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

[Knight_Marshal]

If I ever got around to running my world then adventurers are completely unknown, but then again so are the classes for the most part. I need a good skill based game to run my world as the players would start off around 12-16 years old and would be farmers, fishermen or apprenticed to some other trade. The first 5 or so game sessions would revolve around them being people in a village as opposed to some class. This would give me a chance to observe their personalities so that when the main event starts, certain things would happen to each character based on who they are and not what they are.

Before that, there are no adventurers and no one has ever wondered what else is out there. When the event happens they will find out why.

 

[Fanaelialae]

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.

That's fine if you want to play that way, but it makes the mistaken assumption that every character that belongs to one of these organizations must be a classed character (ie, every thief must be a Rogue). The DMG shows that this is not the case with NPCs like the Mage. My take on it is that PCs are basically elite, a cut above most of the NPCs around them (at least in terms of potential) and that this is due to them being classed. There are plenty of guys who can competently swing a sword, but that doesn't make them a Fighter IMC.

 

[GlassJaw]

That's fine if you want to play that way, but it makes the mistaken assumption that every character that belongs to one of these organizations must be a classed character (ie, every thief must be a Rogue). The DMG shows that this is not the case with NPCs like the Mage. My take on it is that PCs are basically elite, a cut above most of the NPCs around them (at least in terms of potential) and that this is due to them being classed. There are plenty of guys who can competently swing a sword, but that doesn't make them a Fighter IMC.

This. Great post.

vonklaude, your post is absolutely valid but makes a LOT of assumptions about how the world (your world) works. Like Fan above, I view even level 1 characters as a rarity. A temple will have many attendants of various roles but only a few will have the ability to cast spells.

Again, neither is a wrong approach, but it's important to be mindful the impact it has on world-building.

 

[clearstream]

That's fine if you want to play that way, but it makes the mistaken assumption that every character that belongs to one of these organizations must be a classed character (ie, every thief must be a Rogue). The DMG shows that this is not the case with NPCs like the Mage. My take on it is that PCs are basically elite, a cut above most of the NPCs around them (at least in terms of potential) and that this is due to them being classed. There are plenty of guys who can competently swing a sword, but that doesn't make them a Fighter IMC.

As you will see noted in my closing paragraphs, I do not make that assumption at all. In play I typically find that template NPCs cannot cut it as credible authorities. So in an organisation of say 50 thieves, a good proportion of them - at least tens - will be character classed individuals. I guess here we are arguing what is credible. Either approach is probably credible fluff, but I feel for credible crunch the approach I advocate is stronger.

 

[clearstream]

vonklaude, your post is absolutely valid but makes a LOT of assumptions about how the world (your world) works. Like Fan above, I view even level 1 characters as a rarity. A temple will have many attendants of various roles but only a few will have the ability to cast spells.

Again, neither is a wrong approach, but it's important to be mindful the impact it has on world-building.

Any approach makes a LOT of assumptions about how the world works. For example, the post I am critiquing throws in characterisations of adventurers that are tied to a specific and assumed world view ("bored", "addicted to the rush", "adrenaline junkies", "anti-socials").

 

[Kabouter Games]

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.

I think you ran headlong into a naive, misleading assumption yourself - that the heads of associations comprised of adventurers, and the leaders of polities, must of necessity be adventurers with levels higher than the adventurers under their control or influence.

Except perhaps in a barbarian tribe, where tradition dictates that only the strongest may lead, or the Red Wizards of Thay, that assumption does not hold.

In order to lead an organization, you don't have to be higher level than everyone else in the organization who has adventuring levels. You have to be better at running organizations than everyone else in the organization. You have to be a better politician, a better leader.

There's no reason why the Pope has to be a level 20 adventuring cleric. In fact, being an adventuring cleric ill suits a priest to be Pope. It's far more useful to be skilled in the internal politics of the church. It's infinitely more useful to remain close to the seat of power, where you get to know people, manipulating favor and patronage. Bimbling all over the countryside smiting heathens does precisely zero to improve either skill set.

Same thing with politicians and nobles. Your job isn't to be the best [insert character class here]. Your job is to run [insert political entity here]. You might go off for a bit as a youth to do something carefully calculated to gain you some street cred when it comes time to assume the throne/run for president - in the Real World, that's been military service of some stripe - but you don't specialize in that, necessarily, not to the point you're one of the world's best. You do your bit, wave the flag, show the people you put on your trousers the same way, and then marry someone else almost as important but not quite, pop out some sprogs, and wait for your chance to rule. That's true if your last name is Kennedy, Bush, Saxe-Coburg, or Windsor.

You don't have to be a 20th level Rogue to run a large city's Thieves Guild. Hell, you don't even have to have any adventuring levels at all! *koffkoffXanatharkoffkoff* You just have to be smarter, better at manipulation, better at long-term and short-term planning, a bunch of skills that adventuring levels not only don't guarantee, but all too often lead you away from. You have to be so scary that other members of your gang are terrified of betraying or trying to supplant you - think El Chapo or Don Corleone.

Now, back to the OP.

In my world-building, lots of people "have" levels in adventuring classes. But that doesn't mean they identify as [class]. It's merely a convenient shorthand for explaining some of their skills and giving those skills in-game mechanics for those times the PCs interact with those NPCs within the game engine.

True adventurers - people who make their living by seeking out danger, loot, and glory - are pretty rare. Mercenaries - people who are prepared to visit violence on other people for money - are common as muck.

Thieves and spies are common. Glamorous, famous cat burglars like Bill Mason are rare.

I say that to show that the lines are blurry. The mercenaries have fighter levels, sure, because it explains and gives mechanics to what they've learned through a life trying to stick sharp things into other people. The thieves and spies have levels, sure, because it explains and gives mechanics to what they do. But they're not really adventurers.

Anyway, that's how I do it. YMMV.

Cheers,

Bob

www.r-p-davis.com

 

[S'mon]

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.

This is stuff is so setting dependent, I find it weird you are asserting it as a general truth. It seems to
somewhat fit default Forgotten Realms and moreso Mystara, but in plenty of other settings an NPC with the power of an 8th-10th level PC certainly could be the leader of a major organisation. I would put Greyhawk in there, and it fits my Wilderlands setting - a pirate chief is likely based off something like the CR 5 Gladiator stats, not a 12th level Fighter or Rogue. My 5e Golarion too, pretty much.

In most settings Tier IV PCs are easily 'Epic', among the strongest mortal individuals in the world. In my Wilderlands game the 18th level Barbarian Hakeem is widely regarded as an avatar of Bondorr the Sword God.

I think by Epic you mean 20th level with some number of Epic Boons?

 

[S'mon]

That's fine if you want to play that way, but it makes the mistaken assumption that every character that belongs to one of these organizations must be a classed character (ie, every thief must be a Rogue). The DMG shows that this is not the case with NPCs like the Mage. My take on it is that PCs are basically elite, a cut above most of the NPCs around them (at least in terms of potential) and that this is due to them being classed. There are plenty of guys who can competently swing a sword, but that doesn't make them a Fighter IMC.

I agree. Here's how I statted out a player-created organisation in my Wilderlands setting, a
moderately powerful martial order of one of the major cities. Player had specified leader was "14th level Eldritch Knight", which I accepted, so her stats come closest to those of a PC.

The Bright Seraphim of Valon

MARIAN IRONHEART, GRAND WIZARD OF THE BRIGHT SERAPHIM
Female Human (Common Avalonian), Lawful Good
Armor Class: 19 (+1 Full Plate Armor) > 24 with Shield spell.
Hit Points: 119 (14d10 +42)
Speed: 30ft (9m / 6 sqr)
Proficiency: +4
STR
20 (+5)
DEX
11 (+0)
CON
17 (+3)
INT
13 (+1)
WIS
15 (+2)
CHA
15 (+2)
Skills: Religion +5 Athletics +9 Persuasion +6 History +5 Arcana +5
Saving Throws: Strength +9 Constitution +7
Challenge: 8 (3900 XP)
Racial Features

Ability Modifiers: +1 to all
Languages: speaks Common and Avalonian.

Marian Ironheart
Actions

Multiattack. Marian makes three weapon melee attacks or three ranged attacks.
+1 Greatsword, The Moon Blade. Melee Weapon Attack +10 to hit, reach 5 ft, one target. Hit: 16 (3d6 +6 ) slashing damage (Greatsword Style). +2d6 radiant vs undead or fiend.
Properties: Heavy, Two-handed,
+1 Warbow. Ranged Weapon Attack +10 to hit, range 150/600, one target. Hit: 10 (1d8 +6 ) piercing damage. 20 silver arrows.
Properties: Ammunition: range 150/600, Heavy, Two-handed,

The Moon Blade - Blade Weapon (+1 greatsword), rare (requires attunement). When you hit an undead or fiend with the Moonblade, that target takes an extra 2d6 radiant damage.
When drawn, the sword’s luminous blade emits bright light in a 15-foot radius, and dim light for an additional 15 feet. You can use an action to expand or reduce its radius of bright and dim light by 5 feet each, to a maximum of 30 feet each.

Fighter Abilities:
Action Surge 3/day
Second Wind d10+14 3/day
Indomitable 3/day

14th level Eldritch Knight
Spells Known: 3 cantrips, 10 spells.
Spell Slots: 4 3 2
Spells Known (1) Comprehend Languages, Shield, Thunderwave, Witch Bolt
(2) Continual Flame, Melf's Acid Arrow, See Invisibility, Shatter
(3) Counterspell, Lightning Bolt

Cantrips: Blade Ward (res BPS eont), True Strike (advtg on 1st attack vs target next turn), Light (object sheds light 20/20 1 hr),

SA: Bonded Weapon - Moonblade
War Magic - may cast cantrip + make 1 weapon attack bonus action
Eldritch Strike - target hit by weapon has disad on spell save vs Marian until end of her next turn.

Seraphim Eldritch Knight
Male or Female Avalonian
Armor Class: 18 or 20 (Full Plate Armor, & Shield), +5 with Shield spell.
Hit Points: 52 (8d8 +16)
Speed: 30ft (9m / 6 sqr)
Proficiency: +2
STR
16 (+3)
DEX
11 (+0)
CON
14 (+2)
INT
15 (+2)
WIS
12 (+1)
CHA
12 (+1)
Skills: Religion +4 Athletics +5 Arcana +4
Challenge: 4 (1100 XP)
Racial Features

Ability Modifiers: +1 to all
Languages: speaks Common and one extra.
5th level Eldritch Knight

Cantrips: 2 Spells Known: 4 Spell Slots: 3 1st level

Spells Known (1) Comprehend Languages, Shield, Thunderwave, Witch Bolt
Cantrips: Blade Ward (res BPS eont), Light (object sheds light 20/20 1 hr)

SA: Bonded Weapon - sword. War Magic - may cast cantrip + make 1 weapon attack bonus action
Actions

Multiattack. The Seraphim Knight makes two weapon melee attacks or two ranged attacks. Doffing or donning a shield takes 1 action.
+1 Greatsword or +1 Longsword. Melee Weapon Attack +6 to hit, reach 5 ft, one target. Hit: 14 (3d6+4) slashing damage (Greatsword Style) or 10 (1d8+6 ) slashing damage (Duelist Style)
Properties: Heavy, Two-handed,
Warbow. Ranged Weapon Attack +5 to hit, range 150/600, one target. Hit: 7 (1d8 +3 ) piercing damage.
Properties: Ammunition: range 150/600, Heavy, Two-handed,

___________________________________________________________

Seraphim Brother Spiritual
Male or Female Avalonian
Armor Class: 17 (Half plate, Shield)
Hit Points: 39 (6d8 +12)
Speed: 30ft (9m / 6 sqr)
Proficiency: +3
STR
13 (+1)
DEX
11 (+0)
CON
15 (+2)
INT
11 (+0)
WIS
17 (+3)
CHA
12 (+1)
Skills: Religion +3 Insight +6
Challenge: 3 (700 XP)
Racial Features

Ability Modifiers: +1 to all
Languages: speaks Common and one extra.
Actions

Mace or Shortsword. Melee Weapon Attack +4 to hit, reach 5 ft, one target. Hit: 4 (1d6 +1 ) bludgeoning or piercing damage.
Properties: WOLOLO!,
Spells

Spellcasting. the Brother Spiritual is an 6th-level cleric. Its spellcasting ability is Wisdom (spell save DC 14, to hit with spell attacks +6)
Cantrips (at will): Thaumaturgy, Light, Sacred Flame, Spare the Dying,
1st level (4 slots): Healing Word, Bane, Guiding Bolt, Sanctuary, Cure Wounds, Shield of Faith
2nd level (3 slots): Prayer of Healing,
3rd level (3 slots): Mass Healing Word, Protection from Energy, Remove Curse, Spirit Guardians
______________________________

Seraphim Initiate
Armor Class: 16 (Chainmail) or 18 (with shield)
Hit Points: 19 (3d8 +6, or 12+7)
Speed: 30ft (9m / 6 sqr)
Proficiency: +2Image result for young knight
STR
16 (+3)
DEX
11 (+0)
CON
14 (+2)
INT
15 (+2)
WIS
12 (+1)
CHA
12 (+1)
Skills: Religion +2 Athletics +5 Arcana +4
Challenge: 1 (200 XP)
Racial Features

Ability Modifiers: +1 to all
Languages: speaks Common and one extra.
Actions

Attack. The Initiate makes one weapon melee attack or one ranged attack. Action to don or doff shield.

Greatsword or Longsword. Melee Weapon Attack +5 to hit, reach 5 ft, one target.
Hit: 13 (3d6 +3 ) slashing damage (Greatweapon Style), or HIt: 9 (1d8+5) (Duelist style)
Properties: Heavy, Two-handed,
Warbow. Ranged Weapon Attack +5 to hit, range 150/600, one target. Hit: 7 (1d8 +3) piercing damage.
Properties: Ammunition: range 150/600, Heavy, Two-handed,
____________________________

Seraphim Acolyte
Armor Class: 15 (chain shirt, Shield)
Hit Points: 13 (2d8 +4)
Speed: 30ft (9m / 6 sqr)
Proficiency: +2
STR
14 (+2)
DEX
10 (+0)
CON
14 (+2)
INT
12 (+1)
WIS
16 (+3)
CHA
12 (+1)
Skills: Religion +3 Insight +5
Challenge: 1 (200 XP)
Racial Features

Ability Modifiers: +1 to all
Languages: speaks Common and one extra.
Actions

Mace or Shortsword. Melee Weapon Attack +4 to hit, reach 5 ft, one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 +2 ) bludgeoning or piercing damage.
Properties: WOLOLO!,
Spells

Spellcasting. the Acolyte is an 2nd-level cleric. Its spellcasting ability is Wisdom (spell save DC 13, to hit with spell attacks +5)
Cantrips (at will): Guidance, Thaumaturgy, Sacred Flame,
1st level (3 slots): Bless, Guiding Bolt, Shield of Faith, Healing Word, Sanctuary, Command, Cure Wounds

ORDER TREASURY

11,500 Gold
1,050 Platinum
8 lbs. of gold trade bars (400 gp)
6 lbs. of exotic spices (90 gp)
9 lbs. of gold trade bars (450 gp)
1 set of bagpipes (30 gp)
3 vial(s) of holy water (150 gp)
1 lyre (30 gp)
12 black onyx worth 50 gp each
8 deep blue spinel worth 500 gp each
opal music box worth 2500gp
feather ribbon strung with pink pearls worth 2500gp
Oil of etherealness
Potion of mind reading
hoard total: 32,750.00 gp

 

[S'mon]

As you will see noted in my closing paragraphs, I do not make that assumption at all. In play I typically find that template NPCs cannot cut it as credible authorities. So in an organisation of say 50 thieves, a good proportion of them - at least tens - will be character classed individuals. I guess here we are arguing what is credible. Either approach is probably credible fluff, but I feel for credible crunch the approach I advocate is stronger.

What is credible crunch? Do you mean for challenging PCs?

I found the CR 12 Archmage was great for scaring 5th level PCs, I like how it makes 18th-level casters
within reach of 10th level PCs as in 1e-2e D&D. If you don't want that then yes use different statting, but no reason to make him with PC class rules - those tend to create glass cannon NPCs.

 

[Jester David]

I compare them to professional athletes.
Every big city might have. A few, but overall they're rare. Fraction of a percent of the total population. And whole lots of people aspire to be adventurers and have some skill, few can actually make it to level 1. Lots of amateur adventurers.