D&D 5E Levels of literary heroes (and inflation thereof)

[TheCosmicKid]

He doesn't need to be level 1 - the game could certainly start PCs at level 3 (or whatever). But Luke Skywalker, at the start of his adventuring career, really should be a valid starting character in a Star Wars RPG.

Given that Luke Skywalker is the archetypical Hero's Journey character of the 20th Century, I think if a game doesn't start him at 1st level then something has gone terribly wrong.

Agreed. One of the things that most annoyed me about the EU was the absurd reverence given to the 'named' characters, and Han Solo in particular. And one of the things that most pleased me about TFA was that it didn't do that.

Well, one thing TFA did do which kind of surprised me was confirm that the "Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs" line wasn't just Han talking bantha pudu.

I'm generally resistant to the notion of giving him attributes that are too high. I'd rather he be assigned a slightly higher level to compensate.

Depends on the character. Luke, Leia, and Han are definitely above average, but don't display extreme raw ability; something resembling an 8-15 base array seems perfectly appropriate for them. But Conan is a Marty Stu (ability-wise, anyway). He is immensely strong, and tough, and agile, even in the stories from the beginning of his career. And yes, I know that, contrary to some powergamers' complaints, a 15 is supposed to be quite a good score, but Conan is never matched in a contest of raw strength by a mortal man. To me that sounds like 18 territory. Conan's DM was running a solo campaign, so gave him a ludicrous point buy to compensate.

(If you give him unusually high stats but moderate level, that makes him unattainable - no PC can ever match him. Conversely, if he's higher level but has achievable stats, that means a PC can match him; they just haven't done so yet.)

NPCs like Conan don't have to be in your campaign setting. If a player is upset because his character can't match a character from a different setting, there's not much you can do about that. You can't control what a pulp writer in Texas wrote eighty years ago.

And with the right approach, I don't think there's necessarily a problem with having NPCs like Conan in your campaign setting. PCs meet creatures with higher ability scores than they all the time. Normally they're monsters, but in principle why couldn't some of them be humanoids? Regardless of the numbers, the PCs outmatch the NPCs through teamwork, and perseverance, and (let's face it) more than a little serendipity. Luke, Leia, and Han saved the universe. Conan never did that.

 

[delericho]

Given that Luke Skywalker is the archetypical Hero's Journey character of the 20th Century, I think if a game doesn't start him at 1st level then something has gone terribly wrong.

I'd be inclined to agree. But others take a different view, and argue that all those years when he "used to bullseye womp rats" and when he was "the best push pilot in the Outer Rim" mean he must have been higher than 1st. I'd certainly prefer all that be considered background, but I can live with the alternative... provided the PCs also start higher than 1st.

Well, one thing TFA did do which kind of surprised me was confirm that the "Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs" line wasn't just Han talking bantha pudu.

Indeed. Which was damn stupid of them, what with the script for "Star Wars" making it clear that he was.

Depends on the character. Luke, Leia, and Han are definitely above average, but don't display extreme raw ability; something resembling an 8-15 base array seems perfectly appropriate for them.

They're above average in the general populace, and that's fine. I'm inclined to think that the PCs should be as well. But, IMO, it's a problem if they're above the values possible for PCs. Especially in a Star Wars RPG, where those are exactly the sorts of characters it should be possible to play.

He is immensely strong, and tough, and agile, even in the stories from the beginning of his career. And yes, I know that, contrary to some powergamers' complaints, a 15 is supposed to be quite a good score, but Conan is never matched in a contest of raw strength by a mortal man. To me that sounds like 18 territory.

He's immensely strong and tough and agile at the start of his career, but he wasn't also hugely smart and wise and charismatic at that same point. Those aspects of his character came later - which can partly be modelled with aging modifiers and partly is a result of him boosting those ability scores later and/or re-assigning some of those point buy stats later on.

NPCs like Conan don't have to be in your campaign setting.

It's not a question of modelling him as an NPC.

Here's the thing: if you sit a bunch of new players down to play a Star Wars game, when they get to discussing characters they'll inevitably start talking in terms of the 'named' characters - Luke Skywalker, or Han Solo, or Boba Fett, or whatever.

Now, very likely they'll not be playing those characters, but those characters set the tone. And, equally, it's likely they won't be able to play characters who can match those guys from the start - both Han and Boba Fett are clearly experienced characters so it's not unreasonable for them to have to adventure a bit to grow to that level.

But the problem with the stats assigned to Han Solo and Boba Fett in the published books is that the PCs can't grow to match those characters. It doesn't matter how long they play or what deeds their PC achieves, they can never match up.

Which, IMO, is a significant weakness in a game intended to model those guys and their adventures. (Amusingly, as discussed up-thread, the d6 Star Wars system does allow for characters who match up extremely well... provided you ignore the actual stats they published for the characters! )

Obviously, D&D isn't "the Conan RPG", but it does have something of the same sort of expectation, in the form of 1st Ed's Appendix N (Appendix D in 5e) - it's very heavily influenced by Conan, and Elric, and Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, and Drizzt. So, again, it's not unreasonable that PCs should be able to match those guys, eventually.

Hence my dislike for giving those guys unreachable stats, or too many levels, or multiple game-breaking custom rules just for them (especially if the class was built specifically for them!) - while it's true that those guys may be the best of the best in their respective settings, so too should be max-level PCs in their settings, and in the same way.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Obviously, D&D isn't "the Conan RPG", but it does have something of the same sort of expectation, in the form of 1st Ed's Appendix N (Appendix D in 5e) - it's very heavily influenced by Conan, and Elric, and Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, and Drizzt.

"Influenced" by a character from a fiction series based on your own game is a little circular, but aside from that, sure, those are among D&D's influences. But, D&D has a tendency to pull more spells & magic items from it's influences than the mighty deeds of the non-caster heroes. Conan, Fafhrd, Grey Mouser, & even Elric, don't much resemble D&D characters.

So, again, it's not unreasonable that PCs should be able to match those guys, eventually.

Hence my dislike for giving those guys unreachable stats, or too many levels, or multiple game-breaking custom rules just for them (especially if the class was built specifically for them!) - while it's true that those guys may be the best of the best in their respective settings, so too should be max-level PCs in their settings, and in the same way.

That is a good point. If you're going to emulate a genre with an RPG, the PCs should be able to generate the characters in that genre. If it's going to be a cooperative RPG, you need to make compromises to keep all the PCs relevant and all the players engaged, though, and that can make it tricky to closely model lone heroes like Conan.

 

[S'mon]

And with the right approach, I don't think there's necessarily a problem with having NPCs like Conan in your campaign setting. PCs meet creatures with higher ability scores than they all the time. Normally they're monsters, but in principle why couldn't some of them be humanoids? Regardless of the numbers, the PCs outmatch the NPCs through teamwork, and perseverance, and (let's face it) more than a little serendipity. Luke, Leia, and Han saved the universe. Conan never did that.

I agree strongly with that. There was a fun early Han Solo novel where he faced the
assassin Delgardo, who was simply better than Han - I still remember the scene
where they go for their guns Western style, and Delgardo guns down Han Solo before he
can clear leather. Likewise the antagonist in No Country For Old Men; or Darth Vader for
that matter (until RotJ). Having to face a superior foe is a good test of mettle for heroes.
Just don't have the superior character accompanying the PCs and solving all their problems as a
Mary Sue or Elminster - unless maybe the players really like the guy and beg him to
come along.

 

[delericho]

"Influenced" by a character from a fiction series based on your own game is a little circular...

It certainly is. D&D has started to eat itself.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It certainly is. D&D has started to eat itself.

Maybe the 5e Ampersand Dragon should be eating his own tail? We could call it "Jörmung&r."

 

[TheCosmicKid]

They're above average in the general populace, and that's fine. I'm inclined to think that the PCs should be as well. But, IMO, it's a problem if they're above the values possible for PCs. Especially in a Star Wars RPG, where those are exactly the sorts of characters it should be possible to play.

That's what I meant by "above average", and I'm agreeing with you here. But I'm also drawing a distinction between characters like them and characters like Conan.

He's immensely strong and tough and agile at the start of his career, but he wasn't also hugely smart and wise and charismatic at that same point. Those aspects of his character came later - which can partly be modelled with aging modifiers and partly is a result of him boosting those ability scores later and/or re-assigning some of those point buy stats later on.

His mental scores are definitely not the equal of his physical scores, but they're still above average. Even if they weren't, even if he started at 18/18/18/8/8/8, that would still be an overpowered array by conventional D&D standards. Which is fine. Conan is not a D&D character, and does not need to conform to D&D standards conventional or otherwise.

But the problem with the stats assigned to Han Solo and Boba Fett in the published books is that the PCs can't grow to match those characters. It doesn't matter how long they play or what deeds their PC achieves, they can never match up.

I get that. What I'm saying is that for some literary characters, like Conan, that is simply an inevitable result of the way they were written. If you were to stat Conan at, say, 15/13/14/8/10/12, this would not accurately represent the character that Howard wrote.

Obviously, D&D isn't "the Conan RPG", but it does have something of the same sort of expectation, in the form of 1st Ed's Appendix N (Appendix D in 5e) - it's very heavily influenced by Conan, and Elric, and Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, and Drizzt. So, again, it's not unreasonable that PCs should be able to match those guys, eventually.

Like I said, the way to match Conan is to run a solo campaign with a ludicrous point buy. It's not on D&D to match every protagonist of every adventure story in its base rules, because that's impossible, because some adventure stories are simply more OP than others. For an even clearer example of this than Conan, think about Hercules. D&D is obviously influenced by the legend of Hercules -- the hydra is right there in the MM -- but it just as obviously does not support Hercules as a PC in its standard character creation rules. If you want to play a character as strong as Hercules, you're going to have to work out something special with your DM, or else play a different game where demigods with such power are the norm for PCs. (Exalted, maybe? I know it only by reputation.)

Hence my dislike for giving those guys unreachable stats, or too many levels, or multiple game-breaking custom rules just for them (especially if the class was built specifically for them!) - while it's true that those guys may be the best of the best in their respective settings, so too should be max-level PCs in their settings, and in the same way.

Conan is definitely not max level, though.

 

[Quartz]

The D&D Balor was, in the earliest incarnation of the game, called a Balrog. It was renamed due to the threat of legal action from the Tolkien Estate. So, in D&D terms, we can be pretty sure that the Balrog Gandalf faced in Moria was indeed a Balor - because that creature was the exact inspiration Gygax (or Arneson) used for the D&D creature.

But even then you don't need to make the Balrog as powerful as the Balor was in the original Monster Manual, let alone the 5E one, do you? If Glorfindel et al are only 4th level, then a 6 HD beastie with DR, SR, Legendary Resistance, and a good CON (so good HPs) is going to be a very difficult proposition.

 

[DeanP]

I think it's a mistake to conflate the type of setting of the characters in the novels, and the corresponding features of the characters in those settings, to the standard D&D setting. Elric of Melnibone was an aspect of the eternal champion and could summon the Lords of Chaos and even fought the Lords of Chaos, but he couldn't teleport, cast wish, etc. But that's the wrong comparison to make. The "standard spell lists" or "Standard class features" exist in the "standard heroic fantasy" settings of the game whether it's Forgotten Realms or something close to it. If the classes are tailored to their specific settings, Elric could indeed be a "20th level warlock" or whatever single class or multiclass combo one cares to envision. The same for Conan. If you wrote a Hyborean Age setting specific to the magic and power level of the setting, there's no reason that Conan wouldn't be a 20th level character. The power level of the character is relative to the setting.

I've even contemplating developing something for the Young Kingdoms or other settings but that would require a serious amount of investment of time and play testing to get the character classes right, and so I opted not to do it. Even taking out a few spells really changes the dynamics of a class. For example, as much as I dislike resurrection and True Resurrection being available, I won't change it or remove it from my setting because that takes away some very important spells on the cleric's spell list and alters the power level of the cleric relative to the other classes.

 

[rgoodbb]

I know this is a literary discussion but didn't the Movie Gandalf look more like a Nature Cleric than a Wizard to anyone?