What level is your average local NPC?

[haakon1]

The vast majority of my campaign world's populace have one level in an appropriate NPC class, usually commoner, sometimes expert.

Most magic casters are adepts rather than having levels in a PC class (low magic game); most nobles are warriors; most officials are aristocrats or experts.

Likewise, military forces are composed of commoners, warriors, and experts.

Someone who's pretty accomplished at arms or at a skill will probably go up to NPC level 3, but theoretically most stay at level 1 from adulthood to death. Kids are basically 0th level (unless they're undergoing some sort of rigorous education, which is uncommon).

This is fairly close to how I run it myself. I use the default population assumptions from the 3.5e DMG for the main NPC classes (Commoner, Expert, and Warrior), but for PC classes, Adept, and Aristocrat, in most cases they are specific NPC's with a name and a purpose (at least in small town settings).

I once did mini stats (HP) for an entire hamlet that was being attacked by an orc tribe (and had to hold them off until the PC's arrived to save the day). The Commoners were only the most basic of militia -- literally spear carriers -- while the Experts had actual armor (leather) and better weapons (crossbows or swords). The village elder was an Expert 3 and had chainmail.

The local noble's "professional" force at his tower were primarily Warrior 1 with studded leather armor, crossbows, and melee weapons, with sergeants of War2-3, and a Captain who was about Fighter 4. The noble himself was something like Aristocrat 4 and had a young (Cleric 2) chaplain. And I had a few NPC's scattered about the region -- a retired wizard, an adept/witch who lived in the woods, and a half-fey miller (Expert) were the ones that every remotely mattered.

That, of course, doesn't count the baddies, who included some low level adventuring types and some that count as high level in my world (~8th level plus) and were comparable to/slightly better than the PC's.

 

[The Shaman]

Most of the games I play don't use classes or levels like any version of D&D, and that's how I voted on the poll.

If I were to run some form of D&D again, most likely it would be 1e AD&D, in which case the vast majority of the human population of the game-world would be zero-level. Classes and levels are reserved for exceptional individuals.

 

[S'mon]

I just came up with the following for my planned 4e Wilderlands game. This version of the Wilderlands is a pretty high powered setting, similar to the vibe I get from the sample NPC 'monsters' in the 4e Monster Manuals & Monster Vault - eg a 'common bandit' is a 2nd level standard, a pirate can be 9th level(!), and so on.

4e NPC Wilderlands Human Demographics

Novice: Minion 1-3
Trained: Minion 4-6
Experienced: Minion 7-10, Standard 1-2
Veteran: Minion 11-13, Standard 3-5, Elite 1
Elite: Minion 14-16, Standard 6-8, Elite 2-4
Ultra-Elite: Minion 17-20, Standard 9-12, Elite 5-8, Solo 1-3

Most Ultra-Elites will be leaders, champions & warlords, but might include small cadres of ultra-elite imperial bodyguards and such.

Edit: I'm starting PCs at 3rd level, equivalent to Elite NPCs.

BTW I noticed that the 4e DMG actually does briefly discuss NPC demographics! In the World section it says that most NPCs are 1st level minions or other unclassed 'monster' types; most temple priests are regular guys who may or may not have some Ritual casting ability, a hedge wizard might use the MM Human Mage stat block, etc. They were clearly trying to move away from the "everybody with a name has a class & level" thing; in fact the "PC class NPCs" stuff in the 4e DMG has seen very little use and looks now more like a legacy of earlier editions.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

For typical soldiers, I have been using 4e minions of the following levels:

Novice: 1-2 - farmers, levy
Trained: 3-4 - trained levy
Experienced: 5-6 - typical professional 'men at arms'
Veteran: 7-8 - typical knights, veteran troops, Guards units
Elite: 9-10 - pirates!
Ultra-Elite: 11+

About the same in my Pathfinder game, though not limited quite the same way.

Farmer Maggot would be a lvl 5 commoner, a master smith might be a lvl 5-7 expert and have two lvl 1-2 experts as apprentices as well as a lvl 3 journeyman. Bob the field hand is a lvl 1 commoner. Very few are above level 8, Rembrandt van Rijn might be a lvl 10 expert in painting, but such masters are few and far between.

The Auld Grump

 

[S'mon]

About the same in my Pathfinder game, though not limited quite the same way.

Farmer Maggot would be a lvl 5 commoner, a master smith might be a lvl 5-7 expert and have two lvl 1-2 experts as apprentices as well as a lvl 3 journeyman. Bob the field hand is a lvl 1 commoner. Very few are above level 8, Rembrandt van Rijn might be a lvl 10 expert in painting, but such masters are few and far between.

The Auld Grump

The big difference is that 4e minions die on 1 hit, whereas a 3e/Pathfinder level 7 master smith can take 7 times the damage of a level 1 apprentice before dying. This is something I dislike a lot; I think it's fine to build NPCs with hit dice, like the 1e AD&D DMG Sage (8d4) and Ruffian (2d8), but giving them actual class levels creates all kind of weird undesired effects, like the 70 year old master smith being (always!) vastly tougher than the 18 year old lads working for him. If/when I run 3e again I'll not use NPC classes, I'll assign NPCs hit dice commensurate with their combat ability.

 

[JamesonCourage]

The big difference is that 4e minions die on 1 hit, whereas a 3e/Pathfinder level 7 master smith can take 7 times the damage of a level 1 apprentice before dying. This is something I dislike a lot; I think it's fine to build NPCs with hit dice, like the 1e AD&D DMG Sage (8d4) and Ruffian (2d8), but giving them actual class levels creates all kind of weird undesired effects, like the 70 year old master smith being (always!) vastly tougher than the 18 year old lads working for him. If/when I run 3e again I'll not use NPC classes, I'll assign NPCs hit dice commensurate with their combat ability.

I play in a classless system that does not add any hit points automatically, and you only gain hit points if you buy them. I much prefer it to the "gain a level, free hit points" setup that is required of crafters, etc. So I'm in total agreement with you (I think, at least) in regards to dislike of that mechanic.

However, on the 18 year old versus 70 year old in regards to hit points. If we assume that both start with a 10 Con, and that the 70 year old craftsman is an Expert (I prefer PC classes, but we'll go with Expert since most people prefer it), while the 18 year old is a warrior, and we use your example (8th level vs 2nd level), we're looking at an average (if we don't max hit points at level 1) of 9 hit points (for the 18 year old) versus 8 hit points (for the 70 year old). If we max 1st level hit points, it's 12 hit points versus 10, in favor of the 18 year old still.

That's because the 70 year old is venerable, which gives him a total of -6 to Constitution, leaving him with a 4 (-3 modifier per roll). That means that even if the Expert 70 year old 8th level craftman gets the high side of average on his hit dice (all 4's), that his Constitution will lower it by 3 per level, leaving him with 1 hit point per level. The 18 year old warrior not only doesn't have this problem, but in all likelihood has a higher starting Constitution score.

Anyways, I know it's a complete tangent. And I don't like the way it works, still. Anyways, as always, play what you like

 

[NewJeffCT]

back in the olde days of 1E/2E, most NPCs were 0 level (acolytes if they worked in a church, warriors if they were the town guard (led by a level 1 fighter/sergeant), and basically just humans with 1-4hp who plied a trade listed under NPCs in the 1e DMG. People of importance usually had some sort of character class and their level depended on the situation.

In 3E, most people were first level commoners, though an experienced adult may be level 2 or 3 as a commoner. The town guard were commonly first level warriors, led by a 2nd level warrior/sergeant. The town blacksmith, armorer, weaponsmith, etc were all experts of level 1-4, depending on the situation. The town lord was usually some sort of low level aristocrat. (I loved 3E/3.5E's NPC system)

in 4E, I haven't really sorted it out yet. I would guess most townsfolk are some sort of level 1 or 2 minion. Town guard are the standard town guard from DDI, which I think is a level 3 soldier? The town noble is the level 5 noble from DDI, but a duke or king... not sure yet.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

The big difference is that 4e minions die on 1 hit, whereas a 3e/Pathfinder level 7 master smith can take 7 times the damage of a level 1 apprentice before dying. This is something I dislike a lot; I think it's fine to build NPCs with hit dice, like the 1e AD&D DMG Sage (8d4) and Ruffian (2d8), but giving them actual class levels creates all kind of weird undesired effects, like the 70 year old master smith being (always!) vastly tougher than the 18 year old lads working for him. If/when I run 3e again I'll not use NPC classes, I'll assign NPCs hit dice commensurate with their combat ability.

It never bothered me - the 7th lvl expert would still go down to a 4th lvl fighter, it just took longer.

Unless there is a reason to do otherwise I wave a hand and say 'he goes down in a spray of blood'. The outcome is not in doubt, aside from whether the smith will manage to mark the PC before going down. Unless the PCs have declared that they are killin' folk I will roll a Fort save after the battle to see if he recovers quickly, if that fails than I make another to see if he survives at all.

Now in a bar brawl, with nothing but fists and improvised weapons, I might well run the battle - the odds are more even, and the stakes a lot lower.

The Auld Grump, and that smith? He's got a right fist like a mule's kick!

 

[Celebrim]

The big difference is that 4e minions die on 1 hit, whereas a 3e/Pathfinder level 7 master smith can take 7 times the damage of a level 1 apprentice before dying.

Technically, the master smith can evade about 25 times the damage of the apprentice and absorb about 20% more punishment. This is because D&D hit points are abstract, and most the ones you have beyond those you gain a 1st level represent the ability to avoid or mitigate damage and not the ability to absorb it.

However, while its concievable that becoming a 7th level smith instills in you a hardness of frame and power of body and atheleticism such that you are better at evading or absorbing blows, I concede that it is abit wierd that the same is true of a master scribe or a master flower arranger.

...like the 70 year old master smith being (always!) vastly tougher than the 18 year old lads working for him.

Ok, so that isn't true. The 70 year old master smith is only tougher than an 18 year old lad if his health hasn't yet failed him due to disease, injury, and the toil of aging. The problem I have here is the difficulty D&D has with aging a character correctly. There is no reason why a 70 year old NPC should have more than a 4 Str, 4 Con, and 4 Dex unless you deliberately set out to create a character who has remained hale and hearty despite thier advanced age.

Besides, a 7th level character of any class is a super-heroic fantasy character. If you are higher level than Gandalf, then well, it's expected that you are elligible for the Order of the White Lotus or membership in the Silver Horde.