Training peasants to fight in a pinch

[Friend of the Dork]

Just a few facts: In Pathfinder, a lvl 1 Commoner is CR 1/3 (as is a warrior). Secondly, Commoners are only trained with 1 simple weapon, not all. What are the odds that everyone knows how to use a spear OR sling OR crossbow?

Rules wise they are indeed in deep doo. The way I see it they can work as distractions and support, unless you use some kind of mass combat rules (swarm horde/mob rules) where they can be effective in sheer numbers. All of this depends on the enemy being overconfident, surprised or just inept.

Levels: I agree not all should be lvl 1, but I'm not sure if age is the only requirement here. After all, a 30 year old "man" who has lived with his mother his whole life, doing simple errands in a city, and never been in a fight is not gonna be a 5th level commoner! I'd say his lack of ambition and experience makes him 1st or MAYBE 2nd level.

On the other hand, the young man that left his home at 15 to join a sailing ship, has faced merfolk on the sea, and been in countless bar brawls and maybe survived a Pirate raid, might easily be lvl 3 or more at 18 years. It is also possible he might have multiclassed into Warrior or even gotten himself a PC class with some training.

If the village is anything like the one in the Magnificent 7 or the 7 Samurai, all the villagers will be Commoners who have lived there all their lives, and the most experienced ones have only "encountered" drought, heavy rains, maybe some dangerous wildlife, and an occasional fistfight. They are easily bullied for a reason. The only high-level commoner will be so old he is useless in a fight anyway, and will only be useful for his vast knowledge of farming and poking the young 'uns with a stick.

The whole scenario is actually fitting for a low level party, 2nd or 3rd level hopefully, who with their skills and possible ingenuity can give the villagers a chance, and who would also be hopelessly outnumbered if facing all the bandits by themselves.

 

[Thanael]

Levels: I agree not all should be lvl 1, but I'm not sure if age is the only requirement here. After all, a 30 year old "man" who has lived with his mother his whole life, doing simple errands in a city, and never been in a fight is not gonna be a 5th level commoner! I'd say his lack of ambition and experience makes him 1st or MAYBE 2nd level.

The three ideas posited in the threads I linked to here where to grant everyday NPCs XP in the following way:

A) every month of living is a CR 1 challenge (Sean K Reynold's "Theory About Peasants")
B) assigning different CRs for years with CR2 being average (Seasong's method)
C) learn something new every day : 1 xp per day -> 365 XP per year. (Mavrick Weirdo's method)

Method A (starting at age 20) results in a quick progression to level 2, later to level 7 (age 41) and up to level 9 (age 61) when the NPC level stagnates as they don't get XP for CR 1 challenges anymore then.

Method B is a lot slower, where the bulk of the population will be level 3-5, with levels 1-2 representing youth and higher levels becoming more and more uncommon for average (CR2) lives.

Method C results in the following progression

age 15 is level 1
age 18 is level 2
age 24 is level 3
age 32 is level 4
age 35 is “middle age” –1 S, D, & Co; +1 I, W, & Ch
age 43 is level 5
age 53 is “old age” –2 S, D, & Co; +1 I, W, & Ch
age 57 is level 6
age 70 is “venerable” –3 S, D, & Co; +1 I, W, & Ch
age 73 is level 7
age 92 is level 8

Mavrick Weirdo also posted lots of example NPCs and you can see that by incorporating the aging mods, hitpoints and fighting ability (which are often cited in such discussions as problems) tend to stagnate from age 340 upwards.

On the other hand, the young man that left his home at 15 to join a sailing ship, has faced merfolk on the sea, and been in countless bar brawls and maybe survived a Pirate raid, might easily be lvl 3 or more at 18 years. It is also possible he might have multiclassed into Warrior or even gotten himself a PC class with some training.

Is that how slow your PCs level? Because what you describe sure sounds like an adventure. Why should NPCs level slower than PCs? Isn't giving them NPC classes aready enough of a damper?

 

[Thanael]

Why 2 threads?

General: http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/314331-training-peasants-fight.html
Pathfinder: Training peasants to fight in a pinch

Please merge!

The other thread mentions the Mob template from DMG2, which would be a nice way of modelling this. The PCs training/encouragement enables the parents to gain the Mob Template.

 

[Friend of the Dork]

The three ideas posited in the threads I linked to here where to grant everyday NPCs XP in the following way:

A) every month of living is a CR 1 challenge (Sean K Reynold's "Theory About Peasants")
B) assigning different CRs for years with CR2 being average (Seasong's method)
C) learn something new every day : 1 xp per day -> 365 XP per year. (Mavrick Weirdo's method)

Method A (starting at age 20) results in a quick progression to level 2, later to level 7 (age 41) and up to level 9 (age 61) when the NPC level stagnates as they don't get XP for CR 1 challenges anymore then.

Method B is a lot slower, where the bulk of the population will be level 3-5, with levels 1-2 representing youth and higher levels becoming more and more uncommon for average (CR2) lives.

Method C results in the following progression

Mavrick Weirdo also posted lots of example NPCs and you can see that by incorporating the aging mods, hitpoints and fighting ability (which are often cited in such discussions as problems) tend to stagnate from age 340 upwards.





Is that how slow your PCs level? Because what you describe sure sounds like an adventure. Why should NPCs level slower than PCs? Isn't giving them NPC classes aready enough of a damper?

Interesting theories, but I don't think they hold up. First of all, trying to apply realism with the xp system is nearly impossible to begin with - in RL people gain experience yes, but training and learning is most important to increasing our skills. The lvl 1 Commoner becomes so because his mother, father and others teached him how to farm, handle animals and being useless in combat

In D&D PCs gain levels simply by defeating challenges, mostly in combat. Now of course combat experience will make you better at it, but in RL it's the training that allows you to survive that combat in the first place, and subsequent training that improves your skill further.

Thus age alone is a poor measurement for xp. The farmer applying their trade over the years will get better at farming, but the level system also makes them better at fighting for some reason. And really, who needs +15 profession farmer?

But time allows you the potential to experience, train and learn. So I agree a 30 year old farmer is probably not 1st level anymore - he has achieved things just by surviving that far, and is not unlikely to have to fight some, expecially in a society where there are no police to fight your battles for you, and you are expected to defend your family as well as honor.

At the very best those 3 methods are simple guidelines. Method A's weakness is in using party xp for basis - xp meant for a group of 4 should not be divided by only 2 people, and peasants usually work in the village community. That's alot of people to share the xp with! I'm not talking about the "Little house on the prairie" or similar frontier farmstead, but feudal society where most people lived in villages and worked their Lord's land.

Thus essentially halving xp makes them even lower levels, and it also depends on wether you use the Pathfinder system of slow, medium or fast progression (I suppose you use the same as for the group). With these rules it takes at least 4 years to become lvl 3 - and starting age is probably between 17-20, same as the lowest minimum starting age for PCs. Thus 18 year old 1st level commoners should not be uncommon. although a 21 one could be 3rd level as he started out with responsibilities earlier, through early marriage or a dying father perhaps.

Hmm I've gotten lost.. my point is that a very tranquil village might have either a higher amount than usual of low-level commoners, or a higher than normal amount of mid-level but old ones. An old Commoner might be level 6 but with a Str of 4, an average of 1 hp/lvl (for a total of 6, go retroactive Con modifier!) +0 to hit, 1d6-2 damage with his club... see where I'm going with this? He might laugh at a Sleep spell, but he will easily go down in one swing from a lvl 1 warrior. He will probably not want to fight anyway, but will have quite a few skill points, and as Senility and poor eyesight don't exist in D&D/PF he could have a very good Perception skill.


Oh, and about my example: It's an adventure only compared to RL, as we are talking about 2 (life or death) combat encounters in 3 years... alot for a Commoner, not for a PC. I don't generally give out alot of xp for bar brawls, unless they turn nasty.

Point was that people gain experience at different rates depending on how dynamic their lives are. Bob the couch potato will probably gain less experience than Jim the sailor.

 

[Thanael]

Well it's better than a lvl 1 commoner being killed by a cat.