NPC levels, what's an EXP ??

[dcollins]

Do I reAlly have to point out, yet again, that the rules do no such thing.

They give XP for overcoming challenges. If getting the harvest in on time is a challenge (and I would argue that it is), then you get XP for it.

Actually, it does not. What it does say is that you definitely get XP, by Challenge Rating, if you defeat something in battle. Otherwise, maybe you get XP, depending on the judgement of the individual DM.

 

[smootrk]

I think a variation on this idea would be necessary IMO.

I like the time based xp's for the run-of-the-mill professional is OK. What I would want to add is for the Professional who excel's at his or her trade, or one of the innovators, or a professional in an extroidinary cirmcumstance. Like an armorer or weaponsmith in a time of war, where he/she has to work extra hard, become exceedingly efficient, or otherwise expand his/her skills in an exceptional way.

I would not go so far as to try to come up with CR's for everyday events or XP awards for each application of a skill, but I think at the least a system or table of modifiers to the XP system listed here is needed to cover special circumstances or environmental effects.

 

[nothing to see here]

I think a variation on this idea would be necessary IMO.

I like the time based xp's for the run-of-the-mill professional is OK. What I would want to add is for the Professional who excel's at his or her trade, or one of the innovators, or a professional in an extroidinary cirmcumstance. Like an armorer or weaponsmith in a time of war, where he/she has to work extra hard, become exceedingly efficient, or otherwise expand his/her skills in an exceptional way.

I would not go so far as to try to come up with CR's for everyday events or XP awards for each application of a skill, but I think at the least a system or table of modifiers to the XP system listed here is needed to cover special circumstances or environmental effects.

One of the systems I worked on was a CR-per-year base system where you assign a CR (1,2 or 3) to the work done in a year based on it's challenge, and apply it to the NPC in question on the same sliding scale as PC's get. Don't know how that works out over time though.

 

[Krelios]

The big problem with all of this is that increasing skills requires you to increase in hit dice. Since hit points are suposed to represent a character learning to "roll with a blow" in combat rather than simply taking more of them, why is it that a skilled accountant must be more skilled at combat to advance his trade? I appreciate the effort involved in creating the table that the OP provided, but the problem lies in the way skills are handled to begin with, rather than in the way xp is rewarded.

 

[nothing to see here]

The big problem with all of this is that increasing skills requires you to increase in hit dice. Since hit points are suposed to represent a character learning to "roll with a blow" in combat rather than simply taking more of them, why is it that a skilled accountant must be more skilled at combat to advance his trade? I appreciate the effort involved in creating the table that the OP provided, but the problem lies in the way skills are handled to begin with, rather than in the way xp is rewarded.

Hit points I can handle...in a cinematic game it's easy enough to justify the fact that the more 'remarkable' you are, the harder you are to kill, regardless of your actual combat skill.

BAB, I find much more of a frustration...there is no non-combat application for this, yet the base rules require a progression of at least +1/every two levels. There is no reason for a 6th level commoner to be a better fighter than a 2nd level fighter, yet there it is...

 

[Shin Okada]

I have always been thinking that in average, short-lived races are living more aggressive (or challenged) life than long-lived races. So exp per year may not be a fixed number. The oldest human farmer (commoner) could be equally in higher level to the oldest Elven farmer. That could be a reason why human town and elven town both have equally high-leveled NPCs by town making rules.

 

[Tatsukun]

Well, as I have kept mulling this system over, I've decided I like it.

As for not everyone being equal, of course the DM can add or subtract based on such things if they are known. If you make an NPC that is known to be a lazy-good-for-nothing, maybe he only gets 100Exp per year. If you have a self-starter worker, add more.


This system is made for when, in the middle of a game, you have to guestimate the level of an NPC (or the age). The players ask if the old brewer can make masterwork beer? Well, he's been doing it for X years, and it's Y level of danger - so you can guess.

I also agree that BAB is an odd thing for a high level baker to get. But I guess I'll just have to live with that for now. I don't mind HP, I know some really tough old fishermen, and I'm not sure anything can kill one of them!

I also go thinking about an Elven town. With this system, is everyone's grandma an Epic mage? Well, by the table, most grannys are around a 9th level commoner, but keep in mind that they probably started out with an 8 CON. After aging effects she's at 2 CON. That's 9 HP total.

I don't think 9 HP is that bad for a tough old lady.

I think I like it. But I AM going to change the title of the last group of jobs from Dangerous, to Challenging. If you are farming that one plot of land nobody wants (because it's filled with rabbits, has no water, and gets little sun) you are getting a lot of EXP.

-Tatsu

 

[smootrk]

You might simplify the tables into one table with a list of modifiers to the XP. It would be easier to calculate and figure out... rather than having multiple tables that really do the same thing. I think you may get better commentary and idea generation on different types of modifiers that may be used.

For instance... just using one table and having a +100, +200, or +300 modifier for danger level of the job. A -100, 0, +100, or +200 modifier based on personality traits of the individual (lazy, normal, efficient, work-a-holic). A set of modifiers for environmental factors (construction jobs in an area during the time of a Castle being constructed, Smithy jobs during wartimes (or peace). I could probably go on ...

My basic point is keep it simple. Less is often more when it comes to rules involving tables, charts, graphs. I do like very much the basic idea that you have come up with.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Do I reAlly have to point out, yet again, that the rules do no such thing.

They give XP for overcoming challenges. If getting the harvest in on time is a challenge (and I would argue that it is), then you get XP for it.


glass.

With fewer XP for an easy year (i.e. bumper crops), and more in a bad year (i.e. drought). Managing to grow enough to feed your family and cover your land lords share and the church's tithe is indeed a challenge in a bad year.

The Auld Grump

 

[irdeggman]

Actually, it does not. What it does say is that you definitely get XP, by Challenge Rating, if you defeat something in battle. Otherwise, maybe you get XP, depending on the judgement of the individual DM.

Pg 40 of the DMG “CR awards for noncombat encounters: You could award exp for solving a puzzle, learning a secret, convincing an NPC to help, or escaping from a powerful foe. Mysteries, puzzles and role-playing encounters (such as negotiations) can be assigned CR. . .Don’t ever feel obligated to give out XP for an encounter that you don’t feel was much of a challenge. Remember the key word in experience award is award. The PC should have to do something impressive to get an award.”

Pg 50/51 of the DMG talks about the different things that fall under rewards and behavior.

Pretty much the amplifying text in these sections back up that exp is not awarded solely based on defeated monsters (although that is the default).


The most important aspect here is the bit about experience awards and it being an award that characters must do something impressive to get. IMO this excludes the normal day to day activivites by their very nature they can't be "impressive".