The Possibility of "Too Fantastic" Fantasy

[Brother MacLaren]

First off, you demographics is flawed. The DMG demographics don't actually state that. You need pretty large centers to get any large number of high level PC's in a settlement.

If you're going to correct me, please correct the point I actually made: "multiple mid-level (5+) PC-classed individuals in every town." Not "a large number of high level PCs."

My books are in storage. Can you tell me that if you roll up a town using the DMG math, you will not have multiple individuals of PC classes of level 5 or higher? I think that "Small Town" was a +0 modifier, "Large Town" was a +3, and most PC classes were a d6 or d8 for level. To me, those odds look like you would indeed have multiple mid-level PC-classed individuals in every town. But I may be recalling the numbers wrong.

 

[Hussar]

Ahh, now I see the problem. You consider 5th level to be mid level in 3e. I consider that low level. But, even in a small town, most are going to be 4th or lower. And, you'll only get one PC of any given class above 5th level even going up to cities.

Of course, since earlier editions lacked any demographics guidelines, we are just going to have to agree to disagree as to how many "mid level" NPC's you'd find in a given town.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Ahh, now I see the problem. You consider 5th level to be mid level in 3e. I consider that low level. But, even in a small town, most are going to be 4th or lower. And, you'll only get one PC of any given class above 5th level even going up to cities.

"Of any given class" wasn't my point at all. It was the overall number of PC-classed individuals of 5+. I apologize if that was unclear.

Of course, since earlier editions lacked any demographics guidelines, we are just going to have to agree to disagree as to how many "mid level" NPC's you'd find in a given town.

I believe they did have some demographics on how common the various classes were. Maybe that was just the "randomly encountered NPC party" table? In any event, I recall the implication that Fighters and Thieves were much more common than any other class. And that part of the 3E -- the paladin in EVERY SINGLE TOWN -- struck me as absurd. I like my paladins as extremely rare examplars of heroism, 1-in-100,000 or so.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

"Of any given class" wasn't my point at all. It was the overall number of PC-classed individuals of 5+. I apologize if that was unclear.


I believe they did have some demographics on how common the various classes were. Maybe that was just the "randomly encountered NPC party" table? In any event, I recall the implication that Fighters and Thieves were much more common than any other class. And that part of the 3E -- the paladin in EVERY SINGLE TOWN -- struck me as absurd. I like my paladins as extremely rare examplars of heroism, 1-in-100,000 or so.

The funniest part is - what happens if you add classes? Suddenly you have more "heroic" characters in each town then before?

 

[Reynard]

The funniest part is - what happens if you add classes? Suddenly you have more "heroic" characters in each town then before?

A good fix for that would be to revise the demo chart to reflect class groups (Warrior, Adventurer, Arcane and Divine). Of course, I think revising everything to reflect those 4 groups is a good idea, even going so far as to just make those 4 classes, but that's a different issue.

 

[Silent Cartographer]

I believe that's the fourth law of thermodynamics.

The furry law of roleplay dynamics?

 

[apoptosis]

How is this a FR problem and not an issue with D&D as written, in every edition? Heck, back in 1e, my fighter equiped his followers with hippogriffs and rocks inscribed with Sepia Snake Sigil (goes off on contact in 1e IIRC). Why not? Nothing I did was out of lines with the rules and we simply had enough money to go out and buy hippogriff eggs. Or rather pay other to get them.

This is one thing I hope will actually be addressed in 4e. The per encounter and at will abilities seem to be more combat oriented and less functional. After all, even something like Purify Food and Drink would have a huge effect on a D&D world. Even a 1st level cleric can do that 3 times a day, and a wand would be ridiculously cheap for a town to afford.

Never mind what something like a Lyre of Building or a Decanter of Endless Water would do.

If they move utility spells into rituals, then perhaps casters will have less of an effect on world design.

Well I understand the motive behind your reasoning, for me it creates a bigger problem that I see in comics. People have all these superpowers but they dont impact the world outside of battling supervillains.

For me that causes a bigger issue than the world being way too fantastic (which i also dont really want).

It can be a difficult issue to adequately fix.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I believe they did have some demographics on how common the various classes were. Maybe that was just the "randomly encountered NPC party" table? In any event, I recall the implication that Fighters and Thieves were much more common than any other class. And that part of the 3E -- the paladin in EVERY SINGLE TOWN -- struck me as absurd. I like my paladins as extremely rare examplars of heroism, 1-in-100,000 or so.

Well, the randomly-encounter NPC tables that did crop up (in the 1e DMG and the Rogues' Gallery) gave very high-level figures for random NPCs by 1e standards (in the median range of 7-12; believe me, I used those tables religiously and ignored the results just as religiously. Hey, I was 10!) And there were a fair number of NPC paladins and rangers on those tables despite the stat requirements.

Also, if you like paladins to be rare, they shouldn't be a standard PC class. 3e UA actually presented a perfectly viable solution: Make them a PrC! Enough people apparently liked the core paladin that they never adopted that variant.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Also, if you like paladins to be rare, they shouldn't be a standard PC class.

But that's the thing -- what might be common for PCs doesn't have to be common for the world at large. PCs are exceptions.

The world at large is 99-99.9% NPC-classes, while adventuring parties are usually 100% PC-classes. Drow are 99.99% evil, but most drow PCs are non-evil. The fact that paladins make up 5% of PCs doesn't have to mean that they are 5% of PC-classed NPCs.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Ah, but now you're getting into the difference between default assumptions and assumptions related to specific campaigns. If you want to rule that paladins do not constitute 1 out of every 11 PC-classed characters in your world despite the fact that paladin is an equally available PC option to, say, fighter, of course you can... just as you can alter the demographics to suit your world! However, in the context of a published game book, the designers really don't have the luxury of providing for every single DM's individual take.