Please no monster class levels

[Derren]

Other character: "Why do you expect to be trained in the same techniques as him? He dabbled in dark secrets - did you? You just went to the Universal College of Dumbleyore..."

-YRUSirius

"Well I certainly want to". I have the the book he used to learn necromancy from, but still I can't do anything despite studying it over and over.

 

[pemerton]

A thief goblin who you only bother with hide/move silently and sleight of hand is missing out on however many levels of Sneak Attack, making him possibly a more viable opponent.
A fighter who is "just hit points", misses out on at least 2 feats (at first level alone).
A Magic User who just has a few spells, but no concentration, spellcraft, etc, is basically a 1 or 2 trick trap before he's surrounded and unable to cast.

If you want your goblin to do more sneak attack damage, just give it bonus damage with combat advantage/flanking.

Give your spell-casting goblin a level +3 Concentration bonus.

Just give your monsters the numbers they need to wokr!

But the monsters really should follow the same rules as players. If the third-level orc has whirlwind attack, but you are playing an orc fighter at third level and you can't get whirlwind attack, that makes no damn sense and needs to die.

<snip>

if they are third level PCs and run into a third level wizard, they should have a pretty good idea of what it can do.

But what, in the fiction, does this even mean? When the PCs meet an orc warleader who can whirldwind attack (= close burst), how do they know he is 3rd level? What would it even mean for the PCs to know this, in the fiction?

Likewise if they meet a wizard. They might recognise his/her spells - but how woud they know his/her level?

I agree that one should not get too stuck on such things, but there is value in using the same mechanics for the same concept. If a caster-type monster plays by the same rules as a PC wizard, it provides two benefits:

1) It increases player understanding of the game world.

<snip>

2) It reduces the amount of rules that the DM has to learn.

To me, this is relevant only for monster magical abilities. (A whirlwind attacking orc, for example, is self-explanatory - the orc is a master warrior who can attack all his adjacent enemies.)

And even then, it is an argument not for giving monsters class levels, but for expressing their spells in the same mechanical terms as PC spells.

For example, it's a reason for a goblin hexer's Mirror Image to follow the same mechanical pattern as a PC's (but the hexer might still get more, or fewer, images without causing any confusion on the part of the players or the PCs - s/he has learned a weaker version, or is casting a better version, of the spell the 3rd level PC wizard knows).

It's an argument for a game similar to Runequest - monster abilities use the same mechanical "language" as PC abilities.

But in RQ monsters aren't built as PCs.

 

[Dausuul]

"Well I certainly want to". I have the the book he used to learn necromancy from, but still I can't do anything despite studying it over and over.

What did you expect? You've only been studying for a month and a half. You've got another fifty-nine years, ten months, and fifteen days to go before you can start raising zombies. Come back three campaigns from now.

 

[Derren]

What did you expect? You've only been studying for a month and a half. You've got another fifty-nine years, ten months, and fifteen days to go before you can start raising zombies. Come back three campaigns from now.

So how did that 17 year old apprentice learn to raise those 3 zombies we found in the cellar of the Inn 4 months ago?


...10 levels and 8 months later.
And I still can't raise a zombie...

the orc is a master warrior who can attack all his adjacent enemies.)
.

Except that he isn't and has troubles hitting even moderately armored combatants. He certainly isn't as good as the fighter and he fared rather badly in that tournament...

 

[YRUSirius]

Man, I know those whiny little children. They want to be good in everything and they want to have everything. Then they get pissy, if their parents say, no, you can't have it.

-YRUSirius

 

[Derren]

Man, I know those whiny little children. They want to be good in everything and they want to have everything. Then they get pissy, if their parents say, no, you can't have it.

-YRUSirius

Really smart reply... (not)

Wanting the same options as NPCs certainly is not "demanding to do everything".
When someone wants to be a necromancer, he should be able to do what every NPC necromancer with equal skill/level can do.

 

[YRUSirius]

That's the whole point. The players' tools need be balanced with each other. Not with the tools the dungeon master uses.

So if a player wants to be a necromancer, he needs a PLAYER class. He does NOT need a monster class.



Man, if a player wants to be a dragon, he should be able to do what every NPC dragon with equal skill/level can do, right?

-YRUSirius

 

[Derren]

That's the whole point. The players' tools need be balanced with each other. Not with the tools the dungeon master uses.

So if a player wants to be a necromancer, he needs a PLAYER class. He does NOT need a monster class.

-YRUSirius

If you don't care about consistency then thats ok.

But a lot of people do and they want only a necromancer class, no matter who takes it. Everything else would be silly.

And yes, when the DM allows a PC to play a dragon of X age, then the PC should be able to do what a dragon of X age can do.
But again, "dragon" is not a class but a race. You are (again) missing the point.

 

[YRUSirius]

So wait, if you go for consistency, the characters in the consistent world know what a class is? Because they know EVERY fighter does this and that at this level? Metagame much?

And yes, when the DM allows a PC to play a dragon of X age, then the PC should be able to do what a dragon of X age can do.

Then yes, the DM has the right to prevent a PC to play a monster class of level X. Hence, PCs use different rules than NPCs.




Btw, who says that the orc is using the same fighter class as the PC? The character in the world?

"Hey Bob, this orc is fighting. So his class must be fighter. I do not know what this means, but he should be able to swing his sword this way, because he has the same amount of levels as me. I don't know what levels mean though..."

-YRUSirius

 

[pemerton]

He certainly isn't as good as the fighter

How is that relevant? In 3E I can have a 20th level fighter who can't do whirlwind attack vs a group of 4th level fighters, even though s/he would trivially defeat any of them in one-on-one combat.

and he fared rather badly in that tournament...

I didn't realise we were talking about those romantic, chivalrous orcs!