D&D (2024) Rogue's Been in an Awkward Place, And This Survey Might Be Our Last Chance to Let WotC Know.

[Mistwell]

Two things. First, NPCs aren't built like PCs. You could easily train them to use a single martial weapon and represent that in their stat block. Second, you don't even have to do that. Short Bows and Light Crossbows are sufficient for no disadvantage except for the most ancient of dragons who can breathe at 90 feet, and they can still shoot those at disadvantage.

This is again more circular logic. The argument was that 5e dragons as written are not powerful enough, with the evidence being in 5e a town of 1000 people would kill a dragon with 300 people shooting longbows. The same rules however don't provide for that happening on their face. So to prove your point, you alter the stats of the population listed in the rules to be able to do the thing you claimed, as opposed to use the very rules as written that you made a claim about to examine if your claim is true.

Look my man, you can alter a dragon too. But we're not talking about altering the rules. We're talking about what they say right now. And right now commoners don't have proficiency with anything other than a club and are described as the overwhelming majority of professions found in an ordinary town. That's it. You can't alter them to make your point any more than I can alter the red dragon to make my point.

You want to sup-up the townsfolk in your game? Cool. Just don't complain when I sup-up the dragon in response. But the 5e dragon beats the 5e town as written in the rules.

 

[Maxperson]

This is again more circular logic. The argument was that 5e dragons as written are not powerful enough, with the evidence being in 5e a town of 1000 people would kill a dragon with 300 people shooting longbows. The same rules however don't provide for that happening on their face. So to prove your point, you alter the stats of the population listed in the rules to be able to do the thing you claimed, as opposed to use the very rules as written that you made a claim about to examine if your claim is true.

What rules? 5e has no rules on populations. This is what the DMG says.

"Consider the following questions as you create any settlement in your world:
• What purpose does it serve in your game?
• How big is it? Who lives there?
What does it look, smell, and sound like?
• Who governs it? Who else holds power? Is it part
of a larger state?
• What are its defenses?"

So the DM decides the defenses, which include militias and their weaponry.

"The guidelines in this section are here to help you build the settlement you want for whatever purpose you have in mind."

The guidelines(not rules) help the DM in achieving what he had in mind. They do not govern and the DM is changing nothing if he does not do things the way the DMG suggests.

The DMG suggests this about a population of 1000.

"Defense: The reeve might have a small force of soldiers. Otherwise, the village relies on a citizen militia."

Good grief. It even suggests what I have been saying. Militia! I'm not even changing the non-rule suggestion. What is it that you think I've changed?

Look my man, you can alter a dragon too. But we're not talking about altering the rules. We're talking about what they say right now. And right now commoners don't have proficiency with anything other than a club and are described as the overwhelming majority of professions found in an ordinary town. That's it. You can't alter them to make your point any more than I can alter the red dragon to make my point.

Militias don't use clubs. Where are you getting that from? As far as I know, 5e hasn't produced a militia stat block, so I'm still altering nothing by making one. Hell, looking at the bandit, no proficiencies are listed. So bandits can't rob you with anything but clubs, right? Berserker? Nope. No listed proficiencies in their stat block, either.

Similarly commoners have no proficiencies listed, and that stat block fails to include militia members, so it doesn't apply in any case. It would apply to non-militia members of those professions. Hell, would you or anyone else think that a DM has suped-up a commoner merchant by giving him a dagger? No. You'd hear no cries of, "But he's a commoner and can only have a club!" from the players at the table. I could even give the merchant a sword and no one would bat an eyelash.

NPCs are proficient with whatever you equip them with. They don't use PC rules. Arming a militia with spears and short bows isn't changing the guidelines on NPCs, villages or anything else.

Here are the MM guidelines on weapons on NPCs.

"Assume that a creature is proficient with its armor, weapons, and tools. If you swap them out, you decide whether the creature is proficient with its new equipment."

So even going by the guidelines provided, I can use the commoner statblock and just give them shortbows and decide proficiency, without suping them up. But again, there is no militia statblock provided and I'm talking about militia members, not commoners with no militia training.

You want to sup-up the townsfolk in your game? Cool. Just don't complain when I sup-up the dragon in response. But the 5e dragon beats the 5e town as written in the rules.

I haven't increased them at all, though. Hell, I just decreased them. I reduced them from longbows to shortbows!

 

[Krachek]

DnD is not a world simulation tool.
I use the rules to interface the players with a fantasy world,
not to build a world around the rules, which always create a lame caricature.

 

[Mistwell]

What rules? 5e has no rules on populations. This is what the DMG says.

"Consider the following questions as you create any settlement in your world:
• What purpose does it serve in your game?
• How big is it? Who lives there?
What does it look, smell, and sound like?
• Who governs it? Who else holds power? Is it part
of a larger state?
• What are its defenses?"

So the DM decides the defenses, which include militias and their weaponry.

"The guidelines in this section are here to help you build the settlement you want for whatever purpose you have in mind."

The guidelines(not rules) help the DM in achieving what he had in mind. They do not govern and the DM is changing nothing if he does not do things the way the DMG suggests.

The DMG suggests this about a population of 1000.

"Defense: The reeve might have a small force of soldiers. Otherwise, the village relies on a citizen militia."

Good grief. It even suggests what I have been saying. Militia! I'm not even changing the non-rule suggestion. What is it that you think I've changed?

1. You're saying a town is whatever the DM wants it to be, so if the town is centered on killing dragons then a town can kill a dragon. THAT'S CIRUCLAR LOGIC.
2. The monster manual has an entry for commoners and the description of that commoner ARE THE COMMON CITIZENS OF A TOWN.
3. The citizen militia is just the able bodied people grabbing whatever weapons they have. The Monster Manual entry for them lists a club. But you wanted to give 1/3 of the population 50 gp long bows and claim they suddenly had more training in weapons than half the PC classes. You then backed off and "only" gave them 25 gp short bows (still half a years labor to afford) and which still many PC classes do not have proficiency with.

So yeah, you're changing the rules to do whatever you want them to do, and then arguing your change proves your point. Of course a town serves whatever purpose the DM deems it to be - so does the Dragon! But the "typical" resident of a town is listed in the rules and you've decided essentially zero residents are going to match that typical listing. You're basically saying "I am writing the town to win this argument!" here.

Militias don't use clubs.

Yeah, they do, they use whatever they can grab. It's an informal grab every abled bodied person, not some formal thing with an armory and military training and a large budget to buy expensive things which otherwise would cost half a years labor.

NPCs are proficient with whatever you equip them with.

This is the ultimate "I win this argument by fiating whatever I want!" type disingenuous approach. Why not equip them all with +3 broadswords of dragon slaying while you're at it. After all, when it was said a town of 1000 people can kill a dragon, everyone understood that to mean "because a town is equipped with whatever you want to equip them with" and not what's listed in the MM, right?

 

[Maxperson]

1. You're saying a town is whatever the DM wants it to be, so if the town is centered on killing dragons then a town can kill a dragon. THAT'S CIRUCLAR LOGIC.

No, it's not. It's logic based on a percentage of a town being part of a militia. There are no rules for this, so the DM has to make them up. You can't claim that because there are no rules for a militia, I am somehow suping up a town by including one and using circular logic to do so.

Having towns with a 10-30 percent militia rate is not unreasonable and in fact conforms to the suggestions in the DMG.

2. The monster manual has an entry for commoners and the description of that commoner ARE THE COMMON CITIZENS OF A TOWN.

The most common citizens of the town. Not all the citizens. If there are 1000 people in a town and 300 are militia and the rest are commoners, the 700 are the common ones. That means that I can have 10 merchants, 7 of whom use the commoner statblock and 3 of whom use the militia stat block(or just commoner statblock with proficiency with shortbow and spear), and be right in line with the game.

3. The citizen militia is just the able bodied people grabbing whatever weapons they have. The Monster Manual entry for them lists a club. But you wanted to give 1/3 of the population 50 gp long bows and claim they suddenly had more training in weapons than half the PC classes. You then backed off and "only" gave them 25 gp short bows (still half a years labor to afford) and which still many PC classes do not have proficiency with.

It's not half a year of labor. That's the arbitrary PC price. John the Hunter with his bowmaking proficiency could pump out shortbows at a pretty decent rate for just the price of a bow string. And someone can probably make those for free as well.

But yes, if for some bizarre reason the population had to run to the store to buy shortbows whenever a dragon attacked, it would be very expensive.

This is the ultimate "I win this argument by fiating whatever I want!" type disingenuous approach. Why not equip them all with +3 broadswords of dragon slaying while you're at it. After all, when it was said a town of 1000 people can kill a dragon, everyone understood that to mean "because a town is equipped with whatever you want to equip them with" and not what's listed in the MM, right?

Call it what you will, it's what the game designers put there. It's also why elves have proficiency with certain weapons. There's zero reason why citizens of a town can't be trained to use short bows as part of their background like elves do. None. It's part of the game. It's not some magic "I win button" or "suping up" the citizens. It's part of being a militia.

By the by, what is listed in the MM has never been the end all be all of what those NPCs/Monsters could use. They were simply the easy aid by the designers. The "Hey, let's just shove a spear in the hands of this orc to make things easier on the DM." not "By giving them a spear, DM's who arm orcs with anything else are attempting to win by fiat!!!!" I reject your argument that I have to arm all bandits with scimitars and light crossbows or I am cheating the discussion.

 

[Pauln6]

No, it's not. It's logic based on a percentage of a town being part of a militia. There are no rules for this, so the DM has to make them up. You can't claim that because there are no rules for a militia, I am somehow suping up a town by including one and using circular logic to do so.

Having towns with a 10-30 percent militia rate is not unreasonable and in fact conforms to the suggestions in the DMG.

The most common citizens of the town. Not all the citizens. If there are 1000 people in a town and 300 are militia and the rest are commoners, the 700 are the common ones. That means that I can have 10 merchants, 7 of whom use the commoner statblock and 3 of whom use the militia stat block(or just commoner statblock with proficiency with shortbow and spear), and be right in line with the game.

It's not half a year of labor. That's the arbitrary PC price. John the Hunter with his bowmaking proficiency could pump out shortbows at a pretty decent rate for just the price of a bow string. And someone can probably make those for free as well.

But yes, if for some bizarre reason the population had to run to the store to buy shortbows whenever a dragon attacked, it would be very expensive.

Call it what you will, it's what the game designers put there. It's also why elves have proficiency with certain weapons. There's zero reason why citizens of a town can't be trained to use short bows as part of their background like elves do. None. It's part of the game. It's not some magic "I win button" or "suping up" the citizens. It's part of being a militia.

By the by, what is listed in the MM has never been the end all be all of what those NPCs/Monsters could use. They were simply the easy aid by the designers. The "Hey, let's just shove a spear in the hands of this orc to make things easier on the DM." not "By giving them a spear, DM's who arm orcs with anything else are attempting to win by fiat!!!!" I reject your argument that I have to arm all bandits with scimitars and light crossbows or I am cheating the discussion.

Militias tend to be armed with simple weapons. It's normally only your town guard that are trained and armed with martial weapons. So spears and clubs are more likely than swords and bows but it does depend on how you build your town. The Greyhawk 1e gazetteer did give some guidance on standing army and militia strengths. Some settlements even confirmed that they had well-trained and well-armed militia, implying that the norm is not well-trained and well-armed.

There are plenty of ways you can make dragons more unkillable by peasants, such as magic resistance and spell choices, even sensible limits on how many arrows archers might have. You can always test your theories.

 

[Mistwell]

No, it's not. It's logic based on a percentage of a town being part of a militia. There are no rules for this, so the DM has to make them up. You can't claim that because there are no rules for a militia, I am somehow suping up a town by including one and using circular logic to do so.

You're begging the question - not the new meaning of that phrase "begs the question" which means the opposite of the real definition, but the old real definition of that phrase. You are making an assumption about the word "militia" and then just failing to fill in a huge amount of data behind that word.

Militia, to me, just means anyone able to respond to a fight. That's it. There are no rules for it because it's not a rules concept. It's like saying all things green - you don't need a rule for green, it's green. You don't need a rule for people able to fight, you get that means pretty much everyone except the old and young, and those taking care of the old and young. It's not a word which comes with training. It's not a word which comes with some set amount of experience. It doesn't carry extra equipment or proficiencies. It's just a description of "people who can respond to a fight."

They're still commoners. They're not special commoners who suddenly happen to be rich enough to afford a high end luxury item like a short bow or long bow, they are not special commoners who suddenly didn't need to subsistence farm and had time and training to gain proficiency in weapons that even some professional adventurers never gain proficiency with. They're still just commoners, and we have stats for those.

It's not half a year of labor. That's the arbitrary PC price.

No that's the NPC price. It's listed how much a commoner makes a day, and how much it costs to get a short bow or long bow, and we can run the calculation. Even if you incorporate the Xanathar's crafting rules, it's still WELL WELL WELL beyond affordability for a town of 1000 to afford 300 of either.

John the Hunter with his bowmaking proficiency could pump out shortbows at a pretty decent rate for just the price of a bow string. And someone can probably make those for free as well.

We have rules the cost of this. You don't get to just make this up to try and win an Internet argument. You keep doing that. Please stop. The entire argument made was "Rules as Written Dragon cannot beat Rules as Written town of 1000." You can't change any part of that. If the book gives you a way to do it, that's how you run the calculation. Otherwise, why bother continuing to discuss this. I will make up my own scenario for what a Dragon could do too if that's the path we're going down.

But yes, if for some bizarre reason the population had to run to the store to buy shortbows whenever a dragon attacked, it would be very expensive.

Call it what you will, it's what the game designers put there. It's also why elves have proficiency with certain weapons. There's zero reason why citizens of a town can't be trained to use short bows as part of their background like elves do. None. It's part of the game. It's not some magic "I win button" or "suping up" the citizens. It's part of being a militia.

Commoners get no background, they're not PCs. Yet another "Imma houserule this to win an argument on the Internet" oddness. Cut it out man. No more "town wins because I write it so the town wins" nonsense.

By the by, what is listed in the MM has never been the end all be all of what those NPCs/Monsters could use.

Cool. This dragon vaporizes people from a range of 1000 feet. After all, the dragon in the MM has never been the end all of what Dragons can do, right? We done with that silliness now?

 

[CreamCloud0]

i wonder what the breakdown of this thread's topics would be? and how much of it was ever actually discussing rogues.

 

[Pauln6]

i wonder what the breakdown of this thread's topics would be? and how much of it was ever actually discussing rogues.

Rogues can join militia but they prefer to be looting houses while everyone else is fighting, hiding, or fleeing.

 

[Yaarel]

Rogues can join militia but they prefer to be looting houses while everyone else is fighting, hiding, or fleeing.

It reminds me of a short story I read as a kid.

The nation of Switzerland disbanded its military. Instead, the Swiss made mandatory that every citizen must train to be assassins. Heh, they never fought in any wars, and instead killed off the foreign leaders who causing Switzerland trouble, and eventually the leaders of the other nations learned to leave Switzerland alone.

A town militia of Assassin Rogues.