NPC Classes?

[kennew142]

Several reasons:
a)Craft/Profession type skills can be taken by players, and it's often important to know how well they did. Handwaving it is irksome and sends the message "This aspect of your character doesn't mean anything." If you can just write "I am a blacksmith" on your character sheet and always succeed in smithing (no matter the task), then why not write "I am a dragonslayer" on your sheet and always succeed in killing dragons?

I agree with this, but I've always had a problem with killing things making you a better craftsman. I'm not sure that level based skills are the best mechanism for modeling these abilities.

I'd be happy with 5-level classes for 'Commoner', 'Professionals', and 'Soldiers'; I don't need 20th level farmers.)

I have been toying with the idea of a five tiered system to describe professional/craft skills. Something along the lines of:

1) Novice/Apprentice
2) Competent
3) Expert
4) Master
5) Grand Master

PCs with the appropriate training/background would have a ranking in the appropriate professions/crafts. The ranking could be improved only through time and/or training - not killing orcs.

I'm still trying to determine exactly what mechanic to use to reflect this system in the event of PC crafting. But it works very well for me when dealing with NPCs.

Put me down in the camp that is not in favor of NPC classes and levels. IMO it was another idea in 3e that seemed good, but failed to live up to its promise.

 

[Incenjucar]

The thing with Profession Classes is to not associate them with the ability to kill or survive.

They're a separate system altogether that should be wholly independent of normal "class" concepts.

The grand master paper folder who can fold paper so well it you could fall in love with a paper doll they made should still be a one-shot kill by a level 1 rogue.

I'm hoping that the rogue "skill powers" will give some good ideas of how to make a profession class more interesting than just skill ranks.

 

[Mouseferatu]

If I make a BBEG, would you prefer that I did it "honestly" by using classes and gear and taking the time to add things up, or if I "cheated" by taking a dragon of that CR and redescribing it as the BBEG with a nasty greatsword instead of a bite attack, would that be OK? Some people would object; some wouldn't care.

Not only is the latter option not cheating, it's a major tool in the DM's arsenal--one that even the official books have, on occasion, suggested.

More to the point, though, unless you have players who second-guess and try to recalculate the DM's math on every single roll--and I know such players exist, and I'm not saying they're playing "wrong," but I personally wouldn't prefer to game with them--how would they even know?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Not only is the latter option not cheating, it's a major tool in the DM's arsenal--one that even the official books have, on occasion, suggested.

...and then comes the inevitable: "Woah that Greatsword does massive damage! I grab it from his corpse."

And then you either have a PC with the power of a dragon's bite, or you have to explain away your invisible power. Which works maybe once or twice.

 

[FourthBear]

I am hoping that emphasis on character's power mostly coming from their personal ability, rather than magical items, will help here. If more of a PCs ability to effect opponents comes from their own powers and maneuvers, than it seems like NPCs should be easier to explain. An NPC wouldn't need to have the Greatsword of Killdeath to be impressive, he could be the only living master of the Killdeath Strike. And as long as the Killdeath Strike isn't obviously overpowered relative to the PCs options, there shouldn't be too many problems.

 

[Finist The Falcon]

First Post

Reading this thread and thinking about what I wanted to post in my reply made me realize somethings.

1) The NPC classes made me try to categorize every NPC into one of these four slots. From what I have read I think that removing specific NPC classes will allow GMs to be much more creative without fudging stats and abilities.

2) I found the Adept class completely frustrating... The mixing of Arcane and Divine spells while cool in theory was just annoying. I ending up creating another NPC class called the Hedge Mage and giving it the utility/simple spell from the arcane list and making the Adept a purely divine caster.

Honestly, I think it is great that I can make Carl the Carpenter as good a carpenter as I want without even considering 9 other skills because he is an expert and gets 10 class skills. The sames for Sarah the Soldier, I can make her as challenging an opponent as I want without worrying about multi-classing into PC classes or making her a higher NPC class to make up for the lack of feats.

However if you feel like you NPCs are more authentic using NPC Classes, then I suggest you make your NPC's up with those classes and then convert them over to 4e. Or you may be able to create you own NPC classes that look and feel like the 3.5 NPC classes.

 

[The Little Raven]

...and then comes the inevitable: "Woah that Greatsword does massive damage! I grab it from his corpse."

And then you either have a PC with the power of a dragon's bite, or you have to explain away your invisible power. Which works maybe once or twice.

No. The players do not need to know anything about my monster's stats, nor do I need to explain to them that the greatsword they lifted from his corpse is no more powerful than a regular greatsword, and all the extra damage came from the monster.

I don't owe my players anything but a fun game to play. I don't owe them transparency with my monsters or encounters.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I don't owe my players anything but a fun game to play. I don't owe them transparency with my monsters or encounters.

Hey, some people stop having fun when their drow swords disappear in the sunlight because it's really too powerful for them to have. They feel cheated, and they feel like the world works differently for them just because they happen to be playing a game.

Or don't those people matter?

 

[The Little Raven]

Or don't those people matter?

Not in my games, since those people aren't invited. Anyone who tries to second-guess the DM in any aspect of his job is not welcome in my gaming group.

 

[Lizard]

Not in my games, since those people aren't invited. Anyone who tries to second-guess the DM in any aspect of his job is not welcome in my gaming group.

It's not second-guessing the DM, it's trying to make the world make sense.

If you say "Drow swords disappear in the sun", then I expect them to vanish when hit with a "Sunlight" spell, or, if no such spell exists, that it can be researched -- how hard can it be to make sunlight magically?