D&D General Could a real human survive your D&D adventures?

[Zubatcarteira]

Would this work as an example?

View attachment 374201
No class, no saves, no magic. Just one HD, like a commoner. Ability scores sum to 66 (60 base common with +1 to all human race). Basic armor/shield and weapon proficiencies (you could limit the weapons to individual weapons as well). Just two skills (as from a background), two tools, and human race granted languages (common plus one).

Compared to an "adventurer" PC, you have less hp, lower ability scores, fewer proficiencies (including no saves), and of course no class features.

Finally, this PC would never advance (since no class) so no improvement or changes short of allowing downtime training. Certain rewards might include training for feats and additional skill proficiency since this is permitted normally IMO.

So, does this qualify?

I didn't really have in mind using the real person as a statblock of character sheet, just their actual selves in the in-fiction fantasy world, without the game mechanics or superhuman abilities that allow the average D&D characters to perform feats that wouldn't normally be possible.

In terms of what this real person could do, it doesn't have to be an average person, you can make it a 7 foot tall Navy Seal, UFC champion, HEMA expert, with 5 PhDs and a 200 IQ, that person could theoretically exist, they're just limited to real human biology, physics, etc.

 

[ezo]

I didn't really have in mind using the real person as a statblock of character sheet, just their actual selves in the in-fiction fantasy world, without the game mechanics or superhuman abilities that allow the average D&D characters to perform feats that wouldn't normally be possible.

In terms of what this real person could do, it doesn't have to be an average person, you can make it a 7 foot tall Navy Seal, UFC champion, HEMA expert, with 5 PhDs and a 200 IQ, that person could theoretically exist, they're just limited to real human biology, physics, etc.

Gotcha.

Then in my current adventures, for levels 1, such a PC would require ASTOUNDING luck just due to combat alone. Survival for a few encounters? Perhaps. For the session? Maybe. But the complete adventure? Unlikely... the odds are just to against it. Possibly, certainly, but unlikely. Extend it to anything more difficult and the odds become dismally smaller and smaller.

IMO it would be no different than taking a low CR humanoid creature, like a guard, who never advances, gains HP, etc. Such a creature would never survive "a life of an adventurer". In a "typical" D&D game, you need the plot armor in some fashion.

Now, that isn't to say it wouldn't be possible (as I wrote in my first post) with an adventure tailored to a more mundane approach and play D&D in such a fashion.

As for the point in the OP concerning disabilities, it would depend greatly on the disability and how "honestly" the player wanted to embrace it. IME it never works well. Players either want a watered-down version and/or expect accomodations which aren't reasonable in my game world (like magical levitating tenser floating chairs), ramps everywhere, etc.. Magic and/or artificery aren't as common in my games as others IME.

In a fashion, I don't see it as much different than when player considers playing a centaur. Climbing, stairs, etc. can be very difficult, and a player typically decides not to bother with the hassle.

 

[cbwjm]

Thinking of first adventure of the last campaign I ran, probably not. It was a level 3 adventure, it involved undead in a mine and a ritual site with a ritual that needed to be counteracted. Pretty sure any normal preson would have ended up as undead chow.

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

Could they complete your adventurers, or at least survive all the challenges? If not, where do you think they'd fail?

I’m pretty sure the four 1st level adventures I have written for the DMs Guild would do two things: kill one or more mundane humans and make the survivors fabulously wealthy.

I figure humans without class levels would stand a good chance of failure whenever they ran into encounters that require some basic understanding of magic, monsters, or common dungeon dangers.

On the other hand, some of the encounters I wrote rely on jumping, climbing, raw strength, etc., and in working together to survive extreme cold and extreme dry environments. Mundane humans could do that no problem.

 

[Umbran]

A party with normal human limits, with no class abilities, magic, luck, divine favor or any game-granted ability that wouldn't be possible in real life.

I'd be okay with modelling real world, highly skilled people as up to maybe 3rd level characters. So, you have up to third level fighters and rogues, basically, with none of the magical sub-classes.

Could they complete your adventurers, or at least survive all the challenges? If not, where do you think they'd fail?

As above, roughly around where 3rd level characters can't hack it any more.

 

[beta-ray]

In the D&D adventures I've participated in? Not a chance.

 

[GrimCo]

Average human, in typical low level 2ed ad&d would fair no worse than average adventurer. Fighter, tankiest class, has at lv 1 only 1d10 hp. And you roll it, no max on 1st level. Bonus hp is for CON 15+. Thief? 1d6. Wizard? 1d4, and only 1 spell/day at lv 1, with whooping 5 spells at level 4. So normal human, in solid shape, with decent mma and hema training, could reasonably be between thief and fighter.

As for 5ed. 6-8 encounters are guidelines, but most people i know don't use that. 5 minute work day is real thing. Specially in games that are more focused on storytelling and more character driven.

Regular human in 5e would have hard time, but, if they have 2ed aproach, as in tactical, with scouting, planning, using advantage of prepared terrain, setting traps, they could do it. Someone mentioned cr4 dragon. Yeah, that's tough. But not unbeatable. You wouldn't go face to face with it. Weighted nets, scorpions, using cover to shoot and hide, and of course, numbers. why go 4 vs 1? Why not recruit few of more able bodied guards, get some proper military hardware, and do it 10 vs1. In essence, normal humans survive by not being Big Damn Hero, but by using combat tactics and bigger numbers.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Probably not. I don't make the stakes TOO high...but they are heroically high. A perfectly ordinary human being would probably be too fragile.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Average human, in typical low level 2ed ad&d would fair no worse than average adventurer. Fighter, tankiest class, has at lv 1 only 1d10 hp. And you roll it, no max on 1st level. Bonus hp is for CON 15+. Thief? 1d6. Wizard? 1d4, and only 1 spell/day at lv 1, with whooping 5 spells at level 4. So normal human, in solid shape, with decent mma and hema training, could reasonably be between thief and fighter.

As for 5ed. 6-8 encounters are guidelines, but most people i know don't use that. 5 minute work day is real thing. Specially in games that are more focused on storytelling and more character driven.

Regular human in 5e would have hard time, but, if they have 2ed aproach, as in tactical, with scouting, planning, using advantage of prepared terrain, setting traps, they could do it. Someone mentioned cr4 dragon. Yeah, that's tough. But not unbeatable. You wouldn't go face to face with it. Weighted nets, scorpions, using cover to shoot and hide, and of course, numbers. why go 4 vs 1? Why not recruit few of more able bodied guards, get some proper military hardware, and do it 10 vs1. In essence, normal humans survive by not being Big Damn Hero, but by using combat tactics and bigger numbers.

How it should be IMO. TSR had this right as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Baron Opal II]

Could they complete your adventurers, or at least survive all the challenges? If not, where do you think they'd fail?

Sure, with people like Jack Churchill, Percy Fawcett, Mary Seacole, &c.
Most people, maybe not.