Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6291328" data-attributes="member: 17106">To an extent. Even a level 5 commoner isn't much of a combatant. He certainly can't beat what a PC would consider a &quot;level appropriate&quot; challenge. But he is a much better laborer, and he is in general more resilient.What it does when you start using the d20 system as a worldbuilding tool is it takes away some of the sense that adventurers and/or player characters are &quot;special&quot; or operate on a different plane of existence than everyone else. Instead, they are simply incrementally better at various relevant tasks. That increment may be a lot, but there isn't the same sense of &quot;if you want to get better/smarter/tougher, go slaughter some goblins&quot;. Instead it's &quot;if you want to get better, the amount you get better will depend on the risk you take; if you tend bar, you'll slowly advance, whereas if you try to save the world, you'll probably die young but you'll live hard up until then&quot;.Another idea that's tied up here is the method of advancement. The D&amp;D rules themselves are largely oriented around XP for adventuring tasks like acquiring treasure or killing monsters, but most people (at least most people who respond to ENW surveys on this topic) either substantially modify or ignore the XP rules, making more diverse outcomes possible and lessening the whole &quot;killing goblins makes you a better person&quot; vibe.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ahnehnois, post: 6291328, member: 17106"] To an extent. Even a level 5 commoner isn't much of a combatant. He certainly can't beat what a PC would consider a "level appropriate" challenge. But he is a much better laborer, and he is in general more resilient. What it does when you start using the d20 system as a worldbuilding tool is it takes away some of the sense that adventurers and/or player characters are "special" or operate on a different plane of existence than everyone else. Instead, they are simply incrementally better at various relevant tasks. That increment may be a lot, but there isn't the same sense of "if you want to get better/smarter/tougher, go slaughter some goblins". Instead it's "if you want to get better, the amount you get better will depend on the risk you take; if you tend bar, you'll slowly advance, whereas if you try to save the world, you'll probably die young but you'll live hard up until then". Another idea that's tied up here is the method of advancement. The D&D rules themselves are largely oriented around XP for adventuring tasks like acquiring treasure or killing monsters, but most people (at least most people who respond to ENW surveys on this topic) either substantially modify or ignore the XP rules, making more diverse outcomes possible and lessening the whole "killing goblins makes you a better person" vibe. [/QUOTE]

Verification