Am I completely off base?

[WizarDru]

Re: Rahkan

The point is that if I had been making a level 1 psion his skills would have been totally different, except that wouldn't he have chosen those skills at level 1 and thus still have them at level 8? Thats kind of what making a high-level character is about. It really lets you ignore that whole trade off between power now and power later. But the level 8 psion sure did have much cooler powers (and they fit together alot better), which might make him a more realistic character. But his powers also didn't follow a logical progression, making him less realistic?

The debate between high-level vs. low-level character creation just reminded me of that.

A point I've made in said debates. Creating a character out of whole cloth at level 8, 15 or what have you is not the same as leveling a character to that point. Some feats and abilities are much more critical when you have to depend on them for several levels, as opposed to filling-in-the-blanks at creation time. If I make a 13th-level wizard, I might not take sleep as one of my spells, as it won't be nearly as useful at my level as it was when I was 1st-level. I certainly wouldn't take most metamagic feats at that point...but when creating AT 13th-level, it's just one more feat slot to fill.

 

[Henry]

...I find it hard to suspend my disbelief that my vetern blacksmith (10 years) who's even by DM backstory helped the defend the town dozens of times. Is incapable of repairing or making things because I have to hit a particular DC and with +5 (total) to my check I cant. True my bonus is low but lvl 1 does that to you.... and I truely think the system needs some better options. Am I the only one who is tired of playing starting characters who have to kill many foes in order to be good at my trade I was supposed to be practicing for a decade AFTER my apprenticeship ended?

There are ways to simulate this, but I can't help but feel as if you are introducing an artificial blind-spot onto your view of how to portray that first-level character.

If a character is first level, then BY DEFINITION he is a neophyte. There is no way around this. The answer is not that you are playing an unrealistic character, the answer is that you are starting at too low a level. If you want to have a guy with decades of experience at being a village defender and being the local blacksmith, you need to be higher than first level.

Second, if your character is REALLY as good as you say he is at 'smithing, then there is an easy way to do this.

Put highest or second-highest score in INT
Put all four skill points into Craft(blacksmith)
Put Skill Focus (blacksmith)

He will be the most skilled neophyte blacksmith in the local area, at a +8 (or +9 if your DM uses skill emphasis instead of skill focus) to his checks. That's pretty darned skilled. Most normal folks don't get that skilled until 4th or 5th level.

A character with tons of skill at 'smithing and defending needs to start at least at 3rd or 4th level - he puts on 1 or two levels of expert, then 1 or 2 levels of warrior, and then one level of whatever he finally wound up being. Maybe he is a sorcerer, and has JUST discovered his powers? Maybe he has decided to strike out on his own at age 30, and is already a skilled warrior?

Don't let the concept of a fully detailed character with a massive backstory blind you to what 1st level REALLY is. It IS neophytic in flavor - I cannot realistically see a first level character being any older than a young adult, and certainly not older than age 25 or so. If he is, just plain LIVING took care of that little neophytic detail.

I hope this helps somewhat, Limper.

 

[Henry]

Shows me for not reading more than halfway down.

My assertion still stands though, that it's not really a rules fault, per se, but the way of looking at how those rules interact with the context of the story.

I do hope you can convince your group to start a little differently. Even 3rd level is better for what you are discussing than 1st!

Good gaming to you.

 

[Aaron2]

I'm sorry ...

With a +5 smithing, he can make any weapon, "high quality" items, and all light and medium armor. What's wrong with that?! Thats pretty impressive for your friendly neighborhood smith.

Also, if he really was trying to create a smith character, he should have a minimum of +6 before stat bonus. If you want a smith, -make- a smith. A fighter with a few ranks in craft isn't going to cut it.


Aaron

 

[hong]

In game are we not trying to simulate reality?

In D&D? No.

Now some people say "yes, there is _a_ reality we try to simulate, although it's not the same as the real world", and that's true, to some extent. However, using terms like "_a_ reality" is just playing with words, I think. It's a good rule of thumb that if people are using words like "simulate", "model" and "reality", they're not thinking about _a_ reality, they're thinking about REALITY -- ie modelling what real people would be like, or what a real world would be like (if you throw in some wild and wacky elements). Correct?

That's a different paradigm to what D&D is about. D&D is fundamentally not about simulating the real world. It's not even about simulating fiction. It's about _recreating in metaphorical terms_ the essence of myth and fantasy. In D&D, if you want to recreate Conan, Merlin or Aragorn, you don't "build" their stats and abilities by reference to what specific things they did in the books (or movies). You look at what their character was about, and what role they played in the stories they appeared in, and you design something around the overall concept. It's "simulation" in the abstract, as opposed to concrete.

It's not _completely_ metaphorical, of course. If it was, we'd be playing Papers & Paychecks, instead of poncing around with swords, fireballs, flamestrikes, and all the other make-believe weirdness. However, the point still stands: D&D is not the game for you, if you want to create a detailed, realistic portrayal of the common man (SHARK's world notwithstanding). D&D is about larger-than-life heroes, facing larger-than-life challenges. They may have very human concerns (or they'd be pretty boring) but these aren't the focus of the ruleset. Think Indiana Jones, not Death of a Salesman.

You _could_ use D&D to run a world simulation, but you'd be fighting the system most of the time. There are better rulesets for this purpose. GURPS springs to mind, for some reason.


Of course, I PERSONALLY ignore all of the above, and just make up characters like Zippo the flaming bunny with his +12 chainsaw of speed. Zippo is a hit with the cHyx0rs, due to his 10 ranks in Innuendo and Profession (erotic art). He also has a Brooklyn accent, or is supposed to, but every time he speaks everyone says he sounds Pakistani. The guy is a hoot, let me tell you.

 

[Warchild]

Exceptional Talent
Prerequisites: Int or Wis 13+, Must be chosen at 1st/0 level.
Benefit: Choose 1 Craft, Knowledge, or Profession skill that is a class skill. This skills maximum Rank level is equal to Level + 9.
Normal: Character's class skill ranks are limited to Level +3 normally.

 

[Christian]

Rahkan & WizarDru-my favorite example is to look at the numbers of wizards and sorcerers who, like the sample characters in the PH, take the Toughness feat at 1st level. Lots of them do, because it makes it massively more likely that they'll survive to 2nd level. And when they make 12th level wizards, how many do? That's right, virtually none-it's a wasted feat for a character of that level. But even more 12th level wizards should have Toughness than 1st level wizards, mathematically speaking, because very few of the wizards who don't have it reach 2nd level ...

S'mon, take a look at Sean K. Reynold's proposal for NPC character advancement on his website ... One thing he doesn't mention is that NPC level distribution peaks around fourth level on his system, although high (and even mid) level characters (10th plus) will be very rare. Your 'typical' village blacksmith is probably a 3rd-5th level commoner, or possibly an expert ... Makes a lot more sense than what's in the DMG.

 

[WizarDru]

Re: Re: Am I completely off base?

That's a different paradigm to what D&D is about. D&D is fundamentally not about simulating the real world. It's not even about simulating fiction. It's about _recreating in metaphorical terms_ the essence of myth and fantasy. In D&D, if you want to recreate Conan, Merlin or Aragorn, you don't "build" their stats and abilities by reference to what specific things they did in the books (or movies). You look at what their character was about, and what role they played in the stories they appeared in, and you design something around the overall concept. It's "simulation" in the abstract, as opposed to concrete.

Who are you and what have you done with the real hong?

Of course, I PERSONALLY ignore all of the above, and just make up characters like Zippo the flaming bunny with his +12 chainsaw of speed. Zippo is a hit with the cHyx0rs, due to his 10 ranks in Innuendo and Profession (erotic art). He also has a Brooklyn accent, or is supposed to, but every time he speaks everyone says he sounds Pakistani. The guy is a hoot, let me tell you.

Phew. There you are.

 

[Umbran]

Re: I'm sorry ...

With a +5 smithing, he can make any weapon, "high quality" items, and all light and medium armor. What's wrong with that?! Thats pretty impressive for your friendly neighborhood smith.

Aaron here has a point. In the real world, you average historical smith never made decent quality armor. He had neither the market, nor the skills. He made horseshoes, hand tools, and the like - things that could be sold to other common folk. He probably doesn't get particularly high levels of skill because he doesn't need it. Nor is he likely to have the time and money and opportunity to learn highly advanced techniques. Working many years at the same old tasks does not really grant you greater skill. At a point, you top out.

The smith with a total skill mod of +5 probably has all the skill he needs to make the stuff a common village uses, and can Take 10 to do it. Thus, the usual smith can very easily be 1st level.

Your average craftsman, no matter how long he's been working, probably doesn't have huge amounts of skill. He has enough to do his job, and that's all. Just because he's been working 10 years as a blacksmith you should not assume he can whip out a suit of plate mail. Working 10 years in the armory of a noble house would be a different story...

 

[S'mon]

S'mon, take a look at Sean K. Reynold's proposal for NPC character advancement on his website ... One thing he doesn't mention is that NPC level distribution peaks around fourth level on his system, although high (and even mid) level characters (10th plus) will be very rare. Your 'typical' village blacksmith is probably a 3rd-5th level commoner, or possibly an expert ... Makes a lot more sense than what's in the DMG.

Well, my campaign world uses a different distribution than the DMG, but it's a 'squished' distribution - there are only half as many level 3 as level 2, half as many level 4 as level 3, etc, up through level 9. Plus the default assumption in my gameworld is that 1st-level PC-class character with 'elite' stats is significantly above-average, so naturally the mass of humanity are 1st level commoners with average stats.