similar builds that use NPC classes, regardless of how inferior they may be to comparable builds using PC classes. I am well aware of what PC classes can do, but I am curious what people have done with the NPC classes, specifically. It would be cool to see different peoples' different levels of optimization available with NPC classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a few years old, but you might find this 15th level commoner interesting:
Drago the Beast
Half-orc commoner (VMC barbarian) 15
26 Str (+2 race, +4 inherent, +2 enhancement; goes to 30 during rage), 17 Dex, 18 Con (goes to 22 during rage), 14 Int, 14 Wis (+2 enhancement), 16 Cha
Toothy alternate racial trait
Feats: Eldritch Heritage (Abyssal bloodline; Claws, 1d6, magic, flaming), Improved Eldritch Heritage (Strength of the Abyss), Power Attack, Skill Focus (Knowledge (Planes))
VMC Features: Rage 19 rounds/day, Uncanny Dodge, Rage Power (Lesser Fiend Totem), DR 3/-
Skills: Diplomacy +5, Intimidate +20, Knowledge (Arcana) +5, Knowledge (Local) +5, Knowledge (Nature) +4, Knowledge (Planes) +6, Perception +17, Sense Motive +6, Use Magic Device +18
Gear (NPC): +2 mithral chain shirt (5,100 gp), ring of protection +2 (8,000 gp), +1 furious falchion (8,375 gp), amulet of mighty fists (furious) (5,000 gp), belt of giant strength +2 (4,000 gp), cloak of fangs (2,800 gp), headband of unshakable resolve (5,600 gp), stalker's mask (3,500 gp), 625 gp other gear
That is exactly the sort of $#!+ I was looking for, actually. It's an NPC class VMC build... how awesome. I was toying with the idea of VMC'ing NPC classes, but hadn't quite convinced myself it was ok, yet... and speak of the devil, an example of such a build appears. This thread was already worth posting.
There is a role for NPC classes in the game, but it is fairly limited. They serve as a way to define unimportant characters with minimal stat blocks. I don’t use the adept class because anyone that has the ability to use magic should be a fairly important character. Warriors are conscripts with minimal training so are usually only 1st level character, and under rare circumstances may be 2nd level. If an NPC warrior survives enough combat to gain more than 2nd level, they should use the retraining rules to transition to fighter. That leaves only Aristocrats and Experts that will actually gain any real levels in an NPC class.
Of the NPC classes the aristocrat has the most potential to create a decent NPC. With Medium BAB and decent proficiencies in weapon and armor they can be at least something of a challenge in combat. They also have enough social skill and position to be a significant non-combat challenge. Having a good will save makes them less likely to be influenced by magic than most NPC classes.
Expert has limited potential for a decent NPC. You can do the local sage or the smith that is skilled enough to create magic Items (with the magical craftsman feat), but not much beyond that.
Also, there are other uses for NPC classes... like one's followers granted by things like Leadership. You might as well have useful peasants following you if you are going to have literally hundreds of them.
Here are some archers I have used before, both as enemy NPC's and as followers:
Half-Orc Aristocrat 4
This NPC technically could be ran with only 3 levels, but they cannot afford a masterwork HornBow (w/ strength rating) at level 3. Could use Warrior just as easily if you prefer the one point of BAB over all the skills and superior saves offered by the Aristocrat... it's your choice.
Half-Orc
... Sacred Tattoos
... Shaman's Apprentice
1. Endurance
1. Point Blank Shot
3. Precise Shot
At 4:
BAB +3
Base saves +1/+1/+4
(+2/+2/+5 w/ luck bonus)
Using a HornBow they deal appropriate damages, even just firing once per round. They are more focused on accuracy and being able to shoot into melee. Often readying an action to shoot spellcasters.
Elf Adept 5
Elf
... Illustrious Urbanite
... don't trade away Elven Magic
... don't trade away Weapon Familiarity
1. Spell Focus Conjuration
1. Savior's Arrow
3. Weapon Focus Longbow
5. Erastil's Blessing
Uses Wisdom for bow's attack, has 1/day healing arrow ability. And can cast Invisibility.
At 5:
BAB +2
Base saves +1/+1/+4
CL 5, 2nd-level spells
Human Warrior 1
Human
... Heart of the Fey
1. Deadly Aim
1. Ranged Trip
Can trip at range... at level 1... as an NPC... 'nough said.
Elf Expert 3
Although, literally any class with simple weapon proficiency will work just as easily.
Elf
... Crossbow Training
1. Point Blank Shot
3. Rapid Shot
Using a masterwork Light Crossbow that she reloads as a free action due to her alternative racial feature.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm really not a fan of the NPC classes as presented. The idea of a 20th level expert, say the world's best artist, being able to out fight a seasoned mid-level adventurer who has had a career killing all sorts of monsters is absurd.
I houserule that commoners and experts go up in skill points and gain feats as they level up. But BAB, Hp and saves remain fixed. Apprentices are level 1-2 , journeymen levels 3-4 and masters from level 5 with legendary craftsmen being about level 10.
Warriors relate to guards and soldiery, with trained regular soldiers being level 1, veterans level 2, elite units level 3 and the ultra-elite and legendary units being slightly higher.
I'm really not a fan of the NPC classes as presented. The idea of a 20th level expert, say the world's best artist, being able to out fight a seasoned mid-level adventurer who has had a career killing all sorts of monsters is absurd.
I houserule that commoners and experts go up in skill points and gain feats as they level up. But BAB, Hp and saves remain fixed. Apprentices are level 1-2 , journeymen levels 3-4 and masters from level 5 with legendary craftsmen being about level 10.
Warriors relate to guards and soldiery, with trained regular soldiers being level 1, veterans level 2, elite units level 3 and the ultra-elite and legendary units being slightly higher.
There are Warrior 7 "expert bodyguards" as well as Aristocrat 6 "officers"... so I do not think it is necessary to retrain them into PC classes after a few levels... unless you are looking for some class features specifically.
Even in AP's, you can find a lot of NPC's with a decent amount of NPC class levels that you could simply repurpose without retraining classes and messing with their CR... too much. You can optimize an NPC class NPC without affecting the encounter nearly as much as changing that same NPC's class to a PC class. To keep the CR the same, you would have to give them fewer class levels in the PC class... and at that point, what's the point?
You can still make plenty fun NPC's without using class abilities or feats that rely on class abilities. PF1 is rich with opportunity when it comes to using feats to show a particular style or theme.
Here's an NPC "druid" or "ranger":
Adept 7
1. Nature Magic
3. Nature Soul
5. Animal Ally
7. Boon Companion
This NPC has Know Direction as a constant-effect SLA and can choose a Druid Orison like Enhanced Diplomacy, Grasp, Resistance, Spark, or Virtue as a 1/day SLA. They have a fully leveled Animal Companion, a Familiar, and are casting the same level of spells as a Ranger at this level... without all the murderhobo stuff that could easily come from levels in the actual Ranger class. They can act as a guide and a healer, they can kind of fill the role of a Druid or Ranger, without being overwhelmingly powerful... or even powerful enough to adversely affect the overall CR of the encounter.
Gnome Adept 1
Gnome
... Fell Magic
An Elf could actually start with Spell Focus Necromancy, instead of the Gnome's alternative racial feature that increases Necromancy DC's by 1... works out the same, I suppose. But the Gnome's Fell Magic also adds some SLA's with Wisdom-based DC's, which goes well with the Adept's casting.
15pt buy (w/ racials)
8,10,12,10,18,10
1. Reach Spell
Prepares close range Touch of Fatigue. Has almost a 50% chance of shutting down a low-level Barbarian's Rage. It's not awesome, at all, but it's a valid use of an NPC (and their actions) at this level.
The adept spell list is so limited and generic that using it for NPC’s makes them boring and one dimensional. These are not interesting NPC’s they are one dimensional cardboard cut outs.
The “druid” or “ranger” has almost no nature themed spells available. The adept also only has 2 skill points per level and lacks very few class skills and will need to max out handle animal to be able to control their animal companion. So, despite having an animal companion it makes a really bad “druid”
The adept has a total of 8 necromancy spells on its spell list, and none higher than 3rd level. It does not even have inflict light wounds on its list. So other than using touch of fatigue it has really limited options in combat.
This is the major reason I don’t use the adept. They have no real combat ability outside of spells. With their limited spell list, they end up using the same spells in combat. There simply is not a large enough spell list to make unique characters from. Do you players a favor and don’t use such boring NPCs against them.
They're just NPC's... what do you actually expect from them?
The "druid/ranger" Adept 7 has a +3 BAB, some animals, and some bonuses to Know:Nature... they are someone that helps the party when lost in woods... a hermit by pond with a waterfall and some butterflies... maybe a Kobold or Mite or Pugwampi priestess...
The Fell Gnome Adept 1 is, well, literally a 1HD minion... complete cannon fodder. However, with an 18 Wisdom, they can prepare a healing spell, as well as a close range ToF... so they can at least, perhaps, heal someone if their ToF fails. Fell Gnomes also have bleed, chill touch, detect poison, and touch of fatigue as 1/day SLA's... all with Wisdom-based DC's... essentially tripling the spells per day our Adept 1 could potentially cast before dying. It's a 1HD minion that can buff or heal, possibly shut down a Barbarian's Rage, and even has a handful of SLA's that can deal damage, force negative conditions, or even Detect Poisoin. What more can a Gnome Adept 1 really be expected to do?
So the party runs into some no-name bandits demanding toll on a bridge... or whatever. These aren't story-related enemies, or part of a cult, there is no note that leads to further quests/glory... just some "bandits" on a bridge. Possibly a Goblin or Kobold or Mite war party.
You have at least one bowman, at least one reach guy, at least one dude with a big sword or axe or hammer or whatever, and at least one mage. Each of these NPC's will probably be appropriated leveled in NPC classes to provide adequate challenge for the party. This encounter is simply a speedbump between levels 1 and 2, or 2 and 3, or whatever. Or they are minions to more important enemies, it doesn't really matter.
You can afford to litter the battlefield with more enemies when using NPC classes without skyrocketing the encounter's CR. And, you can make NPC's that nearly always hit, or are hard to hit, or deal okay damage, or heal, or whatever... not everyone has completely abandoned the CR system, so "buying" NPC classes for encounters still makes a lot of sense for a lot of GM's. The whole point of this thread was to illustrate the depth of what could be achieved with NPC classes, not to put them down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have to read Adequate Commoner! It proves that NPC classes can prevail through planning and being equipped properly. A very good supplement in general. Plus NPC classes make PC classes feel more heroic!
In my fifth level Campaign that starts out as fantasy and turns to sci-fi my 5th Commoner, who is a real trouble magnet will discover a large spaceship in a cavern. This in turn will lead to a group being organized consisting of every class I can think of at fifth level. Why not start with the most basic class?
1st level Warriors with equipment suited to different roles will be the Grunts, with the 5th level Warrior being like a master Sargeant. Experts as logistics and other things.
I will have to order that, even though I am the last person that needs convinced NPC classes can be made to work... I rather enjoy seeing what I can accomplish with NPC classes.
Here's a "warlock/warpriest" build that I have used in various forms:
Human Warrior 1/Adept X
1. Power Attack
1. Furious Focus
The idea is to grab Furious Focus right from the start, so we are swinging without penalty until BAB+6... which, without more levels in Warrior, is not until level 11.
Warrior 4/Adept 4 is BAB+6, and makes a decent "warlock/warpriest", as well.
Ahh, good old Wyrmcrowned Kobold Adept... Face of the Devourer is a 1st-level Adept spell that adds a +4 circumstance bonus to Intimidate, and lasts 1min/level. They could take the Nature Magic feat, and select Enhanced Diplomacy as their 1/day Druid orison for an additional +2 competence bonus to Intimidate that lasts 1 minute... although Skill Focus would be the superior option.
1D20 (~11) +4 circumstance +3 class skill +2 competence (or +3 Skill Focus) +2 racial +1 rank + Charisma = ~23 for their Intimidate check (without even considering their Charisma)... from a 1HD Kobold Adept.
Could have Dazzling Display online by level 5... the extra ranks and potential to increase Charisma will only make the Intimidate check higher... say, ~28+Cha... from, what, a CR2 Kobold Adept? What's the average Wisdom modifier of a level 5 PC? Pretty sure our little lizardman the size of a turkey just scared the pants off every single one of our big, bad murderhobo PC's. Lol.
Kobold Adept 5 (CR2)
Kobold
... Dragonmaw
... Wyrmcrowned
1. Skill Focus Intimidate
3. Weapon Focus Bite
5. Dazzling Display
Halfling Warrior 3 (CR1)
Halfling
... Warslinger
15pt buy (w/ racials)
14,16,12,10,10,10
1. Weapon Focus Sling
3. Slipslinger Style
To attack: (+9)
+3 BAB +1 mwk +1 Size +1 WF +3 Dex
To damage: (~6)
1D6 +1 Style +2 Str
Our CR1 Halfling Warrior is slinging stones with their Sling Staff at better than CR4 accuracy, and still dealing close to the expected CR1 damages... with impunity from 80' away.
You could do something very similar with a Halfling Aristocrat 3... using same stats and alternative racial features as the aforementioned Halfling Warrior 3.
Halfling Aristocrat 3 (CR1)
1. Point Blank Shot
3. Arc Slinger
To attack: (+7)
+2 BAB +1 mwk +1 Size +3 Dex
To damage: (~6)
1D6 +1 PBS +2 Str
Attack goes up to +8 within 30' due to PBS... Arc Slinger carries the PBS damage bonus all the way out to the Sling Staff's first 80' range increment.
Hugo Rune,
A lot of what you wrote resonates with me.
I don't Adepts them as being standalone characters, but as acolytes, coven members, cultists, and so on. I envision the class as being an umbrella that allows for divine and arcane spellcasters alike. To that end, I see value in Adepts being able to go up to 4-8 levels, depending on the level of the actual Cleric, Wizard, etc., whom they follow.
I don't like the Aristocrat class as written. I've never actually put it in play, but I'm a fan of the Star Wars d20 Noble concept, and would plug in something to that effect: having decent skills, early access to the Leadership feat, the "call in favor" class feature, and so on. Just enough to make them a discernible leader, without encroaching on Core/Base/Alternate Classes.
I see Commoners as single-HD, unskilled laborers. I've never seen the point of leveling them up (which is not to say that there isn't one, just that it isn't immediately obvious to me). They're my barmaids, my beggars (actual ones, not men and women marked by the Thieves Guild), my cow-herds, and so on.
I see Experts as Guildsmen--apprentices, journeymen, fully-accredited craftsmen, masters, and so on. I don't mind them going up in level, but I prefer for them to be limited according to what makes sense given the skills they possess. For example, a 5th level Expert with no INT bonus can take 10 and create a masterwork item as long as he or she has access to masterwork tools. That's a master craftsman in my mind, and should be an accordingly rare specimen. When we're talking about legendary craftsmen, I'd much rather shift to, e.g., a Wizard focused on Craft feats than a 20th level Expert.
Warriors are problematic to me. I understand the interest in allowing for 2nd level veterans, but the reality is that you don't get another feat until 3rd level... and at that point I can't divorce myself from the amount of XP that warrior would need... and how much they'd realistically get given the nature of their existence. So I basically arrived at this:
1. Human realms that rely on conscripts largely do so in the form of warriors. They are limited to 1st level, and get either Phalanx Formation (for spearmen trained to the schiltron) or Point-Blank Shot (for archers). They are supplemented by formations of trained men-at-arms (Fighters) and knights (Cavaliers).
2. Humanoids without a structured society (e.g., orcs, goblinoids) can advance as warriors to whatever level makes sense for their context. They are led by exceptional specimens with special skills (Barbarians, Fighters).
3. Humanoids that benefit from both longevity AND structured, civilized societies, and the resources those can afford them (e.g., dwarves, elves) have no use for NPC classes in general, much less the warrior class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why wouldn't NPC's advance in levels, just like the rest of us?
Some random Warrior... that's his freaking job, it's what he does. He does this 9am to 5pm, Monday through Friday, for half his freaking life... he gets one level in an NPC class for his life's efforts?
Even a nightwatch guard of a small village will see enough action to level up... chase away a bear last night? Survive the bat swarm? Eventually they will level up, yes-no?
That’s precisely it, though:
What does the average warrior conscript or watchman get up to between 9AM to 5PM, Monday through Friday, or what have you?
How often does that amount to having a CR 1 encounter?
How often will each of these men and women have such an encounter on their own, as opposed to with a number of other warriors (which in turn lowers the XP each of them earn)?
And how often will each of them survive such an encounter?
Life expectancy rates for the medieval and early modern eras, to include casualty rates in battles of the same era and attrition caused by sickness, etc., don’t seem to support the idea of numerous veteran amateur conscripts. There were certainly exceptions to the rule, but the rule where military longevity and experience were concerned was professional soldiery.
You could of course argue that all those Italian condottieri, French gendarmes, German landsknechts, English men-at-arms, etc., were actually warriors with extra levels, but I’d offer that it’s simpler and more sensible for them to be Fighters.
I hasten to emphasize that this is all very much IMHO!
They probably will not gain XP at any sort of rate that could be considered exceptional, but they will, in fact, accumulate XP... probably enough to see multiple levels, even in their short-lived lives. Every single thing that goes bump in the night essentially gives them some XP if they survive until morning, as not all encounters must end in a death. These walls weren't put up because they're pretty. We stand guard against the creatures of the night so others may sleep. Every hungry pack of wolves, every meandering bear, every time anything from the bestiary approaches those walls and is engaged by any of the guards will provide every guard with XP.
The guy that spends his nights on wall defending your town is probably the same guy you ask to get the rats out of your cellar. And these sorts of "side quests" happen to be an excellent source of XP, even for NPC's... exactly as side quests are an excellent source for Player Characters. Maybe that hungry pack of wolves or meandering bear they chased off the other night shows back up when one of the guards is out gathering firewood or hunting. That is another encounter our Warrior faces, and if the party is talking to them today, they survived and gained XP from it.
NPC's exist and have lives before the party encounters them. They also continue to exist and live their lives after the party leaves. There is a whole world happening outside of the tiny bubble the party exists in at any given time. The background is active. The town didn't pop into existence simply because the party approaches.
VM, my intent here isn’t to prove to you that you can’t or shouldn’t have NPC warriors with 2+ levels in your game. I’m just offering my opinion as to why I find it problematic… or, more accurately, not as thematically desirable as actual professional soldiery represented by heroic classes filling that “veteran” niche.
I just don’t see 4-5 conscripts or watchmen running into the kind of mortal danger that gives you semi-meaningful XP consistently enough for warriors with multiple levels to be common, much less the norm. I can certainly imagine exceptions to the rule, and acknowledge their existence—e.g., the 1d4 3rd level warriors accompanying the Corrupt Politician NPC in “Andoran: Birthplace of Freedom.” On the other hand, I feel much more comfortable with the rule being reflected by entries like the Orcs, an actual warrior race, wherein just 18 percent of combatamts accumulate enough XP to gain additional levels… and all of them do in Core or Base classes, not NPC ones.
But again, your mileage may vary.
In the spirit of this thread, if I were to offer a build for the NPC Warrior with 2+ levels, I would propose something like Penal Legion Veterans: formations of convicts given a choice between [insert awful punishment here] and earning their freedom in the field of battle in Forlorn Hope-style units. Beneath the blood-red banner of the vanguards and line-breakers, they incur horrific casualties. Eventually, survivors of formations too attrited to be effective are recycled into other penal units. These convict-soldiers don’t receive specialized training or equipment (quite the contrary), but over the length of a years-long war a hardened few accumulate enough experience to become stalwart killers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, sorry. I did not mean to be argumentative or abrasive.
In my campaigns, most any NPC with a name is going to be built with class levels. In fact, I even have class level built "Bandit #1" and "Bandit #2", and NPC's with class levels that could be very scary but are not in any way intended to ever see combat. I have NPC's with 20 class levels, that aren't even that important.
I love building PF1 characters, so I take nearly every opportunity I can to rewrite NPC's or build completely new ones for whatever purpose. Pathfinder is rich with feats and class abilities that are fun to explore and tinker with. This thread was intended to explore and tinker with NPC classes... not if NPC classes should be used.
Your passion for character-building is something I really like about your threads and posts, and I apologize for derailing this topic. And no, you didn’t come off as abrasive by any means.
Regarding adepts, I think of them as "petty spellcasters." They are effectively the NPC "hedge witch" or "shaman/witch doctor" (before those PC classes/archetypes were published).
From a world-building standpoint as a GM, adepts (with a few item creation feats) are more suited for the small-town magic item crafter, potion-seller, etc. than a PC class because they are so much less "powerful." At some point, the conceit that PC-class NPCs (sometimes of equal or higher level than the party) in the town need the PCs to solve the adventure plot wears thin... There is also much less temptation to turn the NPC into a deus ex machina GMPC.
One good thing that PF2 does is take the shackles off the GM, allowing an NPC to be built with the abilities as required, rather than fitting into a neat and tidy class structure. Obviously you can do that in PF1 (for example, having a town guard who is essentially a Warrior-3 that can cast Hold Person 3/day, but has no other special abilities) but it's not enabled in the RAW.
I like to think of NPC classed beings as beings that have the class abilities of whatever NPC class I've given them. As for what flavor they have, I assign that based on the narrative I need to tell. An adept is a petty spellcaster, a friendly priestess, a wu-jen with a six demon bag, and so on. Even better, an Adept 2/Warrior 1 is a holy knight, a paladin, a cleric, a ranger, a magus, a warlock from other editions, a broken being ridden by a hellish spirit of evil, a pawn of a dark patron, a cultist, a shaman, and so on.
NPC classes, like PC classes, are whatever I need them to be. I want a stealthy spy guy to harass the PCs: I could make a Wizard that uses their spells to conceal themselves, a diviner-type oracle, a kobold with sorcerer levels, an NPC with Expert levels and so on. The point is, they're a spy guy that harasses the PCs.
My point is, a Fighter isn't just a fighter; they're a person that is good at using weapons and armor in conflict resolution. The less hung up I get on the name of the class, the less beholden I am to the fluff text of the class. This lets me take an NPC with the appropriate feats to get to Spring Attack, then describe them leaping skyward and bounding down Anime style rather than saying the Fighter moves, attacks, then moves; no AoO.
I mean, other folks can do whatever they want with NPCs or whatever in their games. I'm only saying this is how I do mine. No disrespect is meant and if I've offended I'm sorry.
I agree completely.
I often use generic/vague terms like "mage" or "soldier" to simply express a theme, not a summary of their abilities. A class in not defined by its title. This is true of both PC and NPC classes. And with the plethora of feats available in PF1, you can pretty much make anyone do anything you want them to, regardless of which chassis you build them on.
FWIW, I seem to recall back in SKR's time that he suggested that the average NPC earned 2XP per day.
Using this and some houserules, notably adding profession to other related skills, I came up with what was primarily a crafting system but which could be easily used for other NPCs.
I also applied a different leveling system, each year an NPC would get a 50% chance to get a level point, once they had acquired as many level points as the sum of their levels, they would progress to the next level. I found that this gave a nice distribution of levels and was similar to the 2XP/day on average. I have toyed with the idea of say 5% chance per month instead of 50% per year to try and flatten the distribution and get some higher levels but have never progressed it.
This gave me a nice baseline for the average peasant (commoner) and tradesman or professional (expert). Most are cookie cutters of each other with the profession, craft and known knowledge skills changed to suit. If a module calls for an oddball [like the tailor in Hommlet], I can adjust things to suit. In his case, I moved his level up two, maxed the dexterity score and swapped one of the standard feats for weapon specialisation (heavy crossbow). As I said in my previous posting, I keep BAB, HP and saves fixed at level 1.
When it came to Warriors, I noted that the class skills are similar to a Commoner's and also reasoned that most militia would be drawn from the peasantry rather than the trades. So a Warrior 1/Commoner x can easily be a farmer/militia member or a member of the city watch, whilst a warrior x is a professional soldier. In my previous posting I'd stated I used levels 1-3 to cover regular, veteran and elite. There are also the officers, which referring back to the 3.5e Heroes of Battle are the equivalent of commanders ranging from level 1 to level 7, which would be 1-7 levels above the soldier level. So a Veteran Corporal (level 1 commander) would be level 3 and the corporal's of an elite unit would be level 4, whilst the General would be levels 8-10.
Wow... I live in a different world, I guess. I just figured these guys have $#!+ going on, for years. Yeah, lives are short in comparison... there's freaking dragons and zombies and mad mages, on top of an old times hard life toiling for one's bread and safety every freaking day. They existed before the party showed up, and [God-willing] will be here after the party leaves. Assuming the party doesn't get a wild hair up their arses and literally kill everything in sight... that's always an option in this game. It's like today's worst crimes, but with magic involved. These peasants have to deal with mass shootings that involve freaking necromancers raising the people they kill as zombies to kill more people. I give my background peasants the shadow of a doubt, and assume they have gained XP if they are alive to meet the party today.
Here is my baseline Commoner. This is the lowly peasant... your average "John Doe". These are people working fields in the background, and next to you in the tavern. They are the lowest I care to go, but they are tempered from years of hard labor:
15pt buy (w/o racial modifiers):
14,14,12,10,13,10
Skills (2+Int):
Climb +5 (+3+0+2)
Craft +4 (+3+1+0)
Handle Animal +4 (+3+1+0)
Perception +5 (+3+1+1)
Profession +6 (+3+2+1)
Ride +6 (+3+1+2)
Swim +5 (+3+0+2)
1. Catch Off-Guard
2.
3. Toughness
HP: 16 (3d6+3+3)
Fort: +2
Ref: +3
Will: +2
BAB +1
Melee:
Cold Iron Sawback Kunai +3 (1d4+2), or
Improvised Weapons +3
Ranged:
Cold Iron Sawback Kunai +3 (1d4+2), or
Sling +3 (1d4+2)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love the random background generator tool on the AON website as a resource for NPCs with which you could expect PCs to have significant interaction—whether that’s having a contextual idea for how they’ll behave or (if they’ll get into combat) what kind of feats and tactics might make sense for them.
The guy that spends his days turning big rocks into small rocks is probably more than capable of using his chair to kill a squishy Wizard. Lol.
Most of these stats and feats literally never see any use. I do not associate myself with people that feel it necessary to have their characters slaughter background NPC's. In fact, I have players that have chosen to deal nonlethal damage to animals so they knock the animals out to be released later. So these NPC's are simply built to what I think makes sense for them. They are not built to provide a challenge, or anything fancy... they are farmers and miners that, if provoked, use what they have at hand to defend themselves.
The famous Cold Iron Sawback Kunai is within their budget, and would prove exceedingly useful in their day to day lives. Cold Iron is probably as fancy as they can afford, but in a world where monsters are diverse enough for the material of your weapon to actually matter, it is a necessary expense. Everyone carrying a dagger is pretty standard, but the Kunai makes way more sense for a farmer or laborer. You cannot, or should not, ever use a knife to pry... and prying is something laborers must do themselves in a time before commonplace machinery.
I don't even use their stats when I have random villagers stand up to the giant crashing through the north wall... the woodcutter goes down swinging, lodging his axe deep into the giant's toenail before being scooped up and eaten, or thrown hundreds of feet into the air, or squished under the giant's filthy heel. So it's not like having every single Commoner as a CR1 "threat" actually even matters. They are still just NPC's toiling away in the background, being eaten by dragons, and rended limb from limb by trolls.
My average Expert has 5HD... to show their "expertise". Actually, it is simply to give them the Master Craftsman feat, but they still get a 4HD stat bump and +3 BAB out of it. I have 8HD Aristocrats running around like its nothing special... because, to me, an 8HD Aristocrat is nothing special. Just a "fancy" NPC that might use bigger words than your typical farmer.
I rarely give anyone or anything less than 3 levels of any class, regardless of whether it is an NPC class or PC class. A lot of times I will shamelessly give things however many levels in whatever class to get what I want from them or the class. If I'm giving something levels in a 3/4 BAB class, but need them to have a certain BAB... I just give them more levels. If I want to play with something that isn't unlocked until whatever number of levels in that class, I give something that many levels in the class. Whatever results is what it is.
I can introduce these things to the party whenever I feel it is appropriate, but they always exist. If the party goes looking for snakes, they may find them. I try to keep things balanced, but I don't necessarily change things to match the party's capabilities. There are plenty of opportunities around every corner for the party to be completely outclassed by someone or something that I haven't even given a name or background to yet. The world is big and scary.
Bosses have as many levels as they need to do something memorable. They get templates and player WBL and I will straight up bend/break the rules stacking archetypes or allowing different weapons to work with class abilities that otherwise shouldn't. Bosses do whatever I want or need them to do, and I will go through pretty great lengths to make them do SOMETHING the party might remember.
Sometimes I introduce different NPC's based on completely different points of comparison... I might view an NPC as a martial enemy even though they are built on a spellcasting chassis, and I might give them enough levels to match the BAB of the party's martials. I might give a multiclass NPC enough levels to match the party's spellcasters' CL if I view that particular NPC as a caster more than martial. The class and numbers of levels mean very little compared to how and why I build any particular NPC.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The vast majority of characters in Pathfinder, including those with PC classes are supposed to be 5th level or lower. From 6th to 11th level are the notable characters of the kingdom. 12th level characters are considered legendary characters and are the most powerful in the world. That is the default assumption of the game. 5th level characters are usually those at the top of their profession not the average. The best smith in the city might be a 5th level expert and most will actually be lower level.
If your average expert is 5th level, your campaign is so far out of the normal that any comparison to a normal campaign is not going to work. When every village blacksmith can beat the snot out of a 1st level fighter what need to they have for adventurers?
By the way to actually make magic items the expert needs to be at least 7th level. Master Craftsman requires 5 ranks in a craft which means it cannot be taken until 5th level. The feat allows a character to take magic creation feats, but they still have to take the feat. That means the earliest they can take a magic creation feat is 7th level.
I try to provide 1-20 campaigns. When the whole thing is designed for the party to reach level 20, I need to be able to provide appropriate level threats for high-level murderhobos. Most of the semi-optimized Fighters these days could single-handedly kill a 5HD Expert at first level, so I don't feel bad being outside of the guidelines or expectations. A lot, and I mean A LOT, of my named bad guys are easily packing 12+ levels... 15 is not at all uncommon. I do not shy away from class levels in the slightest.
The Sensitive archetype for Adept is especially interesting to me. It offers Charisma-based casting, and has UMD as a class skill. On top of that, it has bonus feats... starting at level 1. At level 4, if you channel the Marshal Spirit you get a bonus to Charisma skill checks (like UMD), and can choose a Seance Boon from pretty much any other Spirit you want. There's a lot you can do with that.
But, if we are playing with Adept archetypes, obviously the Lay Ritualist is where it's at.
Human "necromancer"
Lay Ritualist 3
1. Associate (Whispering Way)
1. Whispering Way Didciple
3. Wretched Curator
Whispering Way Disciple says this: "any settlement that is the size of a small town or larger, you can always find scrolls of the following spells available for purchase regardless of their legality: animate dead, control undead, create undead, detect undead, disrupt undead, false life, greater false lifeUM, ghoul touch, lesser animate deadUM, mass repair undeadACG, repair undeadACG, and undead anatomy I–IVUM".... we get bonuses on the UMD check, too, from Wretched Curator. Wretched Curator requires you to purchase an evil scroll in a place where it's illegal, so this all works out. Anyways, Lay Ritualist is the only NPC class that has the required spells to use any of the scrolls they might find.
There are a lot of fun rituals you could have them partake in, too. You could even realistically have a Lay Ritualist become a Lich... it would take 20 levels to afford the phylactery, but they could do it. And out of any of the NPC classes, this would probably make the most sense. Lay Ritualist could be used for entry to Agent of the Grave, which is hilarious.
Lay Ritualist 8/Agent of the Grave 5
BAB +6
Base saves +5/+4/+9
CL 12
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PC's are often gestalt, and that, alone, gives me the freedom to go wild without remorse. The players are given a 35pt buy, but minus the RP of their race from those points... like a Kobold would be 35-5=30pt. I have allowed custom races, too. I'm also the sort of GM that allows you to find whatever you have the gold for at ye old custom magic shop, and I not only allow, but encourage, players to craft in downtime. I want them to be loaded with class features, with stats nobody can complain about, and geared up with the best toys in town.
Now, when I throw halfway optimized enemies with class levels at the party, I can do so without feeling bad. I don't have to hold back... in fact, more often than not, I still have to send reinforcements before the encounter is over way too soon. If I want an NPC to survive to face the party more than once, I often have to build that NPC gestalt, with PC wealth, to even stand a snowball's chance in h3ll.
I understand that not everyone plays like that, and so my standard NPC may seem way out of everyone else's norm... my NPC's may be of very little help to others. The purpose of this thread was to simply stash a bunch of NPC's in one spot for GM's to grab whatever they might want or need.
What I am starting to realize, though, is that people do not use or need random NPC's that are actually built. If everyone has their background NPC's at 1HD, then they have one feat and like 5hp... so it doesn't matter, at all, what that feat might be, or what their stats might be... they have 1HD and 5hp, and one casting of Color Spray can knock out every single one of them without fail, so what's it matter? At 1HD, the difference between the NPC classes disappears, nobody cares which skills you put your one rank into. If NPC's never see above 4th level, they literally don't need a class, or stats, or feats, because none of those choices will actually come into play enough to matter... at all... ever.
And that doesn't sit well with me when I am trying to build a world that is worth people dedicating time out of their real lives to come play in. I don't want these generic meat-sacks polluting the background of my world. I want there to be clean NPC's that use big words, and dirty NPC's that can kill you with their chair. I want the background peasants to be as rich and diverse as everything else in the world.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding NPC character levels, I have found the old (2007!) Alexandrian post D&D: Calibrating Your Expectations is a decent take on how the underlying D20 rules mechanics maps to "real world" activities (with the understanding that there is a certain amount of abstraction and simplification to make the rules playable). The issue that some gamers have is the expectation (reinforced somewhat by the frequent appearance of leveled NPCs scaled to the APL in published adventures) that mid- and high-level characters are relatively commonplace, instead of being rare and noteworthy.
The companion post E(X): The Many Games Inside the World’s Most Popular Roleplaying Game provides some additional context on how the character levels (PC and NPC) can impact the play-style of the campaign.
Those spellcasting services are really so that the PCs have someone to cast Remove Disease or Raise Dead and so on. It's a sop to players who want to continue with the PCs they've raised from low levels, rather than any sort of attempt at reality.
In AD&D 1e there's a rule (DMG p35) that about 1% of human and half-orc NPCs are capable of class levels; other races get 2%. The other NPCs are level 0. Now suppose that for every character of level N, there are 2 of level N-1 down to 1. So for a 7th level NPC to exist, there are 2 6th level, 4 5th level, 8 4th, 16 3rd, 32 2nd and 64 1st. Total 127 levelled NPCs, plus some 80 level 0 for each of them (assuming a mostly-human settlement). That's a population of 127x80 = 10160.
Of course that 7th level NPC is probably (44%, DMG p35) a fighter type. 1 in 6 is a cleric. So for there to be a 7th level cleric, you need a population of 61000. If you want a 12th level MU to cast Stone To Flesh, you need a city of (2^12-1)*80*6 = 1965600.
Now I think maybe that's taking it a bit far, but the resulting numbers of casters aren't totally silly (maybe 5x too low). In PF1 you'd let everyone get levels, but most would be NPC classes and they'd have a flatter ratio like 3:1, though the ratio varies by class (maybe 8:1 for commoners, 1.5:1 for adepts and aristocrats, though these are very unevenly distributed).
If I cared enough I'd model it in software.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mudfoot, I don't know what page 35 of AD&D 1e's DMG is even talking about in reference to NPC's being capable of receiving class levels...
Like they're too stupid to take feats? Incapable of gaining XP? I literally do not know what those words mean. And level 0 really isn't a thing in my games... you exist, you got hit dice, you do SOMETHING with your time, and that SOMETHING can probably be done by at least one class. I thought the entire point of classes existing in the first place was to provide a summary for how someone spends their time... these are skills you have learned doing whatever it is you do... these are the abilities of someone that does whatever it is you do.
Why would you have NPC "commoners" that only have racial HD, when you could just as easily have NPC Commoners with levels in Commoner? And if an NPC is capable of receiving NPC class levels, what is stopping that same NPC from being capable of receiving PC class levels? What is the metric for measuring if an NPC possesses the necessary qualifications to receive class levels?
And aren't the members of the party supposedly drawn from the same population as everyone else? Is each member of the party an example of the one in a million chance occurance of the stars aligning to be part of miniscule percentage of the population capable of recieving class levels?
It makes it harder for me to imagine the world if the party just happens to be the only 4 people for thousands of miles capable of using magic or whatever their precious class levels give them, and these 4 people just happened to form a team together. No. Just no. That never happens. That is impossible for me to believe, and everything else is going to be impossible believe as soon as they encounter an enemy that can use magic, too. Hey man, don't make us kill you, you're special like us, join our team, we were once 4, and now we are 5... it would be a crying shame to eliminate such a rare and beautiful occurance such as an NPC with levels. Oh my god, don't break it, we must capture it and study its habits. People with class levels are literally more rare than Unicorns?
And for some strange reason, the overwhelming number of those even capable of recieving class levels just happen to choose to be bandits rather than productive members of society? Why is literally everyone on the planet capable of receiving class levels either in the party, a bandit fighting the party, or a mage for hire in town? Everyone else on the planet is just defined by their racail hit dice, like animals and monsters? I bet more than 1% of monsters have class levels as they appear in the bestiary... it's more probable for monsters to be capable of receiving class levels than humans?
Or, everyone that exists is at the very least capable of receiving class levels... that is probably way easier to believe than the vast majority of the population existing with nothing but racial hit dice. You mean they don't even qualify for freaking Commoner levels? What do you possibly have to do in order to qualify for low peasantry?
I might be completely misunderstanding what that is even supposed to mean, though.
Like they're too stupid to take feats? Incapable of gaining XP? I literally do not know what those words mean. And level 0 really isn't a thing in my games... you exist, you got hit dice, you do SOMETHING with your time, and that SOMETHING can probably be done by at least one class. I thought the entire point of classes existing in the first place was to provide a summary for how someone spends their time... these are skills you have learned doing whatever it is you do... these are the abilities of someone that does whatever it is you do.
The answer to your concerns and questions comes down to the context of the NPC in question: the community they exist in, its proximity to danger, the extent to which they cleave to martial traditions, their profession and the likelihood it requires them to enter into mortal combat, and so on. And then, of course, there’s the biggest contextual reason behind whatever levels any number of NPCs might have in any number of classes: the needs of the GM.
It makes it harder for me to imagine the world if the party just happens to be the only 4 people for thousands of miles capable of using magic or whatever their precious class levels give them, and these 4 people just happened to form a team together.
With respect, VM, you’re proposing two extremes. One involves a proliferation of NPCs with several levels in NPC classes—which, don’t get me wrong, you’re absolutely entitled to both champion and field.
The other, an absence of NPCs with levels, simply doesn’t exist. It didn’t exist in 1E (those percentages are a rough guideline that was never reflected in any of the campaign products TSR sold, for any of their campaign worlds). It definitely didn’t exist in their most popular products, like Forgotten Realms, where, in the “Old Gray Box,” rural communities like Shadowdale (for whose entire combatant population Ed Greenwood once provided names, equipment, and levels) contradicted those percentages. It doesn’t exist now either, obviously, given what we’ve seen in Golarion-centric products for over a decade now.
Rather, it’s safer to say (or so I think) that the baseline for NPCs and level in the NPC classes has, since D&D 3E, roughly reflected the ratios shown in the Leadership feat. They are balanced by NPCs with levels in the Core/Base/Alternate classes, who are the real movers and shakers.
Consider, from the scale put out from the first Alexandrian article, that 5th level in most areas of skill and performance is near the top of human ability. This would make this caster-in-residence famous, noteworthy. People would flock to this celebrity. The town itself may hinge on this person's every decision.
…
Moreso than that, why would ANY NPCs with a plot hook not bring this person up first while asking the PCs for help.
Ideally, that NPC doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Or, rather, they’re a facilitator to the story’s needs, and not an obstacle to them. E.g., in Nottingham, the commoners look to the PCs to aid them against injustice because the majority of NPCs with levels are adversarial to them. In Shadowdale, Elminster is invested in mentoring the next generation of heroes rather than providing solutions himself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I believe Mudfoot is referring to is; in the original premise of (A)D&D the PCs were the heroes and even at level 1 stood out from the general population. In Voodooist Monk's Pathfinder it seems as though a character would need to be at least level 6 to progress past being the Baker's wife's whipping boy, which is hardly heroic.
Where most people seem to have landed is that most background NPCs are levels 1-5. Personally, I think that feels about right for skills but wrong for fighting ability, which should remain at level 1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
AD&D 1e was...odd. So I'm not defending the 1% rule any more than I'd defend the 1 minute melee round or the 1e Bard of any of a vast array of other weird brainfart that Gygax came out with...while gratefully thanking him for the hobby he created.
(after being booted from TSR, he created Lejendary Adventures. Yes, it's spelled like that. And it's...also odd. And flopped like a soggy omelette)
But the gist of it is that stock RAW PF1 NPCs, even 1st level commoners with 13 12 11 10 9 8 + racial stats are vastly more capable than the typical AD&D 1e NPC. They have skills and feats and traits and stuff. AD&D 1e NPCs had a personality (there are lots of tables) and a pitchfork.
IMHO, most NPCs are entitled to a modicum of combat ability as reflected in their levels. A 35-year-old farmer (4th level commoner) has probably had a good few pub brawls, mugged or been mugged, seen off some wolves and goblins, wrestled a cow to the ground and done a couple of campaigns of feudal service. He may have done compulsory archery practice. He's entitled to his 4d6 hp and +2 BAB. He's still no match for a well-built 2nd level PC.
It can get a bit more problematic with, say, a 4th level Expert watchmaker having +3 BAB, but he's probably dumped Str and Con for Int and Dex so that's OK.
The Alexandrian's 5th level standard is generally OK, but it comes from some dubious assumptions. He claims, for example, that Aragorn is a Ranger 1 / Fighter 1 / Paladin 3 because such a character could beat the DCs and do the individual things that Aragorn does. Nope. That R1/F1/P3 could not fight 5 Nazgul with a burning torch and a broken sword, nor face down Sauron or the Paths of the Dead or the assorted armies he does. Alexandrian is trying to impose 3e rules on a singular situation in Middle Earth rather than comparing Aragorn to everyone else around him. He need not be 20th level, but he's a lot more than 5th. And likewise for Conan or Elric and the rest.
The party is only considered heroic because they are willing to do what others are not.
The miner that can kill you with his chair may be a coward, or a family man, or working towards literally any life goal that does not involve fighting dragons or trolls.
These people have better things to do with their pathetic mundane lives than rescue kittens out of trees. Or maybe these peasants are too stupid to see the bigger picture, they don't even realize you can eliminate reoccurring threats at the source. Regardless, it is easier for them to throw their hard earned coppers at "heroes" willing to take on the challenge. Think about how many people are willing to complain about politics versus how many are willing to run for office (or even vote). Nobody actually WANTS to take on the problem...
Except our adventuring "heroes" see behind the curtain and possess metagame knowledge that doing this stupid stuff for these lazy peasants gives them XP... and XP gives them levels, and levels give them cool class abilities, and loot, and wealth... so they are more than willing, they are eager, to "help".
At really low levels the party has even recruited a posse of hardcore field workers to assist them, because these guys look like they can kill you with their chairs... come'on, boys, let's go mess up some Goblins! Now, many of those poor miners never returned home to their families that night, as Alchemist's Fire really messes up Commoners, and Goblins love fire. But our "heroes" leveled up and got some loot out of deal. Lol.
Plus, when the PC's are gestalt, and the peasants are, well, not gestalt... ain't nobody in the party getting killed by a peasant's chair. Let's just be perfectly real about what is actually going on here. The members of the party are more than capable of handling themselves in my world of scary 3HD Commoners. I have never had anyone complain that they felt overshadowed by the background NPC's, at any level. Most of the time, people in the party enjoy the diversity they find in what's available.