Level Up (A5E) Do Player Characters Have Average Population Stat Distributions?

[Lanefan]

The point is that creating a mid- to high-level player character is a massive effort.

Which right there is a serious system flaw that needs fixing. Char-gen at any level should be fast and reasonably simple, once one is halfway familiar with the system.

Not having to do that for NPCs who often stay alive only for two, three combat rounds is essential.
So NPC classes does not help, like, even a little.

In the way 3e does them, I largely agree.

The point is that NPCs can't and should not have to abide by the rules for PCs.

But here I disagree. A DM can use whatever method she likes for dreaming up NPCs (e.g. just assign stats instead of roll) but if the end result would be a PC-playable species yet impossible to generate or achieve using PC rules it should also be impossible as an NPC of the same species. On the flip side, if a PC can do it or be it then so can an NPC of the same species.

A simple example: if you put level limits on demi-human PCs in your setting such that, say, Elves can't go higher than 10th level in Bard, your players have a right to be truly hacked off if you introduce them to a 15th-level NPC Elven Bard in that campaign.

 

[glass]

Which right there is a serious system flaw that needs fixing. Char-gen at any level should be fast and reasonably simple, once one is halfway familiar with the system.

A stated goal of Level Up is meaninful choices at every level. That is not going to make the creation of high-level PCs any quicker!

_
glass.

 

[Lanefan]

A stated goal of Level Up is meaninful choices at every level. That is not going to make the creation of high-level PCs any quicker!

Unfortunately.

There's two possible answers, neither of which will likely gain any traction at all but I'll lob 'em out there anyway:

1. Abandon the goal of having to make choices at every level (i.e. have a lot more abilities etc. come baked in with the class such that all the player has to do at char-gen is make notes rather than choices); and-or
2. Greatly reduce the number of levels (i.e. similar to the E-6 variant for 3e only not as extreme).

 

[TwoSix]

1. Abandon the goal of having to make choices at every level (i.e. have a lot more abilities etc. come baked in with the class such that all the player has to do at char-gen is make notes rather than choices);

I feel like for a game that's stated goal is to be a more modular 5e compatible game, making it more like an OSR game isn't the proper direction to take.

2. Greatly reduce the number of levels (i.e. similar to the E-6 variant for 3e only not as extreme).

I don't think that'll be the direction Level Up goes in, but I do find an E-X variant of 5e to be compelling. (I personally favor E-10 because I think level 10 is a real sweet spot for 5e.)

 

[CapnZapp]

Which right there is a serious system flaw that needs fixing. Char-gen at any level should be fast and reasonably simple, once one is halfway familiar with the system.

Well, no... a player creates a high-level character over the course of many many play sessions, over months if not years.

A DM creates several high-level NPCs each week.

The needs are so fundamentally different that insisting on them using the same method is, however well-meaning, hopelessly impractical.

The corollary is: it is a mistake to limit PC character generation just because it needs to be fast and simple for the DM. For instance, Level Up will most certainly crunchify PC chargen. I am absolutely convinced its designers will not even consider adding that to monster generation for a second.

But here I disagree. A DM can use whatever method she likes for dreaming up NPCs (e.g. just assign stats instead of roll) but if the end result would be a PC-playable species yet impossible to generate or achieve using PC rules it should also be impossible as an NPC of the same species. On the flip side, if a PC can do it or be it then so can an NPC of the same species.

This ship has sailed.

The pressing need for DMs to be able to use shortcuts means that both WotCs and Paizos game now actively supports NPCs that only approximates PC power. That is, PCs and NPCs don't play by the same (creation) rules. A "NPC Bard" is a monster, not a PC, so they can - and do - have abilities no PC class offers all the time.

This is a sacrifice, yes. But experience has taught us conclusively it is absolutely necessary.

Anyway, Level Up is definitely not the project that will aim to unify PC and NPC chargen, so...

 

[TwoSix]

A simple example: if you put level limits on demi-human PCs in your setting such that, say, Elves can't go higher than 10th level in Bard, your players have a right to be truly hacked off if you introduce them to a 15th-level NPC Elven Bard in that campaign.

I'm a bit of an extremist in this regard, but in my own games, NPCs don't even have classes. Any relatively distinct NPC has their own unique combination of abilities.

 

[CapnZapp]

A stated goal of Level Up is meaninful choices at every level. That is not going to make the creation of high-level PCs any quicker!

_
glass.

Indeed.

The goals of Level Up directly contradicts "faster chargen", and people that think 5E is already too complex are definitely not its target market.

 

[CapnZapp]

I'm a bit of an extremist in this regard, but in my own games, NPCs don't even have classes. Any relatively distinct NPC has their own unique combination of abilities.

No more an extremist than every published Pathfinder 2 scenario to date...

(There was a single NPC presented as having a PC class in an early adventure. That is pretty much the exception that defines the rule)

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I feel like for a game that's stated goal is to be a more modular 5e compatible game, making it more like an OSR game isn't the proper direction to take.

Is that the stated goal?

From Morrus's Post announcing the project:

"A crunchier, more flexible version of the 5E ruleset which you know and love. If you love 5E but would like a little more depth to the ruleset, Level Up is the game for you!

...

This is an ‘advanced’ version of the 5E ruleset, presented as a hardcover standalone game. It adds more customization and depth to the game. Basically, it’s a ‘crunchier’ version of 5th Edition."

Now, I admit that modularity and flexibility go hand-in-hand like peanut butter and bananas in an Elvis sandwich, but there seems to be an awful lot of crunch involved.

And, for that matter, there is the whole idea of a proposed toggle between cinematic (4e?) and gritty (OSR?) versions of the rules, although it doesn't seem like that is going to garner support from the masses. The lesson, as always? The masses suck.

There is one thing I am certain of, however. There is nothing more enjoyable than arguing over the features of a non-existent product! I declare myself the imaginary winner!

 

[TwoSix]

No more an extremist than every published Pathfinder 2 scenario to date...

(There was a single NPC presented as having a PC class in an early adventure. That is pretty much the exception that defines the rule)

Really? Good for Paizo! Trying to define narrative roles in the setting for every piece of PC-facing options is an exercise in futility, IMO. I'm glad to see they've moved past it.