• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Professions and Casual Realism

Celebrim

Legend
This is forked from the thread on 'What's the Rush' to deal with a subtopic that has come up, which can be thought of as, "How high of level do you need to be to be a realistic member of your chosen profession?" and the related question, "How high of a level do you need to be to be a leader in your chosen profession?"

In the other thread, the example profession is 'pirate', but the actual skills in question are 'sailor'.

So my contention is that D&D in every edition, at least until 3e after which I'm not longer experienced enough to know, maintained the idea that the low levels corresponded to a casual level of realism and the capabilities of low level characters were the capabilities of ordinary people around you. And, the ordinary people around you were generally 0th, 1st, and 2nd level characters with a smattering of higher level characters who had extraordinary abilities that would astound ordinary persons - Olympic atheletes, special forces soldiers, leaders in academic fields, etc. However, even these extraordinary persons were at most 4th or 6th level characters. Characters more powerful than that weren't merely ordinary, or extraordinary, or even heroic. They were super-heroic - the title an 8th level fighter 1e was 'superhero'.

So as I see it:

0th level: Apprentice level characters. Characters who are still acquiring the basic skills they need to perform a job. Most DMs don't make you play through this, though it could be a fun change.
1st level: Novice. You've just completed your education, and you have the basic skills to do the job.
2nd level: Veteren. You've got advanced training or significant actual experience.
3rd level: Expert.
4th level: Master/Hero. You've reached the commonly recognized pinnacle of your profession. You are a big fish in any small pond. You are capable of astonishing feats of skill and/or prowess.
5th level: Elevated Master: Other masters of your profession look up to you.
6th level: Grandmaster/Myrmidon. Einstein, Newton, Napoleon, Alexander the Great, Miyamoto, Cyrano de Bergerac, etc.
7th level: Characters of this level or higher basically have no correspondance in the real world. This is cinematic action movie hero level: James Bond, Zorro, John McClane, Rambo, Blondie/The Man with No Name, Captain Jack Sparrow, etc.
8th level: Super heroes. This is your supporting cast superhero. In an ensemble action movie, the leader might have this level. In an action movie series, the protagonist might level up to this as the action gets more and more over the top. In a superhero story, this is the level of friends and sidekicks or the level of superheroes just starting out. Robin for example. This also might be the level of minor supervillains or the henchmen of major supervillains. You can keep going up from here, but as no real world professions require this level of skill it's not necessary. The characters going up from here exist only as literary, romanticized, or superheroic examples of the type.

So let's go back to the specific question, "What level do you need to be a pirate captain?"

Well, 'captain' is a tricky term. Any one who commands their own boat is a captain, and is addressed as captain and is sovereign when on that boat. There are never two captains of a boat. If another captain comes aboard, he is temporarily breveted to higher rank so that there is no confusion over who is the captain. But conversely, a low ranking officer aboard his own vessel is a captain while aboard it. The guy who commands a fishing boat is its captain. So all you really need to be a captain is a boat and sufficient skill that others in your profession recognize that you are the best man for the job. What's the minimum level in D&D where we'd expect that to be true?

Second. At 2nd level you've got enough loot to buy most mundane equipment - like a small sailing vessel - and you are now skilled enough that novice characters (1st level 'pirates', whatever the class) agree you are the best man for the job. This is pretty easy to imagine. You have 4 PC 'officers', a small boat, and these officers hire on a small crew of whatever is typical for your demographics - commoners, warriors, experts, fighters, etc. The hirelings that they can recruit are novices because the PC's don't have the reputation or obvious skill to convince experts to trust them with their lives, and if they did hire on they'd want to be treated as peers or even to take charge. But at this level you are now 'a captain', and if you and your crew plunder things you are a 'pirate captain'. How realistic is this under the rules?

Consider the question of navigation. According to the rules, to navigate in open water you need to make a DC 17 skill check. If you fail your check 3 times in a row, you become lost at sea. Is that viable for a second level character? Well, a 2nd level character can have 5 ranks in a skill, plus a useful tool giving a +2 bonus, plus let's say a +2 bonus from their relevant ability score. This gives a +9 on the check. If they really care about the skill, they could have taken a feat to enhance it (and often another relevant skill) for another +2 bonus, giving a total of +11 on the check. Can a 2nd level character with a +9 bonus on a skill check manage to navigate open water? Most of the time. They'll probably try to avoid going more than a day or two on open water, avoid bad weather, and stick to the coast most of the time but already at 2nd level we can see that can sail a boat.

What about the question of command? Do you need to intimidate a hireling to get a hireling to respond to your commands? According to he RAW, no you don't. You only need to use intimidate to get someone who doesn't want to obey you to do so. Your hirelings almost by definition have agreed to obey you. You'd only need to try to intimidate them in extraordinary circumstances - and you certainly don't want to do it often, because each time you do it whether you succeed or fail, your crew gets more surely and more rebellious by the RAW. I'd argue that most good leaders have almost no ranks in Intimidate. It's just not that useful of a skill for leader types. But again, as we showed with navigation, even a 2nd level character has a reasonably good chance of being intimidating. In particular, if you are the lawful authority on the boat, and everyone has agreed to put themselves under you, this is ordinarily a decent reason to provide a circumstance bonus. Afterall, if someone comes and gets in your face and yells at you, its going to make a really big difference how you respond if they are wearing the uniform of a gunnery sergeant. And its going to make even more of a difference if you are a civilian off base whom they have no right to yell at, or if you are on base and wearing a private's stripe on your soldier. Ability to command is relative to rank. Sergants don't obey captains because captains are scarier than they are. They obey captains because that's part of their job.

In general, pretty much any skill will end up looking like this if we investigate it. You are reasonably compotent if you can pass about a DC 15 skill check most of the time. A DC of 15 represents a task requiring considerable skill. Most things of higher DC represent things like Craft, Search, or Open Locks were you can really take your time on the task and spend a long time on it (take 20).

It's very important that the game actually work like this. If it doesn't, it doesn't just mean that you have to wait until action hero or superhero level to be basically compotent. It means that every NPC out there making a living for themselves needs to also be action hero level to do their job. If it isn't true that you can command a boat at 2nd level, then every teamster, woodcutter, fisherman or merchant out there also has to have action movie hero capabilities. And if this is really the case, if basically ordinary people in the setting are superheroes, then what you've done is said that all the levels below 8th level are "apprentice levels" and perforce probably should be skipped in the way we usually ship playing a 0th level character. It also means that in addition to mundane tasks like commanding a boat, everyone in the setting is capable of action movie hero feats of leaping out of burning buildings and swinging through windows or surviving falls from 100' up - even the ordinary commoner on the street, or the ordinary fisherman on a boat. It means that it takes an 8th level or higher character to have a reasonable chance to not get their butt kicked by a couple of farmers (which might expain the 'housecat problem'), and what I think it will tend to encourage players who view the world this way is to say, "Well, the rules only apply to PCs, and not NPCs."

So, back to the question of a "pirate captain", we've got a small boat - maybe a 37' sloop or a small rowed galley of 12 oars depending on your settings tech level - and a small crew of 8-12 hirelings at 2nd level. But most players thinking "pirate captain", probably mean some bigger boat - something like they sea in the movies. What level do you need for that? Well, first of all, if by 'pirate' you are thinking some romanticized age of pirate criminals ship from near the end of the Great Age of Sail, like for example Pirates of the Carribean, then the tech level you are thinking of is well beyond traditional D&D which is grounded in 13th century technology or earlier. Even your Great Age of Pirates setting - your Dread Pirate Roberts or Captain Blood - is 17th century tech. By pirate of psuedo-medieval era, or a typical D&D equipment list, you should be thinking something more like a Viking raider. So to even have 'pirate' like you are thinking of, we are going to need to expand at least the price lists for available boats, and depending on how much versimilitude we want we are probably going to need equipment lists and rules for gunpowder and smoothbore cannon at least.

It's also worth noting that real pirates in the age of pirate criminals - your Blackbeards or Captain Kidds - didn't operate like Holliwood pirates. (Imagine that, Holliwood gets it wrong.) They didn't have big multigun frigates, didn't do a lot of sailing in open water if they could help it, didn't engage in artillery duels if they could help it, didn't try to fight naval vessels, and typically used small manueverable vessels crammed with as many cutthroats as they could to quickly board a small target and overwhelm its small crew in a boarding action. The era of pirates with big multigun ships, sailing in open water, engaging in artillery duels and fighting the naval vessels of foriegn powers was actually 100-200 years earlier in the golden age of pirates when pirates were backed monetarily and politically by nations as an instrument of virtually unrestricted warfare. D&D differentiates this class of pirate as 'buccaneers'. If you've played Sid Meier's Pirates, it's set in that era.

Anyway, so suppose though you have introduced a full range of great age of sail sailing vessels, complete with cannon or its versimlitude equivalent (magical weapons, wink wink 'balistas', etc.), in order to capture the idea of pirates from movies. What level are the captains aboard those ships? Well, really the answer is 'whatever you want'. If you are going for 'it looks like a summer blockbuster', then probably 7th level and up. If you are going for, 'it looks at casual inspection like historical pirates', then the answer is probably closer to 4th level and up. Remember, 4th level represents a 'hero' or an acknowledged master in their field. There aren't many of these characters around, but there are enough of them that they will compete for the right to captain the most desirable vessels. A second level character doesn't command enough respect to be entrusted with such a large vessel. While there aren't many 4th level characters in the setting, there are enough that if you've got a couple 100 sailors together, there are going to be at least a few. Even in a low level demographics world where most everyone is 0th or 1st level, you wouldnt' expect the captain of such a ship to be 2nd level. The most desirable ships in the setting probably have at least 5th or 6th level captains under even conservative demographics, not because you need to be that level, but because of simple economics.

And a couple of hundred is in fact the crew of these great age of sail multigun ships. Unlike in Holiwood, you can't successfully sail a 32 gun frigate to Tortuga with a crew of 2. You can't even do it with a crew of 2, plus the comic sidekick, the kick butt token girl pirate, and 20 extras that appear in the film - much less man multiple 12lber cannons and perform a 13 gun broadside while sailing the ship (since each cannon needs a crew of like 7, plus a powder boy retrieving ammunition).

You might be inclined to argue that you need Leadership to crew a ship. But this turns out to fail the same test. NPCs dont' need leadership to crew a ship. If they did, every merchantman would need a 6th level captain with the leadership feat, and once again that implies that every ordinary merchant captain has the skills of John McClain, 1st level and even 4th level characters are still apprentices, and that we should probably skip the first 6-8 levels in the same way we skip 0th level apprentices. Leadership feats give you particular bonuses with regard to how you relate to certain NPCs, but there is nothing that prevents a character - whether PC or NPC - from just continuing the practice of hiring hirelings including as D&D has always allowed, expert hirelings. (I'm going to avoid going into a long rant about just how badly designed the Leadership feat actually is.) One of the basic rules of D&D is unless the rules specifically prohibit something, it's permitted. Leadership permits acquiring loyal followers and henchmen, but it does not forbid acquiring hirelings by other means. A 32 gun frigate actually has a crew of like 270. If you pretend that you are being strict by the RAW and that the rules forbid you having followers without a leadership feat, then they forbid crewing a 'pirate ship' at all, since even with a leadership score of 25 you won't have enough followers to crew the ship!!! In fact, this isn't a strict reading of the RAW, it's a conveinent reading for advancing a certain argument, but it has nothing to do with the rules.

One complaint that you still might have at this point is that unless your character's class is Rogue or Expert, you probably dont' have enough skill points to cover every job a sailor might want to do well. This complaint is essentially again grounded in 'Holiwood reality' of the Pirates of the Carribean where a ship meant for 200 or 400 crew and ran as a business has the CEO doing every job on the ship by himself. In reality, most captains did nothing of the sort. While the captain might also be the pilot, and might be decent at it, it was more usual to employ a skilled hireling in the role of pilot or navigator. This hireling in turn might be very good at plotting a course, but know almost nothing about handling a sword. Likewise, the captain might know quite a bit about how to provision a ship and get the best prices for all the goods, but it was more usual to employ an expert hireling as the ship's quartermaster not only to do the job well or better, but simply because the captain didn't have the time to be the quartermaster, the pilot, the navigator, the surgeon, the carpenter, the boson, the lookout, and the cook all at the same time - and no one expected him to. All these NPC specialists can easily be very good at a particular skill or set of skills by 3rd or 4th level - it's not hard to out do a PC on a narrow set of skills at very low level just by focusing on nothing else. If you want to be able to do all of that, you aren't really asking to be a 'pirate captain'. What you are really asking to be is a 'pirate captain superhero'. D&D can handle a profession request, like 'pirate captain' from a quite low level. But it can never handle 'superhero' from a quite low level. This is because D&D is intended to start from the level of casual realism and move up into cinematic heros, superheroes, and eventually virtual demigods (justice league founders level stuff).
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Are you referring to standard PC classes - fighter, wizard, etc. or are you referring to NPCs of the world - expert, aristocrat, adept, or are you referring to all people - PC and NPC classes? I ask, because I differentiate NPC classes from PC classes.

In my own worlds, as well as settings I design for (especially Kaidan setting of Japanese horror) NPCs are generally never higher than 3rd level. In other words, I have never created an NPC with 4 or more levels of an NPC class - I max it at 3, generally. Not that I couldn't have an exception, but I've yet to create an NPC higher than 3rd level. In my perspective, a 3rd level Expert is a master, 2nd level is a journeyman, 1st level is an apprentice. Because most NPCs never adventure, they accumulate XP very, very slowly, thus a 3rd level NPC might be 40 years old or older.

I treat PCs differently. I can remember the level titles for various classes back in 1e, like Fighter 9th was a "lord". I've never really used those titles to be equivalent to an actual rank for a given PC, to me a given rank is fluid and really depends on the class level of that PC's boss. For example, while an important fortification might be assigned to a 9th level "lord", given different circumstances, a 5th level 'captain' might be assigned to that same fortification by a different lord, with different priorities on the defensable value of a given location. In one campaign a 12th level leader might be a general of an army, yet in another higher powered campaign, the generals might be 20th level PCs, and in such a campaign 12th level might be a unit commander.

So I guess my best answer is that rank value per level varies upon the campaign and circumstances. I don't hold all the PC/NPC levels as having equal rank value in every campaign - they differ always, and are totally based on a given campaign's circumstances.
 

What about the question of command? Do you need to intimidate a hireling to get a hireling to respond to your commands? According to he RAW, no you don't. You only need to use intimidate to get someone who doesn't want to obey you to do so. Your hirelings almost by definition have agreed to obey you.

And every single mutiny that ever happens is people who originally agreed to obey you deciding they don't want to any more. And agreement at the time you leave port does not equate to continued agreement forever. One would expect that people crowded on a ship, drinking weak rum and smelling each other's BO for weeks for low pay - people who are already sketchy enough that they'll hire on to kill other people to take their goods - are not guaranteed to behave for extended periods just 'cause.

So, occasional intimidation to maintain order on ship should be expected. These are pirates, not the crew of the Queen Elizabeth II.

You'd only need to try to intimidate them in extraordinary circumstances...

And in the life of an adventuring characters, extraordinary circumstances arise with painful, and often deadly, regularity. Pretty much any time you're dealing with the ship in-game is apt to be an extraordinary circumstance! So, your argument is fine if being a captain means, "We can hand-wave the routine stuff that happens off screen." But he won't keep the ship long if that's the description, now will he?

Being captain to most folks means being able to regularly undertake all the things that a captain will be asked to do. Compare the fighter-pirate, who has maxed out Profession (sailor) and 2nd level. You say he's competent enough. Fine. Take only a second-level Expert-pirate. In addition to the Profession, and the one other skill the fighter can max out, he's got four skills the Fighter doesn't. Let's call them Appraise, Sense Motive, Diplomacy, Gather Information. The Expert will know where the fat targets are more often (through Gather Information), will bribe his way past officials better, negotiate sales of cargo better. He'll have higher profit margins, and thus be able to pay for greater loyalty from his crew, who will generally be higher-quality sailors than the fighter can.

Without becoming an action hero (he's only second level), this Expert-captain will *economically* run rings around the fighter-captain, and just put him out of business. The only thing the Expert won't do better is swing a sword. But he'll have people who can do that for him.
 

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Are you referring to standard PC classes - fighter, wizard, etc. or are you referring to NPCs of the world - expert, aristocrat, adept, or are you referring to all people - PC and NPC classes? I ask, because I differentiate NPC classes from PC classes.

I'm not really talking about classes at all. I'm talking about professions.

Suppose a character's class is fighter? What could we say about his profession? Only that it probably evolves something that requires him to be a skilled combatant. It could be knight, baliff, field marshall, prison warden, pirate, bodygaurd, big game hunter, soldier, mercenary, courtier, gladiator, duelist, animal handlerer, groom, assassin, night watchman, or what not. He might not be well suited to the profession in every degree, but he's be well suited when it came time to fight. By profession I'm talking about the social and economic station that a character has in the game world. It's not something D&D usually deals with, since in D&D money is typically found all over the place waiting to be picked up. To the extent that PC's have a profession it is usually 'mercenary'.

But that's also a good jumping off point for reversing this. If I give a profession like mercenary, what class does it imply? What about assassin? What about noble? What about pirate? I would argue that its possible to see just about any class fulfilling those roles in some fashion.

So I guess my best answer is that rank value per level varies upon the campaign and circumstances. I don't hold all the PC/NPC levels as having equal rank value in every campaign - they differ always, and are totally based on a given campaign's circumstances.

To a certain extent I agree with you, but that sort of view I find tends to create problems with certain types of play.

Take again the example of wanting to play a 'pirate captain'. We could probably delay entry into the profession as long as we like in theory. We could have every pirate captain be 20th level and the crew be 10th level, in theory. But the problem we would run into is that RPGs tend to require a certain amount of setting forethought if we aren't going to have the PC's wreck the game by pointing out all the plot holes and inconsistancies by actually using those plot holes and inconsistancies during the game to help solve problems. One of those potential problems is that the profession 'pirate captain' may, if we aren't very careful, quickly become one that is obselete not long after 10th level. For a 2nd or 4th level character, a sailing ship is an asset and the wealth invested in it is reasonable and justifiable. For a 15th or 20th level character, a sailing ship tends to be a liability under RAW. The 15th or 20th level character lives in a world where everything can fly, many or most things can teleport, and objects like ships regardless of size can be sunk or disabled with the merest application of force. At 2nd or 4th level a sailing ship magnifies a character's importance and freedom. At 15th or 20th level, a ship - even a bigger ship - tends to contrain and reduce a character's importance. If the world is such where 10th-20th level NPCs are common, given the liabilities of sailing ships and their cost, we might wonder why they existed in the first place. If you have an army of 10th level characters, the ship is their weakpoint and probably the thing easiest to destroy. Tall sailing ships after all have no particular value in this world, as they've been replaced by superior technology or obseleted by advances in weaponry. Magic is superior technology and advances in weaponry. The further back into sailing history we ground our warships, the more that is true. Incidentally, this is the reason the sailing technology of my games tends toward psuedo-18th century.

The truth of the matter is that unless we greatly alter the RAW in some fashion, or we largely elimenate magic, or introduce fantastically powerful ships that can fly, have magic resistance, can quickly repair themselves, and so forth (or perhaps ships like the USS Missourri), the game of playing 'Pirate Captain' is probably over not that long after 12th level anyway. It will have had its run, and a good run, but the campaign may soon need to grow.

Likewise, that style of play may work fine when you - like World of Warcraft - regularly move the PC's to new settings where everything levels up with them, but it doesnt' work so well if you want a world that doesn't have the property of leveling up with the characters. If there are whole cities and ships of 10th+ level characters out there, then this isn't really a world where 1st level characters are anything but helpless. Just as in World of Warcraft, if you stop and think about it as anything other than a game, you might wonder why one of the 40th level gaurds from the next zone over doesn't just wander over and resolve every single problem experienced by the 25th level zone - as he could do easily - so in such a game you might wonder why there has been so careful stratification between the problems you experienced at 1st level and the problems you were no experiencing at 10th level. Why is the party of 8th level NPCs in the tavern comparitively broke, when there has been all of these dungeons packed with treasures you've been exploring that they could have claimed with the greatest of ease? Why are dungeons only plundered by characters that can just barely do so?
 

And every single mutiny that ever happens is people who originally agreed to obey you deciding they don't want to any more.

Usually because the Captain thought he could substitute intimidation for competence.

And agreement at the time you leave port does not equate to continued agreement forever. One would expect that people crowded on a ship, drinking weak rum and smelling each other's BO for weeks for low pay - people who are already sketchy enough that they'll hire on to kill other people to take their goods - are not guaranteed to behave for extended periods just 'cause.

Have you read much about pirate codes? Out in the real world pirates wanted to know up front what they could be punished for and how? Pirate codes constituted a sort of labor contract. Perhaps counterintuitively, pirates signing up to serve aboard a ship would insist upon stiff punishment for discharging guns in a hold, sleeping on duty, or becoming drunk on duty. This is because pirates wanted to come back from their adventures alive, and they knew quite well that a poorly run ship with lax discipline would get them killed. What they however wanted was some agreement before they got aboard that the Captain would be just and fair.

In D&D (and I'd argue in the real world), Intimidation puts the relationship between Captain and crew in an irreversible death spiral. After you use intimidation to force a crew member to do something, his attitude toward you worsens. This makes him less likely to obey you in the future per RAW, and means that the next time you order him around the situation gets even worse. Pretty soon your whole crew is Hostile, and the DM is justified in declaring a mutiny.

And in the life of an adventuring characters, extraordinary circumstances arise with painful, and often deadly, regularity. Pretty much any time you're dealing with the ship in-game is apt to be an extraordinary circumstance! So, your argument is fine if being a captain means, "We can hand-wave the routine stuff that happens off screen." But he won't keep the ship long if that's the description, now will he?

I find your description all backwards. If were have decided to play a game that revolves around ships rather than uses then as scene framing devices, then dealing with the ship in game is what you do all the time. You've elevated the 'routine stuff' of running a ship to what you do in play - whether this is a Firefly game or a Pirates game.

Being captain to most folks means being able to regularly undertake all the things that a captain will be asked to do. Compare the fighter-pirate, who has maxed out Profession (sailor) and 2nd level. You say he's competent enough. Fine. Take only a second-level Expert-pirate. In addition to the Profession, and the one other skill the fighter can max out, he's got four skills the Fighter doesn't. Let's call them Appraise, Sense Motive, Diplomacy, Gather Information. The Expert will know where the fat targets are more often (through Gather Information), will bribe his way past officials better, negotiate sales of cargo better. He'll have higher profit margins, and thus be able to pay for greater loyalty from his crew, who will generally be higher-quality sailors than the fighter can.

Without becoming an action hero (he's only second level), this Expert-captain will *economically* run rings around the fighter-captain, and just put him out of business. The only thing the Expert won't do better is swing a sword. But he'll have people who can do that for him.

Then if what you really wanted to be was an all around compotent skill monkey and that is the concept you envisioned, perhaps you should have chosen to play a skill monkey instead of a brute with apparantly average intelligence. After all, not only will the Expert have been running rings around you since 2nd level, in terms of competancy he's still going to be running rings around you at 6th or 10th level as well. Perhaps you should not be surprised that your mean end up more loyal to that competent 2nd level expert than they do to the swaggering brute that always uses the threat of violence to get his way. Perhaps if your vision of a character is alround competence, your vision is of something like Indiana Jones and not the muscled German NCO that thrashes him. If you make a game where skills really matter, instead of a game where every problem can be solved by hitting it with a stick, then perhaps you should be willing to trade +1 BAB for lots of useful abilities. Perhaps what you really wanted to play was a Rogue all along, if in fact NPC classes like Expert and Aristocrat run circles of competency around you.

I'll leave without long discussion the fact that I think the Fighter is poorly constructed in RAW, and that the choice here between fighter and rogue should not be as clear cut as it is.
 

I'm not really talking about classes at all. I'm talking about professions.

Ah, then I agree completely. As far as professions go, any class could opt to take any profession. While some PC classes might be more suited to a given profession, none should be excluded. I could see a "Thieves Guild" that doesn't include a single rogue, as bards, fighters, spellcasters are just as qualified to steal things, as any rogue might be. And I've certainly played an assassin type character that was only a spellcaster and had not a single rogue level, nor assassin prestige class - anyone can kill with extreme prejudice, you needn't have a level in assassin to be an assassin.

The 15th or 20th level character lives in a world where everything can fly, many or most things can teleport, and objects like ships regardless of size can be sunk or disabled with the merest application of force.

This is an assumption on your part, and perhaps very true in the games played at your table, conventions or whereever, but its very much untrue in all games that I play. Like in the real world US, where less than 1% control 99% of the money, in my campaign worlds, PCs/NPCs with levels higher than 3rd is a fraction of 1% of total sentient beings on a given prime material plane - something like .001% have levels above 3rd, which means spellcasters are a fraction of that. So in my worlds the total number of 3rd level NPCs is less than 1000, probably less than that. The total number of 20th level PC/NPCs in my worlds are less than 10 individuals total. Flying and teleporting is so rare that most people have never witnessed it happening, some uneducated people may believe these activities are fictional.

The truth of the matter is that unless we greatly alter the RAW in some fashion, or we largely elimenate magic, or introduce fantastically powerful ships that can fly, have magic resistance, can quickly repair themselves, and so forth (or perhaps ships like the USS Missourri), the game of playing 'Pirate Captain' is probably over not that long after 12th level anyway. It will have had its run, and a good run, but the campaign may soon need to grow.

Again just because powerful magic exists doesn't mean that powerful magic is in common use. Many nations in our real world have access to nuclear weapons, yet, not since WW2 has anyone ever used nuclear weapons in war, and many of those nuclear nations (including the US) have participated in wars since that time. Just because we have access to nuclear weapons, doesn't mean that nuclear weapons should be used in war. Most fantasy settings do not resemble Eberron - and I don't think they should.

Likewise, that style of play may work fine when you - like World of Warcraft - regularly move the PC's to new settings where everything levels up with them, but it doesnt' work so well if you want a world that doesn't have the property of leveling up with the characters. If there are whole cities and ships of 10th+ level characters out there, then this isn't really a world where 1st level characters are anything but helpless. Just as in World of Warcraft, if you stop and think about it as anything other than a game, you might wonder why one of the 40th level gaurds from the next zone over doesn't just wander over and resolve every single problem experienced by the 25th level zone - as he could do easily - so in such a game you might wonder why there has been so careful stratification between the problems you experienced at 1st level and the problems you were no experiencing at 10th level. Why is the party of 8th level NPCs in the tavern comparitively broke, when there has been all of these dungeons packed with treasures you've been exploring that they could have claimed with the greatest of ease? Why are dungeons only plundered by characters that can just barely do so?

While I certainly don't play WOW (or any MMO), I do understand where you're coming from, in that, at one time back in 1e days, this is how we played our worlds. However, not since that time, have I ever done that. In fact, in most campaigns 1st - 20th level, the PCs spend their entire time in one nation, even one city (as long as there's plenty adventuring available - no need to go elsewhere to find it.) This means that the 1st level adventure party can certainly count on some population of 2nd - 20th level NPCs within close proximity to the 1st level party at any given time. They are not restricted to the 1st level region of the city (for example). On the other hand, 1st level parties shouldn't confront a 20th level spellcaster as part of a 1st level adventure - its the GMs responsibility to limit the encounters to level appropriate. So in my worlds the high level NPCs don't live in some excluded district reserved for high level people. All levels of rank in class exist in all places, its just that the vast majority of everyone is low level, and minimal use of spellcasting impact to the wider world in general.
 
Last edited:

So my contention is that D&D in every edition, at least until 3e after which I'm not longer experienced enough to know, maintained the idea that the low levels corresponded to a casual level of realism and the capabilities of low level characters were the capabilities of ordinary people around you. And, the ordinary people around you were generally 0th, 1st, and 2nd level characters with a smattering of higher level characters who had extraordinary abilities that would astound ordinary persons - Olympic atheletes, special forces soldiers, leaders in academic fields, etc. However, even these extraordinary persons were at most 4th or 6th level characters.
Let me chime with some observation about pre-3e, specifically AD&D, because I've been running a campaign of it for 2.75 years now. It was a brief experiment revisiting the RPG I started with, which, surprisingly, hasn't ended yet :).

Under AD&D, an Olympic athlete, elite soldier, and leading academic would & could be represented in any number of different ways.

Since AD&D doesn't have a proper skill system, the athlete only needs high physical stats. Class and level are irrelevant. They could normal people, ie 0-level. Unless their chosen sport was boxing, or maybe javelin-catching, ie a sport where hit points figure in. In general, class levels have no bearing on "skills". Thieves excepted, of course.

Interestingly, this leaves room for a 'great general' or even 'pirate lord' who is low-level, or even 1st level. They wouldn't have automatic followers until 9th level, but there's nothing stopping them from being INT 18 tactical geniuses or CHA 18 leaders of men and women. This is tougher to justify under 3e and beyond, since those systems tie all competencies to class level (even for NPCs) via the formal skill system.

AD&D's elite soldiers are almost always be fighters, rangers, or even paladins with levels, going as high as 8th.

Leading academics could be wizards, clerics, any educated caster class. Or bards. Or sages from the DMG -- which all have 8d4 HP, great stats, and percentile areas of knowledge. Oh, and assorted spells. Or sages could just be normal 0-level old people, give them 1d4 HP and a chance to know stuff (roll under INT, percentile, whatever).

It's true most folks are 0-level/1HD creatures. But higher-level characters aren't really uncommon. The (plethora of) random encounter charts include mid-to-high level NPCs, so, for instance, just running into a 12th fighter lord or a 9th level assassin, or even a powerful M-U while strolling through as city isn't out-of-the-question, cf. the famous illustration of Emirikol the Chaotic.

In fact, any large group of people, or people-like things, automatically gets higher-level "leader types", or elite guards, or some spell-casters. So leveled characters are basically a consequence of population size (and are present in most "groupings").
 

Usually because the Captain thought he could substitute intimidation for competence.

Yes. But, they weren't substituting for competence in sailing. There's more to running a crew than how to make the boat go. They were substituting for competence in people-management. The fighter-captain isn't set to have Profession (sailor), Diplomacy, and Sense Motive, which is what he really needs.

Have you read much about pirate codes?

Yep. But, let's be honest here. Real pirating is like real soldiering. Most of it is dead boring, with short periods of terror and long periods of threat of scurvy. This does not an adventure game make.

In D&D (and I'd argue in the real world), Intimidation puts the relationship between Captain and crew in an irreversible death spiral.

That's fine. I'm not fixated on intimidation. The fighter-captain is still short on skills, and will still be outperformed by the Expert-Captains in most respects for at least several levels.

I find your description all backwards. If were have decided to play a game that revolves around ships rather than uses then as scene framing devices, then dealing with the ship in game is what you do all the time. You've elevated the 'routine stuff' of running a ship to what you do in play - whether this is a Firefly game or a Pirates game.

See above on how most of it is dead boring. Few are likely to want to play through getting sailors to swab the deck, and if they do, I daresay there are systems dozens of times better at that than D&D. I think it is reasonable to guess that folks signing on for D&D are expecting significant amounts of dramatic action.

Then if what you really wanted to be was an all around compotent skill monkey and that is the concept you envisioned, perhaps you should have chosen to play a skill monkey instead of a brute with apparantly average intelligence.

You seem to miss the point - what the player wants isn't relevant here. The 3.x skill system implies that, to compete, you need to be a bit of a skill monkey. There are two ways to get the required broad competence - be a low-level skill monkey character, or be a moderate level non-skill-monkey character. Either will do.

After all, not only will the Expert have been running rings around you since 2nd level, in terms of competancy he's still going to be running rings around you at 6th or 10th level as well.

Yep. But at 6th or 10th level, you have the skills to match the low-level Expert most of the time, and the rest of the time, you are a 6th to 10th level fighter, and can personally kick the collective butts of him and his entire crew! This is why if he wants to play a fighter-captain, he's got to play through so many levels of story initially, and why how long those levels take kind of matters.
 
Last edited:

The 3.x skill system implies that, to compete, you need to be a bit of a skill monkey.

No, just people who think that there is no space between minmaxed and useless assume it is. Will a fighter captain be able to handle a ship as well as a equal level Expert? No, but thats about the difference between a marine who came into command of a ship and a graduate from a naval academy.

Will the fighter be able to captain a ship? Yes. Remember, just because you are a fighter Int is no dump stat, especially when you want to rise above the meatshields (captain certainly applies), cross class skills can still be taken, you do not need the maximum points in a skill for it to be effective as DCs do not scale according to level and Skill Focus exists.
 

No, just people who think that there is no space between minmaxed and useless assume it is. Will a fighter captain be able to handle a ship as well as a equal level Expert? No, but thats about the difference between a marine who came into command of a ship and a graduate from a naval academy.

Will the fighter be able to captain a ship? Yes.

I didn't say he couldn't physically handle a ship. I said that the fighter would not be competitive with other captains easily available by the core rules for low level NPCs until the fighter is around mid-level. It is not enough to be able to pilot the ship under wind power and hack people up. The pirate also has to deal with managing relations with ports, fencing goods, and not getting himself in trouble with authorities or wealthy merchants. A captain whose only available answers to these difficulties is "kill it or sail the ship" is at a distinct disadvantage, unless the GM is softballing those areas.

The numbers were done in the OP - the fighter just doesn't have the skill points to cover the areas to the point of hitting the nominal DCs, *especially * as he or she has to go cross-class for some of them, which is something the Expert doesn't have to worry about.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top