Something Awful leak.

[I'm A Banana]

Funny thing though, about the "master blacksmith". Change that to a Sage and try the same thing. For some reason, being extremely knowledgeable about the breeding patterns of vampiric wombats suddenly means that I'm capable of standing toe to toe with a 5th level fighter and winning.

I've always been fond of the idea that, in a dangerous, monster-filled, magic-rich world, being any kind of expert means that you MUST confront those monsters and that magic. You can't become a sage about the breeding patterns of vampiric wombats without coming up against some vampires, and some dire wombats, and some wizard's wombat familiars, and some other vampiric marsupials, and the goblins that move into vampiric wombat dens, and the necromancer who raises various vampiric marsupials, and all that.

So by the time you're up against a 5th-level fighter, it's not like you have lived your entire life in a tower studying books. You're still an NPC class, and you still probably don't have great ability scores, so you've spent more time than average in a tower studying books, but you HAVE come up against vampiric dire wombats in your studies, and most of THEM can probably eat a 5th-level fighter.

The world you live in doesn't allow you to be a cloistered sage who doesn't interact with the world yet still somehow gains great expertise in a field. Those treatises on vampiric wombat mating rituals written by the greatest zoologists of old are buried in musty old tombs and forgotten cities crawling with traps, treasure, and monsters. Even if you're a sage, you live in a world of adventure. You may not become an adventurer per se, but your daily work involves some degree of adventure whether or not you become an expert in it.

This is why, when the necromancer releases his army of dire vampiric wombats ridden by the wombat-people of the Lost Continent, you are a useful person to consult. This is why, when faced with a military expert who has slain a few giants, you can still hold your own (you've likely slain a few giants yourself).

I mean, I don't think Steve Irwin was too scared of getting into a bar fight. Dude wrestled alligators for science. That's the model of a D&D sage. In order to become an expert, you need to go on adventures.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I've always been fond of the idea that, in a dangerous, monster-filled, magic-rich world, being any kind of expert means that you MUST confront those monsters and that magic. You can't become a sage about the breeding patterns of vampiric wombats without coming up against some vampires, and some dire wombats, and some wizard's wombat familiars, and some other vampiric marsupials, and the goblins that move into vampiric wombat dens, and the necromancer who raises various vampiric marsupials, and all that.

So by the time you're up against a 5th-level fighter, it's not like you have lived your entire life in a tower studying books. You're still an NPC class, and you still probably don't have great ability scores, so you've spent more time than average in a tower studying books, but you HAVE come up against vampiric dire wombats in your studies, and most of THEM can probably eat a 5th-level fighter.

The world you live in doesn't allow you to be a cloistered sage who doesn't interact with the world yet still somehow gains great expertise in a field. Those treatises on vampiric wombat mating rituals written by the greatest zoologists of old are buried in musty old tombs and forgotten cities crawling with traps, treasure, and monsters. Even if you're a sage, you live in a world of adventure. You may not become an adventurer per se, but your daily work involves some degree of adventure whether or not you become an expert in it.

This is why, when the necromancer releases his army of dire vampiric wombats ridden by the wombat-people of the Lost Continent, you are a useful person to consult. This is why, when faced with a military expert who has slain a few giants, you can still hold your own (you've likely slain a few giants yourself).

I mean, I don't think Steve Irwin was too scared of getting into a bar fight. Dude wrestled alligators for science. That's the model of a D&D sage. In order to become an expert, you need to go on adventures.

It is the model of a sage IN YOUR WORLD. I can present an equally good counter argument and examples of 'sages' and other NPCs that are poorly served by your model.

Here's the thing. If the system for generating NPCs/monsters is free-form like the 4e system NOTHING stops you from simply creating PCs and using them as NPCs. Very little to nothing stops you from creating such things where they break the rules in some ways (IE a dragon wizard can certain have dragon hit points and a breath weapon and also be a wizard, 4e will support that fine).

When it comes to non-'adventuring' NPCs what you find is that the level system, which is pretty good for PCs, doesn't work well for NPCs. Levels are intimately tied in to combat power. The class system and its leveling system are designed to give the character increasing combat effectiveness. Most NPCs simply will never have that. It isn't appropriate to them. If you have to resort to tricks like giving the sage an 8 CON and STR so that his 10 levels in sage DON'T jack his combat effectiveness up (and even then they will have an effect) then WHY BOTHER? You're already clearly pounding a square peg into a round hole.

In 4e if I want a bookish guy who spent his life in a library studying ancient history and talking to adventurers and writing about it, I can. He can be a minion or a low level 'monster' or not even have combat stats at all. I don't need to use some meta-game concept, class and level, to 'explain' how he has a high knowledge bonus in say Dungeoneering. I COULD, but what's the point if I have to then ignore most of the other class/level rules to get what I want? It makes no sense.

Flat out, the 4e (and BTW all other editions way except 3.x) is just superior. It is more flexible, doesn't preclude doing things in a fancier way, and is quick and easy to understand (really what's to understand basically). If WotC wants to make some "monsters by complex math' book for the people who insist on that stuff, they can of course be my guest. I want simple NPCs/Monsters, simple skill system, and mostly free-form stuff on the DM side, not lots of rules that I will just ignore.

 

[Hassassin]

Here's the thing. If the system for generating NPCs/monsters is free-form like the 4e system NOTHING stops you from simply creating PCs and using them as NPCs.

And vice versa. Nothing stops me from creating 3e monsters free-form.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It is the model of a sage IN YOUR WORLD.

I thought that was pretty clear with the whole "I am fond of" preamble.

I don't really think that should be an element in every world or in every game, it's just a reason why it doesn't have to be nonsense to have a high-level sage be able to beat up a 5th-level fighter. It's not inherently problematic in and of itself. It certainly doesn't fit certain styles (take away the "world is full of adventure" setup, and you get the problems Hussar was talking about).

I'll also point out, though, that in 3e, you didn't need a stratospheric skill check to be an "expert" in something. 99% of the population has a Knowledge (vampiric wombat mating habits) bonus of exactly +0, being first level commoners with all 10's. This being 3e, even a slightly higher-level commoner, warrior, or expert, might not have ANY bonus in it. If you take 2 skill points and stick it there, you're suddenly the best sage on vampiric wombat mating habits....possibly in the world. Probably in the city. At 1st level.

High level isn't always required for a high level of expertise. And even when it IS, the stuff that comes with a high level can make sense.

And even if neither of those two scenarios work for you, 3e has the justly famous Rule Zero, which says "ad hoc a bonus of whatever, assume a roll of whatever, just do what you want, DM!"

3.5 has a lot of problems, but the idea that 3.5 forced this weird situation of weak sages who could beat up trained fighters on DMs across the game is not really a fair criticism. Though the fact that some 3.5 DMs think this was the case is quite a fair criticism, because it clearly didn't show very clearly that there are at least three reasons why that doesn't happen.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

the average lvl 5 sage will just die against a lvl 1 fighter.

 

[Klaus]

A level 5 expert (blacksmith) can make any kind of weapon needed.
+8 skill ranks
+1 Intelligence bonus
+3 Skill Focus
+2 masterwork tools
+2 from an assistant or apprentice helping them

+16 to his check If he takes 10, that is a 26 check, vs 20 to make masterwork items.

The Alexandrian Blog Archive D&D: Calibrating Your Expectations

Can I play, too?

Blacksmith - Level 1 Minion Brute
AC 13, F 13, R 11, W 12
hp 1, Initiative +2
Attack: Hammer +5 vs. AC, dmg 1d8+2
Athletics +7, Endurance +8
S 15 Co 16 D 12 I 10 W 14 Ch 8
Special: The blacksmith can create any common metal item in one day. Weapons take 2d4 days, depending on complexity. The blacksmith can't make full pieces of armor. If the PCs befriend the blacksmith, he may sell them metal items with a 10% discount.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Can I play, too?

Blacksmith - Level 1 Minion Brute
AC 13, F 13, R 11, W 12
hp 1, Initiative +2
Attack: Hammer +5 vs. AC, dmg 1d8+2
Athletics +7, Endurance +8
S 15 Co 16 D 12 I 10 W 14 Ch 8
Special: The blacksmith can create any common metal item in one day. Weapons take 2d4 days, depending on complexity. The blacksmith can't make full pieces of armor. If the PCs befriend the blacksmith, he may sell them metal items with a 10% discount.

And how does this prove or disprove that in 3.5 it was "impossible" to make items unless you were a "high level npc"?

But thank you for highlighting things I dislike about 4e. Who is the blacksmith a minion of? Why is he a brute? Why can't he make armor?

Pretty impressive stat array too for a "normal" non-adventuring human. Why does he have only 1 hp but a 16 con? This is why NPCs following the same rules make sense. A 3.5 level 1 expert would have at least 6hps, which means he could at least not get one shot by a house cat.

 

[Mattachine]

In 4e, a house cat isn't a monster with attacks and damage.

It's a housecat.

 

[dkyle]

But thank you for highlighting things I dislike about 4e. Who is the blacksmith a minion of? Why is he a brute? Why can't he make armor?

Pretty impressive stat array too for a "normal" non-adventuring human. Why does he have only 1 hp but a 16 con? This is why NPCs following the same rules make sense. A 3.5 level 1 expert would have at least 6hps, which means he could at least not get one shot by a house cat.

He's not a "minion" of anyone. It's just a mechanics term. No stranger than calling Human NPCs "monsters" or "creatures", which is quite common.

He's a Brute because it categorizes how he's likely to fight in combat. Standardized terminology to make things clear to the DM.

He can't make armor because why should he be able to? Is every blacksmith supposed to be capable of making all items?

As for the 1HP, it's a mechanics representation thing. He has 1 HP, because a level 1 (or so) adventurer will fell him in one hit. That is the context where the combat mechanics are meaningful. They are not designed to model combats between wildly mismatched opponents. Those stats are not meaningful against a house cat, because that's just silly. Obviously, any able-bodied adult would not be seriously threatened in direct combat with a house-cat, to the degree that 3.5's house-cat mechanics suggest. Which illustrates why shoehorning everything into the same system isn't always a good idea.

 

[KarinsDad]

He's not a "minion" of anyone. It's just a mechanics term. No stranger than calling Human NPCs "monsters" or "creatures", which is quite common.

He's a Brute because it categorizes how he's likely to fight in combat. Standardized terminology to make things clear to the DM.

He can't make armor because why should he be able to? Is every blacksmith supposed to be capable of making all items?

As for the 1HP, it's a mechanics representation thing. He has 1 HP, because a level 1 (or so) adventurer will fell him in one hit. That is the context where the combat mechanics are meaningful. They are not designed to model combats between wildly mismatched opponents. Those stats are not meaningful against a house cat, because that's just silly. Obviously, any able-bodied adult would not be seriously threatened in direct combat with a house-cat, to the degree that 3.5's house-cat mechanics suggest. Which illustrates why shoehorning everything into the same system isn't always a good idea.

I can buy the rest of it, but minions are overused in 4E. A blacksmith should never be a minion. He's one of the "elite guard" in the town militia of a small village (because he's the toughest guy in the village) which means that he should be able to fight and not easily be killed by the first local kid throwing a stone. He might not be as good as a first level Fighter in melee, but he should be more resilient than the first level Wizard.

Minions should be revamped in 5E without the 1 hit point mechanic. It's a terrible mechanic because it has these types of gaping holes with it.

In 4E, I'd prefer minions that have 8 hit points at level one and gain 1 hit point per level. They can be one shot-ted, but sometimes are not, especially by the non-strikers. Still wimpy, but not an entirely different hit point game mechanic that's mostly there for cinematic games which not everyone wants their wimpy NPCs to emulate. Wimpy, not cardboard.