Commoner vs Fighter/Rogue vs Wizard/Cleric

[Leatherhead]

But should this schism remain? Should the Fighter or Rogue be restricted by what a Commoner cannot attempt? Could they get abilities which are absolutely beyond the scope of a Commoner?

As long as the "farmhand turned simple swordsman" and "waif rogue" archetypical characters exist, then yes it should be limited.

Or alternatively, should Commoners be allowed to attempt Mage/Cleric abilities? You could make a system where anyone can cast spells or turn undead, but a mage or cleric is just more likely to suceed and gets better results on success.

4e had rituals, that's close enough. Any more throws classes, and perhaps even multiclassing to the wayside. It would also be much harder to balance if anyone could do anything, even if only a fraction of the time.

The other problem with letting anyone do magic is that some people don't want everyone to be magical. But that's more of an "add salt to taste" problem.

 

[BobTheNob]

Shooting a gun or crossbow isn't an advanced combat technique. Ease of use is one of the primary reasons those weapons were/are used. It's also not particularly hard to figure out how to stab somebody with a knife, or kick them in the knee.

There are much more complicated maneuvers available to trained melee combatants, however. Stuff that the unknowledgeable haven't even heard of. And if you haven't even heard of something, how the heck would you attempt to do it?

To be honest, Im not sure how people can argue against this point. You are absolutely correct.

If someone jumped me in an ally with a knife. Would I think
a) Run up the wall like a wuxia warrior, then fall on him grabbing his his neck in a vice like leg grib, flipping and using my forward momentum to throw him into the sky to splat on the opposite wall
b) Take a swing at him
c) Run like hell

The "you can attempt anything" argument implies I could give a) a shot. But a) would simply never enter my thoughts. It just wouldnt. I have 4 seconds to make a decision that determines whether I live to see the next sunrise, and I resort to option a)??? No.

Without a certain amount of training or background, it would simply never enter my mind to attempt certain things, and I would therefore argue that there is limits to what the "common man" can even attempt. In the above scenario, he can attempt b) or c), but a) is for warriors of a certain level only.

 

[hamstertamer]

To be honest, Im not sure how people can argue against this point. You are absolutely correct.

If someone jumped me in an ally with a knife. Would I think
a) Run up the wall like a wuxia warrior, then fall on him grabbing his his neck in a vice like leg grib, flipping and using my forward momentum to throw him into the sky to splat on the opposite wall
b) Take a swing at him
c) Run like hell

The "you can attempt anything" argument implies I could give a) a shot. But a) would simply never enter my thoughts. It just wouldnt. I have 4 seconds to make a decision that determines whether I live to see the next sunrise, and I resort to option a)??? No.

Without a certain amount of training or background, it would simply never enter my mind to attempt certain things, and I would therefore argue that there is limits to what the "common man" can even attempt. In the above scenario, he can attempt b) or c), but a) is for warriors of a certain level only.

Considering you did in fact think of a) because you just posted it, why can't you attempt it then? A person can imagine doing quite a bit and have no real chance of success like the example you just gave in a). You argued against your own argument unless you are in fact have wuxia warrior (whatever that is) training, and I'm sure you don't.

I can imagine myself doing all types of combat maneuvers and I know that I have no real chance of success, but it does not mean I can't attempt it no matter how crazy it is.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Considering you did in fact think of a) because you just posted it, why can't you attempt it then? A person can imagine doing quite a bit and have no real chance of success like the example you just gave in a). You argued against your own argument unless you are in fact have wuxia warrior (whatever that is) training, and I'm sure you don't.

I can imagine myself doing all types of combat maneuvers and I know that I have no real chance of success, but it does not mean I can't attempt it no matter how crazy it is.

Modern people are exposed to a much greater variety of ideas than our ancestors were, thanks largely to the vast quantity of media readily available to us. I'd be quite surprised if [MENTION=82425]BobTheNob[/MENTION] came up with that description without ever having seen an action movie.

To put it another way, just because you've seen something on TV doesn't mean your character ought to be able to do it.

We're not talking about merely swinging a sword here. Anyone can do that. We're talking about what is possible via rigorous martial training. Unless you've had training yourself, there's no way you'll disarm a well trained swordsman under normal circumstances. You might have watched people disarmed a thousand times on tv, but it won't make a bit of difference.

 

[BobTheNob]

Considering you did in fact think of a) because you just posted it, why can't you attempt it then? A person can imagine doing quite a bit and have no real chance of success like the example you just gave in a). You argued against your own argument unless you are in fact have wuxia warrior (whatever that is) training, and I'm sure you don't.

I can imagine myself doing all types of combat maneuvers and I know that I have no real chance of success, but it does not mean I can't attempt it no matter how crazy it is.

So are you saying that, next time someone jump you with a knife, you consider it a reasonable possibility you are going to pull of the spectacular wuxia move, rather than just punch or run?

Me, no, no I bloody wouldnt. The fact that I have seen it in a movie and can type something at a desk has nothing to do with how I would react in a pressure situation. Id probably run, and failing that, take a swing. It would not, given the time and threat to my life, for a second, occur to me to do anything more spectacular.

Now, a trained martial artist, it might occur to him. But to me?..no. I would run. Im a common man, how would I EVER have the presence of mind in a pressure situation such as that to do anything else? Im not saying anything is stopping me from attempting the spectacular atction, Im saying that as I have no reason to believe it would occur to me in the first place. I wouldnt do it...because in that situation, it would never enter my mind to do it.

How does one compare your thoughts whilst typing into a computer vs your thoughts in a fight?

(p.s. wuxia is just a collective term for asian action style films, along the line of the crazy stuff in "Crouching tiger, hidden dragon" where they are flying from tree to tree)

 

[Ratskinner]

But people without training have picked up a gun and shot someone. With no training at all I picked up a crossbow pointed and fired and hit the target near to the middle. There have been cases of people grabbing a kitchen knife and killing an intruder.

I don't think the argument is whether or not commoners should be able to attack at all, but whether they should be able to do so as well as a first level fighter or rogue. Conversely, the question can be phrased: "Should Fighters and Rogues have combat abilities/stunts that commoners don't."

Guns are far easier to use than primitive handweapons...that's why they end the reign of aristocratic warrior classes, historically. Modern crossbows have "learned a lot" from guns and are far more sophisticated and easy to use than their medieval counterparts. That said, I suspect that a peasant could probably fire a crossbow that he found on a table, but would run into difficulty attempting to reload it. (Although crossbows took far less training to use than longbows.)

Of course, two commoners can kill each other...I don't think people are arguing that commoners couldn't make basic attacks. I mean the dude and the intruder are probably both d6 hp commoners (to use 3e terms.) So the one guy got lucky and rolled max damage (maybe critted?) and other guy rolled low hp. Or maybe the fight took more than one round. Tada, one commoner killed another. What people are suggesting is that neither one of them did anything particularly fancy during that fight.

I am not trained in martial arts but I once kicked a purse snatcher in his knee and broke it.

Okay. You both probably still have single digit hp (again in 3e terms.) HP are abstract (sadly, perhaps). So if this guy had 4 HP and you did 4....he's incapacitated.

As for the god thing. Are you saying that gods would just ignore every single time a call from one of their most faithful for aide? I don't find that believable. which is why I have the god call mechanic in all my games. There there is always a chance a slim chance that your god might answer you.

I also like the idea of a hedge witch who is basically a commoner being able to cast a few cantrips. I don't want to multiclass them as say a wizard and deal with all the stuff a wizard gets at first level.

I'm not sure about the magic stuff. That varies a lot in the genre. In some of my favorite fantasy sources, there are no gods (or at least they don't seem to be any evident than they are in this world) and priestly casters are just wizards with credentials from a church. In other sources, magic isn't just a matter of training, its a special thing that only some few chosen people get to do ever. Sometimes I don't like how D&D (and many rpgs) treat magic as if its just an alternative to science. That always leaves me thinking about Magitech.

In any case, both are probably something that should be set up to vary between campaigns and playgroups, rather than firmly fixed in the rules.

 

[Elf Witch]

Shooting a gun or crossbow isn't an advanced combat technique. Ease of use is one of the primary reasons those weapons were/are used. It's also not particularly hard to figure out how to stab somebody with a knife, or kick them in the knee.

There are much more complicated maneuvers available to trained melee combatants, however. Stuff that the unknowledgeable haven't even heard of. And if you haven't even heard of something, how the heck would you attempt to do it?

I am not saying you should but simple things should not require class abilities to do. If farmers have livestock that they butcher to feed their family they know how to use a knife and have an idea of anatomy. A lot of the peasants back in the old days hunted game for food.

You shouldn't have to make someone a first level ranger to give then the ability to track game.

I sometimes think people go overboard on this kind of stuff.

 

[Elf Witch]

To be honest, Im not sure how people can argue against this point. You are absolutely correct.

If someone jumped me in an ally with a knife. Would I think
a) Run up the wall like a wuxia warrior, then fall on him grabbing his his neck in a vice like leg grib, flipping and using my forward momentum to throw him into the sky to splat on the opposite wall
b) Take a swing at him
c) Run like hell

The "you can attempt anything" argument implies I could give a) a shot. But a) would simply never enter my thoughts. It just wouldnt. I have 4 seconds to make a decision that determines whether I live to see the next sunrise, and I resort to option a)??? No.

Without a certain amount of training or background, it would simply never enter my mind to attempt certain things, and I would therefore argue that there is limits to what the "common man" can even attempt. In the above scenario, he can attempt b) or c), but a) is for warriors of a certain level only.

I don't think you give people enough credit. faced with an assailant with a knife you might not do a wuxia style move but you might swing your briefcase at them and then run.

Or you might just stand there frozen in fear.

I am not saying that you could untrained do a monk style counterattack. But say the orcs are riding off with your child you could throw rocks which in real life can kill. You might grab a fallen crossbow and fire it and if you roll well enough actually hit and do damage.

I have seen to many DMs play NPC commoners has totally helpless and that is just not realistic.

 

[Ratskinner]

Considering you did in fact think of a) because you just posted it, why can't you attempt it then? A person can imagine doing quite a bit and have no real chance of success like the example you just gave in a). You argued against your own argument unless you are in fact have wuxia warrior (whatever that is) training, and I'm sure you don't.

I can imagine myself doing all types of combat maneuvers and I know that I have no real chance of success, but it does not mean I can't attempt it no matter how crazy it is.

I think what [MENTION=82425]BobTheNob[/MENTION] is saying here is that his survival instincts would take over (and without training they rightly should.) Trying to pull off a maneuver that you don't know well will likely get you killed.

That being said, its a game. I'm not sure why we're defending the commoner's ability to suddenly take over as party meatshield. Aren't commoners supposed to be the innocent victims we are avenging/defending?

 

[BobTheNob]

I don't think you give people enough credit. faced with an assailant with a knife you might not do a wuxia style move but you might swing your briefcase at them and then run.

Or you might just stand there frozen in fear.

I am not saying that you could untrained do a monk style counterattack. But say the orcs are riding off with your child you could throw rocks which in real life can kill. You might grab a fallen crossbow and fire it and if you roll well enough actually hit and do damage.

I have seen to many DMs play NPC commoners has totally helpless and that is just not realistic.

In all fairness, I did say that. In both of my previous posts I said a reasonable reaction would be either run or take a swing. Damn right I might swing my briefcase (or my handbag )