How different are Fighters from common soldiers/warriors?

[Derren]

I use this way:

Conscript soldier who has been drafted for a specific war -> commoner
Commoner who took up arms (willingly or not) and stayed with that profession for longer and thus also received training/experience -> warrior
Person who has been trained for fighting since his youth instead of a other craft -> fighter

That also means that a 1st level fighter is not some battle hardened veteran. Instead he just finished his formal training which already puts him above most of his untrained peers, but is still less skilled than someone who, for example, did not receive much of formal training but is a veteran of many battles (high level warrior).

 

[Obryn]

What I don't think is necessary is a third metric for determining how good people are; i.e. the categorical PC class vs. NPC class distinction.

Well I'm no fan of NPC classes in general. But I think there is a qualitative difference between a Fighter - a martial artist - and guys who are good with swords.

 

[the Jester]

Interesting. I don't default to "npcs all have lower stats than pcs", and sometimes someone like a village blacksmith might be the (physical stat) equal of a pc fighter. It sounds like this approach is less common than I'd expect.

 

[Lanefan]

Interesting. I don't default to "npcs all have lower stats than pcs", and sometimes someone like a village blacksmith might be the (physical stat) equal of a pc fighter. It sounds like this approach is less common than I'd expect.

In my game NPCs don't automatically have lower stats, but their stats are generated using fewer dice. PCs roll 5d6 drop lowest 2, significant NPC types use 4d6 drop lowest, and true commoners/peasants etc. use 3d6 (or if I want it less swingy or for someone whose stats are intentionally bland, 2d6+3)

Lanefan

 

[Ahnehnois]

Interesting. I don't default to "npcs all have lower stats than pcs", and sometimes someone like a village blacksmith might be the (physical stat) equal of a pc fighter. It sounds like this approach is less common than I'd expect.

Well, the default scores are all 10-11's, right? If your PCs are better than that, they're better than average right?

I would say that the blacksmith might have a decent Str or Con, but probably not overall as good of an ability array as a PC. Certainly there are plenty of NPCs with much better than average ability scores, even better than the PCs, but I expect they're not blacksmiths.

 

[Lanefan]

Well, the default scores are all 10-11's, right? If your PCs are better than that, they're better than average right?

I would say that the blacksmith might have a decent Str or Con, but probably not overall as good of an ability array as a PC. Certainly there are plenty of NPCs with much better than average ability scores, even better than the PCs, but I expect they're not blacksmiths.

Str 17 Int 9 Wis 11 Dex 15 Con 17 Cha 7

Blacksmith? Or PC?

Could easily be either; and I've seen PCs with worse starting stats go on to some pretty good careers.

Lanefan

 

[Ahnehnois]

Str 17 Int 9 Wis 11 Dex 15 Con 17 Cha 7

Blacksmith? Or PC?

Could easily be either; and I've seen PCs with worse starting stats go on to some pretty good careers.

PC class, surely? Doesn't have to be played by a player, but someone with that kind of talent really shouldn't be languishing over an anvil forever. On top of that, Craft is Int-based; this guy's lack of mental stats probably would make him a mediocre craftsman even if he was strong enough to do it all day.

 

[Cadence]

Well, the default scores are all 10-11's, right? If your PCs are better than that, they're better than average right?

In spite of all the things I dislike about how PF does NPCs, their standard ability arrays seem reasonable to me.

Basic NPCs: The ability scores for a basic NPC are: 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, and 8.
Heroic NPCs: The ability scores for a heroic NPC are: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8.

The former is pretty close to what the median 3d6 rolled character would have with 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14. The later is a 15 point character buy. (PF society uses 20 point.)

I'm slightly less happy with them after the extra +2 net racial adjustments... but not enough to complain too loudly about.

 

[Lanefan]

On top of that, Craft is Int-based; this guy's lack of mental stats probably would make him a mediocre craftsman even if he was strong enough to do it all day.

This is something I'd change in a heartbeat, to make the based-on stat(s) somehow relevant to the craft being done if it had to be stat-based at all. For a blacksmith I'd probably base it on an average of the Str-Dex scores. For a potter it might be Int-Dex. For an engineer or draughtsman it'd be straight Int. And so on.

Lanefan

 

[Cadence]

Str 17 Int 9 Wis 11 Dex 15 Con 17 Cha 7

Blacksmith? Or PC?

Two 17 or highers is really good in the classic rolling systems. Only a 0.5% chance of getting that on straight 3d6, 3.9% by best 3 of 4d6, 1.9% by take best 6-3d6 out of 12 of them. And that's without taking into account getting a 15 and that the lowest is a 7.

That array (after racial modifiers) would be 23 points in PF (so above the standard PF Society build, and almost at the "Epic Fantasy level).

This is something I'd change in a heartbeat, to make the based-on stat(s) somehow relevant to the craft being done if it had to be stat-based at all. For a blacksmith I'd probably base it on an average of the Str-Dex scores. For a potter it might be Int-Dex. For an engineer or draughtsman it'd be straight Int. And so on.

I'd second that if we're going to build them like PCs.

Seems easier to just give them the total die modifier I think is appropriate without worrying about level and abilities. (PC Classes are just a model of the game world that works best for modeling how adventuring PCs work, I don't see why the same model needs to be optimal for non-adventuring NPCs).