D&D 5E Poll: What is a Level 1 PC?

[delericho]

Just when the hell did level +3 become rigorous math? These people can read after all. I hope they can manage the stuff my daughter is learning in learning in kindergarten without blowing a mental gasket.

And if they cant, well I'm sorry but NO they do not belong behind the screen.

A few years back, there was a reviewer who spent time running through all the stat blocks in WotC products, pointing out the mistakes. As 3.5e went on, WotC routinely made mistakes (of the stat blocks in "Scourge of the Howling Horde", all but one or two stat blocks contain mistakes, despite most of them being 'copied' from the "Monster Manual".)

Apparently, the math in 3.5e was too rigourous for the designers to get right. If they don't belong behind the screen, who does?

 

[Obryn]

Actually look again 1/3 is the slowest. And yes using the farm implements that doubled as militia weapons for years SHOULD make you better at fighting with them. You know its weight, how you use it to get the most force out of it and how to balance it as you swing it around. I have absolutely 0 problem with that, it makes perfect sense.

And if they pick up anything other then the simple weapon (tools) they get a -4 to hit putting them at a -2 BAB. AND if their chosen tool of trade is not listed as a simple weapon then its an IMPROVISED WEAPON, which has a -4 to hit, giving them a BAB of -2.

So do I see a problem with lunatic peasents of advanced age ( you dont gain XP too fast as a craftsman afterall, takes quite a while to hit 4th or 5th level farming or smithing) picking up a sword and taking their -2 attack bonus and 12 HP and beating up 1st level fighters willy nilly?

Why no Obryn I do not. And that strawman is still burning prettily....

All the stuff you would expect any PLAYER to know when they sit down to play.

So if the bar to GMing is "enough knowledge to at least be a decent player" I have no problem with the club being that exclusive.

Aiming for the intellectual bottom barrel of humanity for the complexity of GMing is the poor philosophy for building an RPG.

Its not a hobby that appeals to dumb people, it just isnt and it never will be.

Okay.

(1) You keep using "strawman". I don't think that means what you think it means.

(2) People who prefer games like Savage Worlds, FATE, etc. are not dumb for preferring lighter-math RPGs. (Edit: Nor do they choose those systems because they are dumb. Your game system of choice is not who you are, nor does it define you.)

-O

 

[timASW]

In 3.5 the expert has d6, so averages 3.5 per level and the BAB at 4th level is +3. Figuring a 12 Str and 12 Con, the 4th level Smith has an average of 18 hit points and an attack bonus of +4. A 4th level sage with 10 Str and 10 Con would have an average of 14 hit points and a base attack bonus of +3.

A first level warrior on the city guard (14 Str and 14 Con?) would have an average of only 6.5 hp and a +3 attack bonus. Off duty in a bar, that makes the sage better, right?

NPC's dont get maximum HP at first. Even at 3.5 per level that 4th level guy only only has 14 HP.

The adapt class advances at 1/3 the 4th level adept has +2. And he's more of a cleric. If you want your sage to have actual arcane casting ability you have to give him a PC class. So he has no real business in this discussion.

If you make the sage an expert he has +2 at 4th level.

A 1st level town gaurd is a wet behind the ears teenage kid fresh out of whatever constitutes basic training for that area. He's never seen any action or received any advanced training.

I have no problem with someone much more experienced then him in a dangerous world being able to beat him stupid in a bar fight.

Thats why 1st level town gaurds come in squads. They arent highly trained badasses. Their guys who just learned that the pointy end of the spear goes in the other guy and havent had a chance to actually see it in action yet.

 

[timASW]

Okay.

(1) You keep using "strawman". I don't think that means what you think it means.

I think you dont want to admit that your exagerating a problem that barely (if even) exists and then arguing against it rather then the reality of the situation. Strawman.

 

[timASW]

A few years back, there was a reviewer who spent time running through all the stat blocks in WotC products, pointing out the mistakes. As 3.5e went on, WotC routinely made mistakes (of the stat blocks in "Scourge of the Howling Horde", all but one or two stat blocks contain mistakes, despite most of them being 'copied' from the "Monster Manual".)

Apparently, the math in 3.5e was too rigourous for the designers to get right. If they don't belong behind the screen, who does?

The only lesson to take from that is not to buy WoTC adventures that were were proofread by unpaid interns who dont really care about their job performance. Thus, dont buy WoTC adventures.

But then we all already knew that for various reasons.

 

[Obryn]

I think you dont want to admit that your exagerating a problem that barely (if even) exists and then arguing against it rather then the reality of the situation. Strawman.

I'm also not the one arguing that class/level systems for NPCs which require them to advance in combat capability to get better at their profession improve versimilitude.

D&D: Where you have to get better at fighting to improve your singing! Versimilitude!*



-O


* yeah, that's 3 minutes of my life I'm never getting back.

 

[timASW]

D&D: Where you have to get better at fighting to improve your singing!

A truly masterful bard is a 1st level expert. 6 ranks of perform, +4 CHA, and skill focus perform. +13 to perform. Hits a DC 33 perform when he takes 20.

Just how high of a level is your straw singer?

MOD NOTE: Tone down the aggressiveness, please. It can't lead anywhere constructive. ~ KM

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think the 3e NPC classes kind of worked from the conceptual space that 3e was working from when they designed it.

I don't think they're really a useful tool going forward. Knowing what the DC's for various ability checks enable DMs to wing it a lot more with regards to sages and skilled professionals and what a "normal NPC" or a "skilled NPC" can accomplish, and everything else is basically 4 hp peasants and 10 hp town guards.

 

[Obryn]

A truly masterful bard is a 1st level expert. 6 ranks of perform, +4 CHA, and skill focus perform. +13 to perform. Hits a DC 33 perform when he takes 20.

Just how high of a level is your straw singer?

... and to get better, he has to do what, exactly ...

Can he get better and still without improving his hit points, attack bonuses, and saving throws?

Also... if he can take 20 on his performances, so can anyone with 10 Charisma and 1 rank in perform. That's "Great performance. In a prosperous city, you can earn 3d10 sp/day. In time, you may be invited to join a professional troupe and may develop a regional reputation" regularly.

Versimilitude!

-O

 

[Cadence]

NPC's dont get maximum HP at first. Even at 3.5 per level that 4th level guy only only has 14 HP.

As per my original post, I gave the Smith a 12 Con, so was thinking 3.5+1 at each level (or do NPC classes not get the Con bonus).

The adapt class advances at 1/3 the 4th level adept has +2. And he's more of a cleric. If you want your sage to have actual arcane casting ability you have to give him a PC class. So he has no real business in this discussion.

If you make the sage an expert he has +2 at 4th level.

Didn't want him to have magic, so went for expert over adept. The Hypertext d20 SRD has a 4th level expert at +3 BAB. Is it in error?

A 1st level town gaurd is a wet behind the ears teenage kid fresh out of whatever constitutes basic training for that area. He's never seen any action or received any advanced training.

The first level warrior has a +1 BAB and ability to use all simple and martial weapons and all armor and shields, and the same hit die type as a Ranger. Based on what the rules give that sounds like a reasonable training program to me. They could have hundreds of XP under the belt from past combats too (just not enough to go to 2nd level).

It could be your personal take on the game that 1st level makes them necessarily a wet behind the ears teenager with minimal basic training -- but given that you just claimed in another reply that a truly masterful bard is only a 1st level expert it doesn't sound like you think so. In any case, I think picturing them as having completed the equivalent of a full apprenticeship seems more plausible. My hypothetical 4th level library diver has no combat training ever and has never been in a fight.

Thats why 1st level town gaurds come in squads. They arent highly trained badasses. Their guys who just learned that the pointy end of the spear goes in the other guy and havent had a chance to actually see it in action yet.

I'm picturing a college-based comedy where a group of distinguished full professors of math and English go beat the snot out of the football team, or a military parody where the congressmen on the armed services committee take out the group of marines fresh from training camp.