D&D 5E adventurers in your world: common or rare?

[Satyrn]

I've always considered them to be about as rare - and famous - as professional atheletes. Well, as rare as NFL players and as famous as NASCAR drivers. That is, in any given city there's probably a bunch of them but you're not likely to come across them unless you hit up the arenas or certain bars (but watch out in those bars!) or happen to live near them - and you might because their wealth varies from Tom Brady filthy rich to barely scraping by (for a pro athlete) rookie special teams guy.

That's numbers.

I say they're as famous as NASCAR drivers because up here in Canada, unless you're a fan, you know they exist and might know a couple by name ("Jimmy Gordon, Jr and his father Dale, right?*") but you really don't think about them ever.


*And of course, the Joxer the Mighty of NASCAR, Dick Trickle.

 

[Caliban]

Low-level (1-5) are absolutely all over the place, the poor, the rich, the bored, the hungry and those who just don't mesh well with civilized society. Most of the adventurers here are young. "The Party" is likely to run into these guys in any given dungeon (either as corpses, prisoners or competitors).

Mid-level (6-10) are moderately rare. These are people who've figured out how to make a living out of what they do (think Indiana Jones), or are addicted to the rush and haven't stumbled into some bad juju yet. The wealthy and the bored are almost entirely gone from here. Even many of the poor have made it "big" and settled down. What's left are the glory hounds, the adrenaline junkies and the anti-socials.

Upper mid-level (11-15)are very rare. These are either heroic figures who have survives harrowing events or the anti-socials who are two steps away from being the target of the next adventuring party. The adrenaline junkies are usually dead now and the glory hounds have either changed their ways or retired.

High-level (16-20+) are exceedingly rare. You can count how many of them there are in the world on your fingers and have a hand left over. These people are the heroes that heroes look up to. Legendary figures who have done something incredible. (They are often also the villains).

This. It's what I call the "World of Adventure" setting. Adventurers are part of the landscape and factored into economic considerations. Job boards with minor quests and news of dungeons are located at taverns and guild halls, etc.

 

[Satyrn]

Oh, and I should add, that just like athletes are bound to interact with each other (not just in practise and during the game) because of their shared lifestyle, the PCs are bound to bump into rivals and allies during the course of their adventures. This will happen as often as they seek others out or as I think would be good storywise. That could be anywhere from never if the campaign doesn't call for it, all the way to "there's an adventurer to be met around every corner." And around every corner could be literally so if you've got a megadungeon attraction like Rappan Athuk that you're running like it's a season of NASCAR, with a field of adventurers racing to be first to the riches.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

As I expand the scope of my campaign post-LMoP (big homebrew sandbox), I've been thinking a lot about how common adventures are in the world.

Generally, I always err on the side of "adventures are rare". As a DM, it gives me context for the blacksmiths, bartenders, farmers, etc. the players interact with. Adventuring is hard and dangerous, therefore most don't choose it as a profession.

I also find it useful for role-playing and a potential plot device. As the players get more powerful and acquire more treasure, they gain more notoriety, which can be good and bad for them. They may begin to be sought out to be hired, the target of thieves, tax collectors, rival adventurers, etc.

How common are adventurers in your world? How do you communicate to the players how adventuring is viewed in your world?

Generally rare, except in spelljamming space where they are "common" because only the elite make it up there.

I sometimes like to start campaigns by killing off all the experienced, friendly NPCs in the world in the initial scene, leaving only the PCs to pick up the pieces. (This is the John Ringo approach to heroism: heroes are born from massive disasters, so first you need a massive disaster.) If I were ever going to run a Forgotten Realms game, for instance, it would be one where Elminster and all the Chosen of Mystra and Drizz't Do'Urden and all the Lords of Waterdeep and everyone else who isn't evil have all been Feebleminded or killed by a horrible, virulent disease which affects anyone over 3rd level and can only be cured by drinking human blood. By the time the PCs come online the disease has burned itself out (no more hosts) but the world has changed forever.

 

[Li Shenron]

Rare at low level, well-done at medium, roasted or overcooked after 10th.

 

[Sunseeker]

I've never bothered to quantify it, but yeah, this sounds about right.
Though I'd say members of the 16+ lv range is probably counted on two hands. Afterall, the world's a pretty big place & at that lv the truly powerful might well be cloaked from observation - or just off planet for the moment.

Sure, and it depends on the population of the world and how "developed" it is. I tend to err on the side of fewer developed societies and more "wilderness" and thus, fewer heroes.

Also, it's easier for me to write "THE FIVE HEROES OF LEGEND" than it is to write the 10, or 15 heroes of legend.

EDIT: to some extent, I also use these heroes as exemplars of the goals my players tell me about (I always tell them to give me 5 traits/values about their character) and then I set up these "legendary heroes" as either paragons of achievement in those areas or "cautionary tales" of what might happen if a player fails to live up to "honor, justice and goodness" and such.

 

[Shiroiken]

In my Greyhawk campaign, they're fairly common, but still represent a very small percentage of the population. They are mostly young and inexperienced, because most adventurers die early. Experienced adventurers often have enough coin to retire, and usually sponsor groups of young and foolish would-be adventurers (for a cut of the treasure, of course).

 

[MarkB]

I go with the approach taken in Eberron, which is that adventuring isn't all that uncommon, but the sort of super-fast experience gain that PCs experience is. The average NPC adventurer could take years, even decades, to gain even a few levels, and some may simply plateau out at a certain level of skill as being at the peak of their potential ability.

 

[S'mon]

Professional adventurers are very rare I'd say, there are 5-6 such NPCs in my Ghinarian Hills setting, in two groups. Most PCs and combatant NPCs are not professional adventurers.

My Varisia/Golarion setting has the Pathfinder Society which is basically professional explorers.

I would differ from shidaku in that the people I think of as "adventurers" are nearly all mid-level/sweet spot types. By high level they've normally settled down as dominion rulers etc. At low level there's not much difference between a random group of "dwarven prospectors" or "mercenary squad" and "adventurers". To be considered an "adventurer" requires a certain competency and reputation - an Indiana Jones or Lara Croft type, probably in the 6-10 level range or equivalent.

 

[clearstream]

Low-level (1-5) are absolutely all over the place, the poor, the rich, the bored, the hungry and those who just don't mesh well with civilized society. Most of the adventurers here are young. "The Party" is likely to run into these guys in any given dungeon (either as corpses, prisoners or competitors).

Mid-level (6-10) are moderately rare. These are people who've figured out how to make a living out of what they do (think Indiana Jones), or are addicted to the rush and haven't stumbled into some bad juju yet. The wealthy and the bored are almost entirely gone from here. Even many of the poor have made it "big" and settled down. What's left are the glory hounds, the adrenaline junkies and the anti-socials.

Upper mid-level (11-15)are very rare. These are either heroic figures who have survives harrowing events or the anti-socials who are two steps away from being the target of the next adventuring party. The adrenaline junkies are usually dead now and the glory hounds have either changed their ways or retired.

High-level (16-20+) are exceedingly rare. You can count how many of them there are in the world on your fingers and have a hand left over. These people are the heroes that heroes look up to. Legendary figures who have done something incredible. (They are often also the villains).

For me this approach doesn't map well to the setting implied by the rules, and weakens our ability to deliver interesting challenges and constraints for PCs at all levels. Could I suggest that it makes naive assumptions that hinder rather than help our campaigns? In a way, our OP perhaps inadvertently built a misleading assumption into their question. I'll try to explain that below.

Tier 1 and 2 - Most core classes have implied organisations: barbarian tribes, bardic colleges, clergy, druidic circles, knightly orders, monasteries, ranger conclaves, thieves' guilds, arcane colleges. So we know that first tier PCs are numerous. The OP typified these as adventurers and the thread ran from there, but many of these character class individuals are fulfilling a non-adventurer function. That's the misleading assumption: are we discussing only those who formally adventure, or all individuals with character classes? I believe the latter. So we have all of these organisations built around the existence of character class individuals to populate them. First and second tier PCs should not yet be at the head of those organisations. Tier 1 and 2 characters are very common.

Tier 3 - That reserves such roles for third tier characters. We know that there are numerous such organisations - multiple arcane colleges for instance. So there must be hundreds or even thousands of tier 3 characters occupying such roles depending on the size of your known world. Thus Tier 3 characters are quite common - every city would contain several. Even small towns would contain one.

Tier 4 - Above such organisations are polities, which must wield sufficient force to cohere them. Rulers of a city or geographical area for example. So we know that there are must be tens to perhaps hundreds of tier four characters. Again depending on the size of your known world. They would be uncommon, but not rare.

Epic Tier - Where we come to a few characters - no more than a dozen perhaps - is at epic tier. Figures like the "Blackstaff" who runs (or ran) the very largest polities in our world (whichever world that is). I believe epic tier individuals would be rare, no more than tens in the known world and perhaps fewer.

Thus I believe a "count up the murder hobos" approach is deeply mistaken. Instead we find a well rounded world that can engage our PCs for many levels by envisioning numerous character class individuals at all levels. You might say - but what of the simplified expert individuals such as spies, arch-mages and so forth? Mechanically those are almost all underwhelming: a CR 1/8th noble? a CR 2 priest? a CR 12 arch-mage? I feel that these are fine filling out mundane roles, but don't extend far enough up the hierarchy to create the maximum interest for PCs at all levels. As the game currently stands it is correct to envision numerous character class individuals in all the key roles. And that becomes even more true in the higher tiers.