Commoner vs Fighter/Rogue vs Wizard/Cleric

[GSHamster]

The WotC article on Sneak Attack crystallized this thought that's been percolating in the back of my head.

Let's take a "classless" person, a mundane or a Commoner. Is there anything a Fighter/Rogue can do that the Commoner cannot attempt?

Like, the commoner can attempt to wear plate mail, can attempt to pick locks, can attempt to pick someone's pocket. The chances of success might be very low, but they are not zero. In the article, the author is proposing that Sneak Attack move from a rogue class ability to something everyone can attempt. The rogue is just more successful at it than anyone else.

This is in contrast to wizards/clerics. A commoner cannot even attempt to cast a spell. She always has a zero chance of success. A lot of magic class-abilities also follow the same lines. For example, in the current editions, a commoner cannot Turn Undead.

But should this schism remain? Should the Fighter or Rogue be restricted by what a Commoner cannot attempt? Could they get abilities which are absolutely beyond the scope of a Commoner?

Or alternatively, should Commoners be allowed to attempt Mage/Cleric abilities? You could make a system where anyone can cast spells or turn undead, but a mage or cleric is just more likely to suceed and gets better results on success.

Or is the current system the best option?

 

[Ed_Laprade]

I think that anyone with sufficient 'faith', however you handle it, should have a shot at Turn Undead. On the other hand, I think that casting magic should need some sort of special magical aptitude: either from a class, feat, or whatever. On the gripping hand, having peasants trying to cast spells with no idea what they're doing could have all sorts of results with Unintended Consequences! (Not so good for the game world, but great for making adventures.)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Maybe anyone can try to perform a ritual. That is not unheard of in fantasy. Usually it has bad consequences. Just as if a commoner tries to steal something.

 

[I'm A Banana]

But should this schism remain? Should the Fighter or Rogue be restricted by what a Commoner cannot attempt? Could they get abilities which are absolutely beyond the scope of a Commoner?

Part of what I liked about 3e was the implication that even a commoner with 10's for stats could conceivably learn to cast a 0-level spell. The Adept class also helped with this -- not powerful adventurers, but able to work some magic anyway.

So, yeah, it's a world where magic exists as a known quantity. Sure, some everyday stage magician might be able to cantrip or something.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I'm not crazy about the idea that anything a fighter/rogue can do, a commoner can do too.

I think that, under normal circumstances, the special things that fighters and rogues can do should be restricted to those classes, much like spell casting is restricted to magical classes.

For example, I think that a wizard (or commoner) shouldn't be able to disarm a fighter. The former has virtually no combat training whatsoever, while the latter has dedicated his life to mastering the martial arts. It shouldn't be a small chance, it should be no chance. Then, if the DM feels that circumstances are favorable (perhaps the fighter is blinded) the DM can allow an untrained combatant to attempt to disarm as a stunt.

 

[Minigiant]

A commoner could wells any weapon, perform most tricks, and cast basic spells.
Without proficiency, the commoner would be inaccurate with a weapon and heavily penalized with armor.

No training in a skill would make most hard actions impossible and sneak attacks weak.

With no training, the commoner's faith souls be too unfocused and unreliable to cast a very minor divine spell or turn Undead but there is that hundredth of a percent chance.

A commoner could maybe store a cantrip in their mind if they are smart enough and try hard enough.

 

[BobTheNob]

I think a commoner could swing a sword. I once heard a historian describe a long-sword as "a crowbar with a sharp edge", so if you want to know, go get a crowbar and hit a tree with it. Was there some reason you failed to swing?

So certainly, a commoner can swing a sword.

Now, can a commoner whirlwind through enemies, tripping one, pushing another back and then end the whole thing in a stance ready to counterstrike the next guy who comes at you? Well No, I propose not only that this is totally implorable for a commoner, so not only could he not do it...it would never occur to him to even try it!

I think that is why I accept that there are thing the commoner cant do. Not because there is no chance in the first place, but because its so far outside of his skill capabilities that realistically it would never occur to him to even try it.

 

[GSHamster]

Now, can a commoner whirlwind through enemies, tripping one, pushing another back and then end the whole thing in a stance ready to counterstrike the next guy who comes at you? Well No, I propose not only that this is totally implorable for a commoner, so not only could he not do it...it would never occur to him to even try it!

But you thought of it, and you're probably the equivalent of a commoner (apologies if you are a real-life swordsman or soldier). So why can't they think of it? They would probably fail miserably, probably on the first part of the attempt. But I really don't see the "never occur to him" bit.

 

[BobTheNob]

But you thought of it, and you're probably the equivalent of a commoner (apologies if you are a real-life swordsman or soldier). So why can't they think of it? They would probably fail miserably, probably on the first part of the attempt. But I really don't see the "never occur to him" bit.

I thought of it because Im setting at a desk postulating about about a fantasy game. Thinking about it in the pressure of combat, hell no.

 

[Elf Witch]

I have often thought of this and I see no reason why a commoner can't pick up a weapon and swing and with a good roll may actually hit and do damage. Fantasy is full of plucky untrained protagonist doing this.

The thing since they are not trained they maybe able to swing and even get a lucky hit in. But a trained fighter will have an easier time defending himself from the commoner.

As for sneak attack that represents the ability of knowing just where to stick the blade to do the most damage. So no someone untrained should not be able to just do it. Though I think fighters should get it the same as rogues.

As for clerical things I have had things like this in my game where a character of great faith has called upon their deity and been answered. I have had fighters call on their god and been granted the ability to heal a fallen comrade. So I see no reason why a commoner couldn't do it or even turn a limited amount of undead. I roll percentile dice and it is between 95 and 100 the god answers.

As for magic if the commoner has a spell book and studies it they might figure out how to cast a cantrip or maybe they have a limited amount of sorcerer blood so they can manage a few spells. I would think it might be cool if a commoner had some demon blood from a great great grandparent and could manage to cast a weal eldritch blast maybe doing 1 or 2 points of damage.