Building charcters with NPC levels.
- Thread starter was
- Start date
Infiniti2000
First Post
Not all NPC classes are meant to be the same. Commoner is way out of balance in comparison with, say, adept. Someone who takes a level in aristocrat may demand extra starting money. I'd suggest allowing only a specific class (e.g. expert), or consider trying to balance it off yourself so that someone with a good concept and choosing commoner doesn't feel screwed when the other person takes warrior.
Just be careful of expert where they can pick the skills. I see some potential for abuse in each choice (except commoner), but as long as you take a real close look at their motivation, you might be okay.
Just be careful of expert where they can pick the skills. I see some potential for abuse in each choice (except commoner), but as long as you take a real close look at their motivation, you might be okay.
Shin Okada
Explorer
It may depend on what does "free" mean. But if that is just that I can start as an Expert 1/Wizard 1 with 1,000 xp instead of a Wizard 1 with 0 xp, I always prefer latter.
I prefer to be a wizard 5 than to be an expert 1/wizard 4 with 1,000 more XP.
I prefer to be a wizard 5 than to be an expert 1/wizard 4 with 1,000 more XP.
Infiniti2000
First Post
Good point. I assumed it meant you can start as an Expert 1/Wizard 1 with 0 xp. Forcing an NPC level upon them really really sucks. Even if you give them 1000xp to start, you're really screwing them over at higher levels.Shin Okada said:
Peter Gibbons
First Post
Skill points. Starting HP. And, as others have mentioned, exactly what "free" means in this context.was said:
Shin Okada
Explorer
Assume that NPC class level is truly free. I mean, a PC with 3,000 xp can be Expert 1/Fighter 2.
I can think of other several game-balance problems.
1. Practiced Spellcaster feat.
By taking this feat, a character has up to +4 higher caster level than his spellcasting class levels, up to his HD. So, an Expert 1/Wizard 10 can have caster level of 11. May not be that much significant. But good.
2. Prestige Class requirements
By taking a free Aristocrat class level, one can be proficient in all the martial weapons and armors. So, some PCs may qualify the requirements of certain prestige classes earlier. For example, a wizard 5 with free Aristocrat level can become Eldritch Knight.
3. 1st-level skills
Having "free" NPC class level may actually hamper a Rogue or Scout. Having x4 skill points at the 1st level is very important for them.
4. Feat choice
As that "free" level may change the timing of getting feats, it may either benefit or hamper some builds. It will be different on each cases. For example, usually, a 1st-level human fighter can choose 3 feats which requires BAB +1 as prerequisite. But Aristocrat 1/Fighter 1 cannot. On the other hand, a 1st-level monk character cannot usually take Weapon Focus (Unarmed Strike). But warrior 1/Monk 1 can. Because of those differences, some players may choose or skip certain NPC class for power-gaming, not for role-playing. I guess that is not your intention.
I can think of other several game-balance problems.
1. Practiced Spellcaster feat.
By taking this feat, a character has up to +4 higher caster level than his spellcasting class levels, up to his HD. So, an Expert 1/Wizard 10 can have caster level of 11. May not be that much significant. But good.
2. Prestige Class requirements
By taking a free Aristocrat class level, one can be proficient in all the martial weapons and armors. So, some PCs may qualify the requirements of certain prestige classes earlier. For example, a wizard 5 with free Aristocrat level can become Eldritch Knight.
3. 1st-level skills
Having "free" NPC class level may actually hamper a Rogue or Scout. Having x4 skill points at the 1st level is very important for them.
4. Feat choice
As that "free" level may change the timing of getting feats, it may either benefit or hamper some builds. It will be different on each cases. For example, usually, a 1st-level human fighter can choose 3 feats which requires BAB +1 as prerequisite. But Aristocrat 1/Fighter 1 cannot. On the other hand, a 1st-level monk character cannot usually take Weapon Focus (Unarmed Strike). But warrior 1/Monk 1 can. Because of those differences, some players may choose or skip certain NPC class for power-gaming, not for role-playing. I guess that is not your intention.
was
Adventurer
-Sorry, maybe I should have been a bit clearer. The term 'free' was meant to imply that the NPC class level would not factor into XP or overall class level. So a level 1 expert/ level 1 fighter would be considered a normal first level character. It would have no xp, save for the bonuses I award for character backgrounds and character portraits.
-Starting HP would be max., adding both levels together.
-Starting skill points would be max., adding both levels together. I don't think the skills issue will be that problematic. I have some pretty good players that I trust enough not to abuse the situation. I also like the idea of using the expert class to expand a character's available skills to reflect past training.
-I have no problem with awarding extra money for aristocrat pcs. However, I was thinking that I might have to balance it with a requirement that the character prefer a comfortable lifestyle and high quality goods.
-While I will certainly review the merits of each class with each player, in the end, the NPC class would be chosen by the player. I wouldn't force a specific NPC class on any of them. They can also choose not to use one if they prefer. If a player knowingly chooses to add a 'lower' powered NPc class, I don't know if there's anything that I can do to eliminate any feelings of inadequacy that may arise later in the campaign. I just want to give them an extra option.
-Starting HP would be max., adding both levels together.
-Starting skill points would be max., adding both levels together. I don't think the skills issue will be that problematic. I have some pretty good players that I trust enough not to abuse the situation. I also like the idea of using the expert class to expand a character's available skills to reflect past training.
-I have no problem with awarding extra money for aristocrat pcs. However, I was thinking that I might have to balance it with a requirement that the character prefer a comfortable lifestyle and high quality goods.
-While I will certainly review the merits of each class with each player, in the end, the NPC class would be chosen by the player. I wouldn't force a specific NPC class on any of them. They can also choose not to use one if they prefer. If a player knowingly chooses to add a 'lower' powered NPc class, I don't know if there's anything that I can do to eliminate any feelings of inadequacy that may arise later in the campaign. I just want to give them an extra option.
Lord Pendragon
First Post
I've done something similar in ever campaign I've run so far in 3.x. But in my case the NPC level wasn't entirely "free." I required each PC to start with one level in an NPC class, chosen to reflect the character's background. I figured it would help them think a bit about their character's pre-adventuring life. (And for that I think it was mostly successful.)
A couple points:
* The NPC classes aren't balanced. The first time I did this, I got a nice mixture because the players weren't powergamers at all. The second time, I got nearly an entire party with one level of Aristocrat. Mainly, it's the Commoner that's out of whack. The others all have advantages for certain concepts. So the next time I started up a game, I gave the Commoner a bonus feat. It was a bonus feat chosen by me, the DM, after the character was otherwise written up. That way I could give the character something that would be useful, but not twinked out. This worked well, and I wound up getting two Warriors, a Commoner, and an Expert.
* You need to consider that in some ways, an NPC class can be a detriment, if it's going to be the PC's first level. Levels have an order, and that is very important at 1st-level, with the 4x skill points and max hp. In order to remove this penalty, I started the game at 2nd-level (1 NPC + 1 PC), but allowed the players to choose which level was counted as "first." So storywise the NPC level would have been earned first (it was their background, after all,) but mechanically, they were able to choose whichever class was their "first level" to take advantage of the 1st-level bonuses.
* You'll need to decide how xp is handled. Does the NPC class count for purposes of how much xp is needed to earn the next level? Does it count when determining when feats and ability score points are awarded? I give each campaign a choice at the beginning (majority of players decides,) either the NPC class is completely "invisible" and therefore doesn't count for xp purposes or feat/ability point purposes. Or the class is "visible" and increases the xp needed for leveling, but also counts for feat/ability pont purposes. I've had groups decide both ways. Some don't want to pay for the class with xp. Others want it to count so they can get to their 3rd-level feat that much faster.
In my experience the NPC classes have worked out well. I've had pretty much every class chosen over the years, and it really reinforces a character's history in the player's mind.
Edit: D'oh! Your post came up while I was writing mine. Looks like you've got a good handle on things. I'll leave my post up anyway, just as a general addition to the topic of using NPC classes.
A couple points:
* The NPC classes aren't balanced. The first time I did this, I got a nice mixture because the players weren't powergamers at all. The second time, I got nearly an entire party with one level of Aristocrat. Mainly, it's the Commoner that's out of whack. The others all have advantages for certain concepts. So the next time I started up a game, I gave the Commoner a bonus feat. It was a bonus feat chosen by me, the DM, after the character was otherwise written up. That way I could give the character something that would be useful, but not twinked out. This worked well, and I wound up getting two Warriors, a Commoner, and an Expert.
* You need to consider that in some ways, an NPC class can be a detriment, if it's going to be the PC's first level. Levels have an order, and that is very important at 1st-level, with the 4x skill points and max hp. In order to remove this penalty, I started the game at 2nd-level (1 NPC + 1 PC), but allowed the players to choose which level was counted as "first." So storywise the NPC level would have been earned first (it was their background, after all,) but mechanically, they were able to choose whichever class was their "first level" to take advantage of the 1st-level bonuses.
* You'll need to decide how xp is handled. Does the NPC class count for purposes of how much xp is needed to earn the next level? Does it count when determining when feats and ability score points are awarded? I give each campaign a choice at the beginning (majority of players decides,) either the NPC class is completely "invisible" and therefore doesn't count for xp purposes or feat/ability point purposes. Or the class is "visible" and increases the xp needed for leveling, but also counts for feat/ability pont purposes. I've had groups decide both ways. Some don't want to pay for the class with xp. Others want it to count so they can get to their 3rd-level feat that much faster.
In my experience the NPC classes have worked out well. I've had pretty much every class chosen over the years, and it really reinforces a character's history in the player's mind.
Edit: D'oh! Your post came up while I was writing mine. Looks like you've got a good handle on things. I'll leave my post up anyway, just as a general addition to the topic of using NPC classes.
Infiniti2000
First Post
Having players you trust is a rare commodity, so keep them close.
That said, you certainly don't want to possibly abuse that trust, so plan to give some balancing considerations for lower powered classes chosen for character reasons. The easiest would be an extra level of commoner, or perhaps an ancestral relic (hidden from the authorities of course). The aristocrat would get extra money. The expert likely gets enough, but perhaps a set of masterwork tools would be a good start.
That said, you certainly don't want to possibly abuse that trust, so plan to give some balancing considerations for lower powered classes chosen for character reasons. The easiest would be an extra level of commoner, or perhaps an ancestral relic (hidden from the authorities of course). The aristocrat would get extra money. The expert likely gets enough, but perhaps a set of masterwork tools would be a good start.
Shin Okada
Explorer
IMHO, you would better give additional bonuses to players who chosen not having NPC class because of their character concepts. For example, if one wants to play a barbarian who was born and raised as a pure barbarian tribesman, it may natural to start from Barbarian 1, instead of Warrior 1/Barbarian 1 or something. You would better not punish such kind of players.
How about this, a player can choose either
a) 2 levels of PC classes
or
b) 2 levels of NPC classes + 1level of PC class
They are same CR.
How about this, a player can choose either
a) 2 levels of PC classes
or
b) 2 levels of NPC classes + 1level of PC class
They are same CR.
Similar Threads
