GMs - What kind of NPC level demographics work best?

[S'mon]

Thanks Fenes, I like that approach.

I tend to think that in a regular 3e setting even low-status guards who've been doing the job for 20 years will be pretty effective head-breakers, maybe 3rd or 4th level warriors. Elite guards can be Fighters. In my current game they'd all be 1d8 hit dice, but I'm using very different demographics.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I assume rougly 2% of all people are PC-class, the rest are NPC class. Actually, I have all this in an excel sheet that I use, so I can give the exact percentages....

I've gotten rid of the adept NPC class. The advancement rate I use is half as high for NPC classes as for PC classes. I don't worry too much about the higher levels - that's more to give me a target for a maximum number of individuals in a particular area; I don't really figure there are going to be 96 12th level or higher commoners in any population of one million. It's more important to me to know that there are as many as 104 wizards of between 7th and 12th level.

Any classes that aren't listed below would be considered sub-sets of the closest class - for example, scouts would fall under "ranger" and warlocks would fall under "sorceror," etc.

Out of 1,000,000 people:
Class	 1st    2-3rd   4-6th   7-12th  12th+     
Fighter	 6,800 	4,533	2,267	378	10
Rogue	 3,200 	2,133	711	119	3
Wizard	 2,800 	1,867	622	104	3
Mageblade 400 	267	89	15	0
Bard	 800 	533	178	30	1
Cleric	 3,200 	2,133	711	119	3
Druid	 800 	533	178	30	1
Barbarian 400 	267	89	15	0
Ranger	 400 	267	89	15	0
Paladin	 400 	267	89	15	0
Sorceror 800 	533	178	30	1
Commoner 900K 	750K	125K	3,472	96
Warrior	 40K 	33K	5,555	154	4
Aristocrat 10K 	8,333	1,389	39	1
Expert	 30K 	25K	4,166	116	3

 

[howandwhy99]

I like pre-d20 zero-level NPCs. NPC ability wasn't tied to level, so folks like Einstein and Da Vinci were a 0-level NPC in the olden D&D days. Demographically, I set them all up as would make sense in the world.

Classed NPC are as necessary for the game. I typically only use classed NPCs as part of adventures, but I'll add them depending upon role in the world too. Like thieves for thieves' guilds, fighters for soldiers and guards, clerics for powerful churches, etc.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

In my game, most NPCs don't have classes (i.e. they're 0-level "normal men"). Even common men-at-arms are usually 0-level. I consider classes to be a game structure that's beneficial for PCs, since they tend to need the detail and the rules for advancement. NPCs often don't benefit from such a structure; I'll modify an NPC to give him the abilities that are appropriate, without regard for class rules.

A 1st level Fighter is a "Veteran."
A 4th level Fighter is a "Hero." (he's starting to be well-known)
An 8th+ level Fighter is a "Superhero" (getting into the John Carter/Conan range).

Not every priest or holy-man is a Cleric. In fact, most are not. Instead, they're often 0-level men with appropriate powers (e.g. certain Cleric spells). Clerics are more like specific orders of warrior-priests -- the kind that would go adventuring rather than serve in the hierarchy.

Most arcane spellcasters are Magic Users. However, I might have a rare 0-level NPC that has taught himself to cast a spell or two, just like I might have a 0-level tailor that's taught himself to shoot a crossbow as if he were a 4th level Fighting Man.

More of my thoughts on this, here.

Re: Wilderlands...I love the Wilderlands setting, but you've put your finger on the biggest sore spot, for me. I don't like the Wilderlands approach to NPCs and class/level. I modify such things with gusto.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Demographics is just a convenient word that means, "NPC's are whatever I want them to be for whatever reason I need them to be it." Attempting to chart the spread of NPC levels, to codify them or just illustrate a general pattern has only ever caused me problems or wasted my own time. For example, if I make any such chart that shows how many NPCs of what class and what level there MIGHT be in a population I find I need to violate it constantly to serve my practical ends - in which case it's not "charting" anything, it's in my way.

The ONLY reason I should ever have to formalize an NPC's level and abilities is if the PC's are going to directly interact with them. Until that time they are nothing more than a collection of adjectives - a reputedly powerful sorceror, an obviously tough guardsman, a weak but prosperous shopkeeper, a ruthless killer or a famously skilled craftsman. If I want a blacksmith to be the most skilled blacksmith in the world I could give a rip what class or level he actually would have to be. If I want him to be 1st level for combat purposes but to have enough skill points for a 20th level player character than thats what he gets. If I want a 16th level cleric to be available then one is available, if I want the highest level rogue in the city to be 6th level then that's what is and demographics be hanged.

 

[S'mon]

The ONLY reason I should ever have to formalize an NPC's level and abilities is if the PC's are going to directly interact with them. Until that time they are nothing more than a collection of adjectives - a reputedly powerful sorceror, an obviously tough guardsman, a weak but prosperous shopkeeper, a ruthless killer or a famously skilled craftsman.

Well, yes - but for combat-oriented NPCs, what does it mean to be a "powerful" sorceror - 4th? 8th? 16th? Is an "obviously tough" guardsman a 2nd level Warrior or an 8th level Fighter?

 

[Psion]

I put NPC levels and PC levels on a different curve. I'm just not interested in seeing commoners with more than 10 levels.

I think the 3e DMG demographics are too generous to NPC classes and to strict on PC classes. High level NPCs aren't common, but they are out there.

I like using only 2e World Builder Guide / DM's Option: High Level Campaign style demographics to give me an idea of what to expect in a region, as a guideline. Unlike the standard 50% breakdown, I vary the ratio according to class. I think I give commoners a 70 or 80% current level/next level ratio, while straight spellcasters are more like 40%.

 

[The_Gneech]

Unless the PCs are likely to either fight the character, recruit them into the party, or engage in some sort of skill-vs.-skill contest, I don't bother to stat NPCs.

That said, when I do stat them, NPCs in my games mostly range from 1st - 6th, usually taking NPC classes. Community leaders, elite soldiers, et al. often have PC classes or higher levels. A warlord will be noble X/fighter Y for instance; the high priest of Pelor might be Clr 10. However, they generally have weaker stats than the average PC (except as required for spellcasters) and get average hp across the board like monsters would.

If I have to pull a number out of the air for an unstatted NPC's skill check, I pick a level that sounds right and add +4 if it's something they're likely to be trained in. (If they're not likely to be trained in it, I just assume their bonus is +2.) If I need to pull a number out of the air for an unstatted NPC's saving throw, I just assume it's 1/2 their level. It's fast and it works.

-The Gneech

 

[Jhaelen]

In my current 3E homebrew campaign I didn't really think too hard about demographics. It's based loosely on the Blackmoor area of Greyhawk but I've replaced pretty much all of the towns and villages with my own creations.

I started by using the DMG rules to populate them, so there aren't many high-level npcs. There's also a pretty low gp limit, so expensive magic items can only be found. There was a whopping three npcs who could cast raise dead (one of them was recently killed by a pc, so now it's only two left...).

There's a few npcs that are important to the storyline that have accompanied the pcs from time to time. I'm advancing them along with the pcs, so they stay at a level slightly below the pcs.

I've further separated the region into zones with different 'difficulty levels' (yeah, video-gamey, I know!). E.g. the western forest is low to mid-level, the swamps are mid level and the eastern wastelands are mid to high level. This means that guards/patrols in the tougher areas may get a slight bump to their their levels. The highest level guards are level 7.

The average party level has reached 12 so they've almost outgrown the region's power level. After the next adventure it's time to visit the Underdark, Limbo, or the Astral Plane depending on player preferences

 

[I'm A Banana]

I actually like the DMG's demographic suggestions. It gives me just the right mix for a mostly mundane world where adventuring and being heroes is rare, but not exclusively PC territory. It helps them gain mentors and trainers, there are people to turn to (and finding those people makes a good excuse for a quest!), but they are pretty rare. It gives the PC's an excuse to go from podunk farms at level 1 to great metropoli by level 20 (only to have to go back out to those podunk farms to slay the herd of terrasques that is stampeding or whatever).