-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Level Advancement Over A Lifetime
- Thread starter seasong
- Start date
LostSoul said:
Sure. You could also withhold BAB advancement, because life experience in general shouldn't make you any better at combat. You could also withhold save advancement for much the same reason. And you can withhold spells (for adepts and such), because someone who can cast 4th or 5th level spells is definitely pretty fantastic.
And if you withhold extra hit points, BAB advancement, saving throw advancement and spells, you're not really left with much. After all, what exactly would a 10th level commoner or even an expert be compared to their 1st level counterpart, without all that? Seems to me that if you're going to codify a lot of extra rules, the final result should at least be meaningful.
Desdichado
Hero
While I agree with hong on this one, my comment is on the ability modifiers with age. I don't know how many elderly people you've been around, but an increase in CHA is hardly a default.
Ron
Explorer
Take a look in Traveller d20 Lite rules (there is a link in EN World home page) to have a glimpse of how they handled character's prior service. In Traveller, characters are usually mid-aged (5th to 7th level), so players have to play a little game which tell them their life achievements and, in terms of d20, give them the overall xp earned.
Balsamic Dragon
First Post
Hmmm, I think what both this system and SKR's system fail to account for is that these commoners are not facing their travails of life alone!
There is merit to the argument that getting the crops in and surviving harsh winters and such should earn experience points in the same way that fighting kobalds does. BUT, these experienced points are earned, and thus divided, by the entire community, in the same way that the experience earned by fighting kobalds are divided among the party.
A community of farmers, for example, will have at least 15-20 people (and that's for a very small farming community). These will be mostly commoners, some of whom are children or elderly, some who plant, some who cook, some who guard the chicken coop in case of kobalds
But even assuming that to survive a year is a CR 2 encounter, those xp are divided 15-20 ways!
Thus, I have no problem with most commoners being very low level, even those of advanced age. If granma was a chicken coop guard in her youth and had to fight off kobalds with naught but a slingshot and a pitchfork, then maybe she is a bit higher level. But for just bringing in the crops, I would say that no commoner would reach higher than about 3rd or 4th.
Balsamic Dragon
There is merit to the argument that getting the crops in and surviving harsh winters and such should earn experience points in the same way that fighting kobalds does. BUT, these experienced points are earned, and thus divided, by the entire community, in the same way that the experience earned by fighting kobalds are divided among the party.
A community of farmers, for example, will have at least 15-20 people (and that's for a very small farming community). These will be mostly commoners, some of whom are children or elderly, some who plant, some who cook, some who guard the chicken coop in case of kobalds
But even assuming that to survive a year is a CR 2 encounter, those xp are divided 15-20 ways!
Thus, I have no problem with most commoners being very low level, even those of advanced age. If granma was a chicken coop guard in her youth and had to fight off kobalds with naught but a slingshot and a pitchfork, then maybe she is a bit higher level. But for just bringing in the crops, I would say that no commoner would reach higher than about 3rd or 4th.
Balsamic Dragon
Lady Dragon
First Post
Giving Commoners levels based on age is flawed in several ways. First when a character gains a level he gain more hit points, better fighting abilities,new abilities and/or feats,and more skill points. Giving out the first 2 gains according to age to a commoner makes no sense the healthiest strongest members of any group(humans) will be aged 20-30. so giving a 50 year old 7d4 hit points while a 20 year old only has 1d4 is silly. The feats and skills are different however if you could think up a system that only gives out feats and skill points and forget the hit points and combat skills and it would be a great system.
As for the old grizzled warrior if he's that good he would have started taking fighter levels a long time ago.
As for the old grizzled warrior if he's that good he would have started taking fighter levels a long time ago.
Desdichado
Hero
Except that they're also not very good at being commoners, in this case. What they'd really need to do is break the rules so they can get more skill points for Profession (pig herder) or what have you. And any system that requires you to break the rules to make sense obviously needs reworking.
I don't think this is really the solution I'd like, though. I'd just go ahead and break the rules, personally, and give them appropriate skill ranks and maybe even occasionally a feat or two as appropriate. Maybe I'd even go so far as to codify it: some kind of non-level advancement only suitable for NPC classes, or some such. Except that I'm not convinced that it's important enough to do.
Last edited:
seasong
First Post
Wow...
So much intelligent commentary! I will do my solemn best to respond in kind.
MavrickWeirdo:
I used CR years to keep everything standardized, and so I could throw in "harsh years". Yours (365 XP per year) is definitely simpler, however.
Tonguez:
I would define a scenario as: an adventurous event that we roleplay out (such as "The Delving of the Lost Castle of Carne"); a major subplot of the story arc (foiling the King's assassins); a year at a difficult job (farming, coastal fishing); a month at an exceptionally dangerous job (deep sea fishing, participating not on the front lines of a month-long battle); a full day of an insanely dangerous job (fighting on the front lines of a battle, delving the Paris sewers to clear out a goblinoid infestation).
I'd also give XP for special stuff, like completing a pilgrimage to the Holy Land for a priest character.
Regarding soldiers' rapid advancement on the front lines: in a typical full day battle, the soldiers who are thrown into the meat grinder up at the front will have earned that XP and then some... if they've survived that long. And, of course, some battles will be easier than others (CR 1 or even 1/2). Also, a soldier will generally spend, at most, a day or two on the front lines in the course of a week of battling, and once they reach veteran status (2nd or 3rd level) they won't spend much time on the front lines at all.
CRG:
Hey, that's pretty cool! Sean's peasants advance a little fast for my tastes, though. Between the advancement and the aging, I want the majority of peasants to be 4th and under.
Celebrim:
I really like the idea of sheltered living! I'll take that, please.
Regarding more thorough aging: I had to keep it somewhat simple for it to be acceptable to the players. Otherwise, I'd probably do something like this:
Aristocrat: +1 to CON for aging rolls.
Middle Class: no effect (merchants, sages, craftsmen).
Serf/Commoner: -1 to CON for aging rolls.
Urban Setting: no effect.
Rural/Wilderness Setting: -1 to CON for aging rolls.
Malnutrition: Each season of a year you spend malnourished counts as a full extra year of aging.
I will eventually have additional stuff for illness, typical death rate for peasants, and the like.
Blind & Deaf: These options are chosen, not rolled, and I won't be choosing these two very often for NPCs. The most common ones are actually physical and mental disabilities.
(Side note: I'm encouraging the players, when they get a physical disability, to tie it into their wounds, scarring, etc. For example, "DEX -2; limps badly ever since that ogre crushed her legs with a boulder.")
Duncan Haldane:
Firstly, yes, a race that lives a long time will tend to reach higher levels. This is fine for my campaign (all humans, see Europ races for details). For a more standard D&D3e campaign, I'd suggest either (a) increasing the time spans required for the elder races to gain XP (elves treat a 4 year period as a CR 2 scenario) or (b) dealing with the fact that longevity is powerful in your campaign setting.
In my campaign, the sidhe typically are very high levels, but they dwell in their own worlds under hills and around unseen corners. Taking on a sidhe and living to tell the tale is worthy of legends.
hong:
Yes. I don't foresee many peasants beyond 5th level, either. The hypothetical 6th level peasant would have made it through 12 CON checks and -2 to all physical attributes, and a number of illnesses, bad winters and whatnot. He could exist, but he's a grizzled Commoner who's dealt with wolves, bandits, and the King's Men over the course of four decades of life. And he's reknown locally, as he should be.
So much intelligent commentary! I will do my solemn best to respond in kind.
MavrickWeirdo:
I used CR years to keep everything standardized, and so I could throw in "harsh years". Yours (365 XP per year) is definitely simpler, however.
Tonguez:
I would define a scenario as: an adventurous event that we roleplay out (such as "The Delving of the Lost Castle of Carne"); a major subplot of the story arc (foiling the King's assassins); a year at a difficult job (farming, coastal fishing); a month at an exceptionally dangerous job (deep sea fishing, participating not on the front lines of a month-long battle); a full day of an insanely dangerous job (fighting on the front lines of a battle, delving the Paris sewers to clear out a goblinoid infestation).
I'd also give XP for special stuff, like completing a pilgrimage to the Holy Land for a priest character.
Regarding soldiers' rapid advancement on the front lines: in a typical full day battle, the soldiers who are thrown into the meat grinder up at the front will have earned that XP and then some... if they've survived that long. And, of course, some battles will be easier than others (CR 1 or even 1/2). Also, a soldier will generally spend, at most, a day or two on the front lines in the course of a week of battling, and once they reach veteran status (2nd or 3rd level) they won't spend much time on the front lines at all.
CRG:
Hey, that's pretty cool!
Sean's peasants advance a little fast for my tastes, though. Between the advancement and the aging, I want the majority of peasants to be 4th and under.Celebrim:
I really like the idea of sheltered living! I'll take that, please.
Regarding more thorough aging: I had to keep it somewhat simple for it to be acceptable to the players. Otherwise, I'd probably do something like this:
Aristocrat: +1 to CON for aging rolls.
Middle Class: no effect (merchants, sages, craftsmen).
Serf/Commoner: -1 to CON for aging rolls.
Urban Setting: no effect.
Rural/Wilderness Setting: -1 to CON for aging rolls.
Malnutrition: Each season of a year you spend malnourished counts as a full extra year of aging.
I will eventually have additional stuff for illness, typical death rate for peasants, and the like.
Blind & Deaf: These options are chosen, not rolled, and I won't be choosing these two very often for NPCs. The most common ones are actually physical and mental disabilities.
(Side note: I'm encouraging the players, when they get a physical disability, to tie it into their wounds, scarring, etc. For example, "DEX -2; limps badly ever since that ogre crushed her legs with a boulder.")
Duncan Haldane:
Firstly, yes, a race that lives a long time will tend to reach higher levels. This is fine for my campaign (all humans, see Europ races for details). For a more standard D&D3e campaign, I'd suggest either (a) increasing the time spans required for the elder races to gain XP (elves treat a 4 year period as a CR 2 scenario) or (b) dealing with the fact that longevity is powerful in your campaign setting.
In my campaign, the sidhe typically are very high levels, but they dwell in their own worlds under hills and around unseen corners. Taking on a sidhe and living to tell the tale is worthy of legends.
hong:
Yes. I don't foresee many peasants beyond 5th level, either. The hypothetical 6th level peasant would have made it through 12 CON checks and -2 to all physical attributes, and a number of illnesses, bad winters and whatnot. He could exist, but he's a grizzled Commoner who's dealt with wolves, bandits, and the King's Men over the course of four decades of life. And he's reknown locally, as he should be.
Balsamic Dragon
First Post
To the extent that Commoners don't get the skill Profession (do they? I assume you are saying they don't, but I don't have the books with me), that may be because farming isn't really a profession. But if the skill description says that Profession (farming) is legit, then I agree that commoners should get it.
What I disagree with is that it is necessary for a commoner to make a profession (farming) roll every day. As a GM, I would only require a roll for things like "hmmm, that's a strange mold growing on the corn, how do I get rid of it?" In those cases, the elder farmers would get together and take 20. So if their best skill was 5 ranks with a +2 modifier (older folks have better wisdom scores), and four of them worked together (+6 bonus), then they'd get a 20+5+2+6 = 33, a substantial success. Farming just doesn't require many split second, dangerous result if you fail, decisions! So commoners don't generally need high skill ranks.
Balsamic Dragon
What I disagree with is that it is necessary for a commoner to make a profession (farming) roll every day. As a GM, I would only require a roll for things like "hmmm, that's a strange mold growing on the corn, how do I get rid of it?" In those cases, the elder farmers would get together and take 20. So if their best skill was 5 ranks with a +2 modifier (older folks have better wisdom scores), and four of them worked together (+6 bonus), then they'd get a 20+5+2+6 = 33, a substantial success. Farming just doesn't require many split second, dangerous result if you fail, decisions! So commoners don't generally need high skill ranks.
Balsamic Dragon
seasong
First Post
And more responses!
Joshua Dyal:
CHA bonuses are a standard part of the D&D3e aging rules. Also, at least in my setting, charisma represents force of personality and ability to get people to do what you want, not just "likability".
And actually, most of the elderly I've been around have been very charismatic... but they also grew old amongst families that have a lot of respect for age. I think a lot of irascibility is just bitterness caused by being treated like fragile, stupid children.
Celebrim:
I forgot to mention: I'm 29. I'm already feeling the DEX -1.
Although to be utterly realistic, STR probably shouldn't be penalized except in case of tragedies (the yearly aging roll). I might drop the STR and CHR modifiers for the 5 year periods.
Balsamic Dragon:
Actually, as I mentioned in the rules, I don't divide XP. These are designed for use without division (which is why I don't give XP by the encounter).
Lady Dragon:
Under this system, a 50 year old commoner will have 6d4 hp and -4 CON (-2 hp per hit die). That averages out to 3 hp. A commoner of age 20-30 will be level 3-5, and will have (on average) 9-14 hp.
If that's not enough, the 50 year old commoner has rolled 20 CON checks at this point, to see if he goes blind, deaf, has reduced physical or mental capabilities, or even loses 5 hp in a lethal heart attack.
Joshua Dyal:
CHA bonuses are a standard part of the D&D3e aging rules. Also, at least in my setting, charisma represents force of personality and ability to get people to do what you want, not just "likability".
And actually, most of the elderly I've been around have been very charismatic... but they also grew old amongst families that have a lot of respect for age. I think a lot of irascibility is just bitterness caused by being treated like fragile, stupid children.
Celebrim:
I forgot to mention: I'm 29. I'm already feeling the DEX -1.
Although to be utterly realistic, STR probably shouldn't be penalized except in case of tragedies (the yearly aging roll). I might drop the STR and CHR modifiers for the 5 year periods.
Balsamic Dragon:
Actually, as I mentioned in the rules, I don't divide XP. These are designed for use without division (which is why I don't give XP by the encounter).
Lady Dragon:
Under this system, a 50 year old commoner will have 6d4 hp and -4 CON (-2 hp per hit die). That averages out to 3 hp. A commoner of age 20-30 will be level 3-5, and will have (on average) 9-14 hp.
If that's not enough, the 50 year old commoner has rolled 20 CON checks at this point, to see if he goes blind, deaf, has reduced physical or mental capabilities, or even loses 5 hp in a lethal heart attack.
Similar Threads
