Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kigmatzomat" data-source="post: 9276896" data-attributes="member: 9254">The big NPC change in 3e, IMO, was not giving classes to NPCs (as the 1e/2e modules were full of that) it was that they added less-special NPC&nbsp; classes.&nbsp; It was a way of differentiating an &quot;average&quot; person from an &quot;elite&quot; one, even if if they have similar experiences. Imagine a young lordling (noble2) takes 3 retainers on a quest (fighter1, 3x Warrior1). At the end of the quest all are 6th but the Fighter is operating at a different level. Their attacks hit more often and harder, they may get more attacks or take more abuse because of feats.&nbsp; The Warriors are great in a fight vs goblins and orcs but they know 1 on 1 the Fighter will trounce them. The Fighter is &quot;a natural&quot;.Same goes for a cleric/ divine adept,&nbsp; wizard/Arcane adept or a rogue/expert.&nbsp; They can fight the same battles, stand shoulder to shoulder but where the NPCs endured, the PCs thrived.&nbsp; It also improves verisimilitude a bit.&nbsp; The odds aren't great for an army of 20,000 commoner(0) against 20,000 Goblins.&nbsp; And where do you get 20k, heck, 10k Fighters?&nbsp;But 11k Warrior1, 5k Warrior2, 2k Warrior3 and 1k Warrior4 plus 1k &quot;irregulars&quot; (mostly nobles, adepts &amp; experts of similar levels with a couple dozen &quot;hero&quot; classes to spice it up), that feels more coherent.&nbsp; The PCs are exemplary, heroic even, but not surrounded by keystone cops.And that plausible army has serious potential against a goblin army, even if it includes bugbears, gnolls, and hobgoblins.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kigmatzomat, post: 9276896, member: 9254"] The big NPC change in 3e, IMO, was not giving classes to NPCs (as the 1e/2e modules were full of that) it was that they added less-special NPC classes. It was a way of differentiating an "average" person from an "elite" one, even if if they have similar experiences. Imagine a young lordling (noble2) takes 3 retainers on a quest (fighter1, 3x Warrior1). At the end of the quest all are 6th but the Fighter is operating at a different level. Their attacks hit more often and harder, they may get more attacks or take more abuse because of feats. The Warriors are great in a fight vs goblins and orcs but they know 1 on 1 the Fighter will trounce them. The Fighter is "a natural". Same goes for a cleric/ divine adept, wizard/Arcane adept or a rogue/expert. They can fight the same battles, stand shoulder to shoulder but where the NPCs endured, the PCs thrived. It also improves verisimilitude a bit. The odds aren't great for an army of 20,000 commoner(0) against 20,000 Goblins. And where do you get 20k, heck, 10k Fighters? But 11k Warrior1, 5k Warrior2, 2k Warrior3 and 1k Warrior4 plus 1k "irregulars" (mostly nobles, adepts & experts of similar levels with a couple dozen "hero" classes to spice it up), that feels more coherent. The PCs are exemplary, heroic even, but not surrounded by keystone cops. And that plausible army has serious potential against a goblin army, even if it includes bugbears, gnolls, and hobgoblins. [/QUOTE]

Verification