[Eberron] How are YOU going to handle the NPC level issue?

[fredramsey]

There has been a lot of talk here about the fact that most of the NPCs in Eberron are of mid level. If you are running an Eberron campaign, what do you plan to do to challenge your high-level PCs?

====================================================

Here's my take: First of all, and most important, one does not have to be personally "powerful" to be dangerous. I don't think that most world leaders could take on a trained soldier in one-on-one combat, but they could pick up the phone and have that soldier attacked by 1000 others.

So power, in the real world or Eberron is not always about the combat skills of an individual. The king may only be a 5th level fighter, but his army is quite powerful. You can't normally just waltz into the king's castle and murder him. And even if you succeed in doing so, there are consequences.

Second, there are plenty of monsters, including a whole continent of dragons, that can ruin a high-level PC's day. Plus the Lords of Dust, residents of Khyber, etc.

At high level, I expect the PCs to be carrying out dangerous missions FOR someone, or they could try to establish their own kingdom/domain. I don't see the need for dozens of epic-level NPCs running around.

Thoughts?

 

[Psion]

At one point, SKR said that the reason that treasure tables were constructed the way that they are is to encourage characters to face more monsters than characters at high levels.

Of course, the Groucho Marx answer to your question (if you beleive monster stomp is inappropraite for Eberron) is "don't play high levels."

 

[shilsen]

There has been a lot of talk here about the fact that most of the NPCs in Eberron are of mid level. If you are running an Eberron campaign, what do you plan to do to challenge your high-level NPCs?

Your take is pretty close to mine. I'm really appreciative of the fact that many of the movers and shakers of the ECS aren't high in level. It alwasy struck me as contradictory that settings having a medieval/renaissance setup where rulers gain the throne through primogeniture rather than force of arms also had the rulers as high-level characters. It really underlines the fact that power isn't about what you can personally do, but the connections you have and what you can do with them. And the day I can't challenge a group of PCs with much lower level NPCs is the day I give up DMing.

In short, I really don't see it as a problem. I even started the PCs at 6th lvl, which puts them higher than most people they will meet for a while (started in Sharn).

 

[JoeGKushner]

Well, a lot of it really depends on the level and background of the characters. A near epic character, like a rogue, with good bluff, gather information, and diplomacy skills, should pretty much be able to do what he wants, when he wants.

A high level mage in this setting, is going to cause troubles. A 20th level caster capable of casting meteor swarm or something along those lines is going to be someone you don't want to mess with, regardless of what hook up you as a leader have.

A 20th level fighter with the leadership feat and mythic mounts for his army in full plate mail, is not going to be someone you want to mess with.

Only role playing in such a case will usually only lead to downfall if your players have the right skills because their skill totals will be much, much higher. "Yeah, I bribe the family into allowing me in to kill X. My diplomacy is 32 and my sense motive 28."

 

[Henry]

There is no issue: A party of NPCs lower level than the PCs can challenge them with planning and forethought; even without this issue, the monstrous opponents are not going to sit down and hide if the PCs don't go after them - in fact they'll have their own plans brewing. And even without this, there's nothing that says I couldn't have higher level NPCs in Eberron - they are rising stars just like the PCs, so they'll be challenging enough when the showdown comes.

If fact, I'm dealing with this very issue right now - the heroes are the ones to stop something that's going on because -- well, they're it. If they can't stop my BBEG from doing what he has planned (in about, oh, three weeks), then that's it - game over. End of story.

 

[fredramsey]

Well, a lot of it really depends on the level and background of the characters. A near epic character, like a rogue, with good bluff, gather information, and diplomacy skills, should pretty much be able to do what he wants, when he wants.

A high level mage in this setting, is going to cause troubles. A 20th level caster capable of casting meteor swarm or something along those lines is going to be someone you don't want to mess with, regardless of what hook up you as a leader have.

I just don't see a single wizard taking out an entire army, no matter what spells he has. He can't take them all out, and besides, just because there are no HIGH-LEVEL spellcasters to take him on, you can put together quite a number of lower-level ones. Not to mention wands. There's not too many casters that could shake off THAT many magic missles, fireballs, etc.

A 20th level fighter with the leadership feat and mythic mounts for his army in full plate mail, is not going to be someone you want to mess with.

Once again, he's going to have to raise that army. And if he's raising the army against a nation, then you know what? He's now become the super villian all the adventurers in the world are going to go after.

Only role playing in such a case will usually only lead to downfall if your players have the right skills because their skill totals will be much, much higher. "Yeah, I bribe the family into allowing me in to kill X. My diplomacy is 32 and my sense motive 28."

If you let skill rolls totally decide this kind of thing, they you get what you deserve. Can you really say that someone could get you to kill someone you love/like just with a strong argument?

It seems like you aren't reading much of what I wrote. The president may not be a trained assassin, but he can order a country bombed out of existance. That is power that a single individual would have a hard time fighting.

And, if you begin to be that high level, you are going to start attracting the attention of a LOT of different parties. EVERYONE is going to want to be either your friend or your enemy. The Dragonmarked Houses, for instance, are going to want to use the power you weild.

A good DM will be able to play with the PCs power levels just fine.

 

[kigmatzomat]

It alwasy struck me as contradictory that settings having a medieval/renaissance setup where rulers gain the throne through primogeniture rather than force of arms also had the rulers as high-level characters.

I'm not sure I agree. IMO the true rulers, if not the titular ones, will be mid- to high level though rarely combat classes. (Rogue is a popular class for young nobles since it provides a great mixture of skills, combat ability, and survival)

The simple fact is that foreign powers will send their most able diplomats; definitely the most skilled, loyal individuals they can find. A ruler should not be blatantly outclassed by the servant of another. Experienced PCs should realize that a low level head of state means a high level cabinet pulling the strings. Cardinal Richelieu and Thomas Wentworth were definitely high level individuals with copious skill. The kings of France and England at the time, however, were not so capable.

Any nation devoid of high level rulers will be outmaneuvered by more competent governments and defeated either militarily, economically, or diplomatically.

 

[Dr Simon]

My impression from the Eberron sourcebook is that high level Eberron play is supposed to be when the Big Threats start to show themselves (maybe their plans are coming to fruition, the Stars Are Right etc.) - that is, the Daelkyr (CR20!), the Lords of Dust, Vol, etc.

The gumshoe stuff is for low-level play, high level is more like Call of Cthulhu where you get to kick back.

At least, that's the way I read it.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I just don't see a single wizard taking out an entire army, no matter what spells he has. He can't take them all out, and besides, just because there are no HIGH-LEVEL spellcasters to take him on, you can put together quite a number of lower-level ones. Not to mention wands. There's not too many casters that could shake off THAT many magic missles, fireballs, etc..

Well, a simple shield spell takes care of the magic missile and a 20th level mage is going to have magic items that the other mages can't duplicate like rings of energy resistance that handle most of the lower level spells that can be used again him or rings of spell turning, etc... I'm not oging to argue with you about it. It all depends on how the GM handles it.

Once again, he's going to have to raise that army. And if he's raising the army against a nation, then you know what? He's now become the super villian all the adventurers in the world are going to go after.

Uh... 6th level he takes Leadership and continues to build on it for 14 levels. Are you going to say, "No, that core rule feat is overbalanced. And why does he have to be the 'super villian'? What if he's a lawful neutral ruler who brings a new order to the land? I think you see any sort of conlift with established authorities as bad which is in itself bad.

If you let skill rolls totally decide this kind of thing, they you get what you deserve. Can you really say that someone could get you to kill someone you love/like just with a strong argument?

You may not believe this... but some people who role play games... are more interested in the GAME aspect and feel very uncomortable with the role playing aspect. I wouldn't punish a high level rogue who spent the points by making him role play it out because if he's got an 18 charisma, he's already allocated resources towards it. Just as I would not let a 10 charisma barbarian with no ranks in diplomacy role play his way out of everything. "Yeah, you try to sound intelligent and charming but after belching on the general, he imprisions you."

It seems like you aren't reading much of what I wrote. The president may not be a trained assassin, but he can order a country bombed out of existance. That is power that a single individual would have a hard time fighting.

Yeah, but in this case, no one has that type of power except the 20th level mage who teleports in or above the city, casts a few meteor swarms, and teleports out. In D&D, an indivudal's power is far, far, greater than anyone person's in the real world. Have you ever seen the anima/manga Berserk? One of the characters basically kills a mercenary army and becomes known as the "Hundred Man Slayer." Ever read Lone Wolf and Cub? People just started to leave Itto alone after a while because it meant you would die if you confronted him.

There is absoluetly nothing wrong with embracing the power level characters have as they gain levels. There is nothing that says that a campaign MUST retain it's static nature because NPC's are written a certain way. What if one of the characters actually comes from a noble house and uses steath and guile to take it over? Is he now a super villain despite having some from the same house?

You and I are seeing things from a different light. In Eberron, high level characters WILL shake the campaign setting simply because there aren't any and they SHOULD be allowed to take the campaign in directions that the players are interested in. People don't complain about the uber NPC's in the Forgotten Realms because they like.

And, if you begin to be that high level, you are going to start attracting the attention of a LOT of different parties. EVERYONE is going to want to be either your friend or your enemy. The Dragonmarked Houses, for instance, are going to want to use the power you weild.

A good DM will be able to play with the PCs power levels just fine.

I agree with that 100%. However, there comes a time when the PCs should be thosel eaders and rulers and much like the real world, when they are at those power levels, they should have people trying to make friends/enemies of them. Heck, even at low levels they have that as people hire them out left and right for different goals and agendas.

 

[fredramsey]

It seems to me you are confusing skills that, in most ways, the mechanics of D&D either play down or ignore, with things like combat ability.

A king would most likely be an Expert. If he is a good king, with many years of successful rule under his crown, he might even be a fairly high-level Expert. But that does not mean he could necessarily go toe to toe with one of his soldiers. Now there has been plenty of fantasy where that was the case, but it doesn't have to be.

I'm sure King Henry the VIII was not a great fighter, but he was a king.

I mean, you can become the most powerful leader in the world with a C average, and Mike Tyson can still beat you to a pulp, if he can get to you in the first place. That's what we're trying to say.

I'm not sure I agree. IMO the true rulers, if not the titular ones, will be mid- to high level though rarely combat classes. (Rogue is a popular class for young nobles since it provides a great mixture of skills, combat ability, and survival)

The simple fact is that foreign powers will send their most able diplomats; definitely the most skilled, loyal individuals they can find. A ruler should not be blatantly outclassed by the servant of another. Experienced PCs should realize that a low level head of state means a high level cabinet pulling the strings. Cardinal Richelieu and Thomas Wentworth were definitely high level individuals with copious skill. The kings of France and England at the time, however, were not so capable.

Any nation devoid of high level rulers will be outmaneuvered by more competent governments and defeated either militarily, economically, or diplomatically.