Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Uller" data-source="post: 1481376" data-attributes="member: 413">I disagree.&nbsp; The Commoner/Warrior/Fighter set of classes gives the DM a range of difficulty for and NPCs at low levels.&nbsp; Personally, I don't see much of a point to Warriors beyond 1st level though.For instance, in an adventure I'm planning, the PCs will wander into a goblin lair.&nbsp; Most of the goblins are your typical War1s.&nbsp; There are a few Rog1s, fewer still Rog2s and 3s, a couple Clr2s and 3s, a Ftr4 and a Rog3/Crl3 as the leader.&nbsp; My thinking is that a basic (&quot;0-level&quot;) goblin is a War1 with average stats.&nbsp; The goblins that have potential to advance beyond being an average everyday goblin will have a level of some adventuring class (fighter, rogue or cleric mostly) instead of a level of warrior.&nbsp; From there they advance in that class.&nbsp; The same goes for human populations.&nbsp; A troop of cavalry will be made up of War1s.&nbsp; The veterans will be Ftr1-3, Officers will be Ftr/Aristocrats of varying levels.&nbsp; To me, your basic soldier is a warrior1.&nbsp; A professional soldier is a fighter.&nbsp; Not that there is really much difference in a Fighter and a warrior that is 1 or two levels higher, at least from the perspective of a player in a brief encounter.&nbsp;&nbsp; Fighter 5: BAB +5, good fort save, heavy armor, about 32 hitpoints (without con bonus).&nbsp; Warrior 6 BAB +6/+1 (but fewer feats), good fort save, heavy armor, about 32 hitpoints (without con bonus).&nbsp; Same skills.&nbsp; So a player isn't going to be able to tell the difference anyway.&nbsp; It's not like I'm going to tell them &quot;You meet a War5 Goblin.&quot;To me, the usefulness is having a low level NPC that isn't quite as tough as a 1st level fighter, but isn't as weak as a commoner.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Uller, post: 1481376, member: 413"] I disagree. The Commoner/Warrior/Fighter set of classes gives the DM a range of difficulty for and NPCs at low levels. Personally, I don't see much of a point to Warriors beyond 1st level though. For instance, in an adventure I'm planning, the PCs will wander into a goblin lair. Most of the goblins are your typical War1s. There are a few Rog1s, fewer still Rog2s and 3s, a couple Clr2s and 3s, a Ftr4 and a Rog3/Crl3 as the leader. My thinking is that a basic ("0-level") goblin is a War1 with average stats. The goblins that have potential to advance beyond being an average everyday goblin will have a level of some adventuring class (fighter, rogue or cleric mostly) instead of a level of warrior. From there they advance in that class. The same goes for human populations. A troop of cavalry will be made up of War1s. The veterans will be Ftr1-3, Officers will be Ftr/Aristocrats of varying levels. To me, your basic soldier is a warrior1. A professional soldier is a fighter. Not that there is really much difference in a Fighter and a warrior that is 1 or two levels higher, at least from the perspective of a player in a brief encounter. Fighter 5: BAB +5, good fort save, heavy armor, about 32 hitpoints (without con bonus). Warrior 6 BAB +6/+1 (but fewer feats), good fort save, heavy armor, about 32 hitpoints (without con bonus). Same skills. So a player isn't going to be able to tell the difference anyway. It's not like I'm going to tell them "You meet a War5 Goblin." To me, the usefulness is having a low level NPC that isn't quite as tough as a 1st level fighter, but isn't as weak as a commoner. [/QUOTE]

Verification