D&D 5E What's the rush? Has the "here and now" been replaced by the "next level" attitude?

[GX.Sigma]

In AD&D, a pirate overlord sounds most analogous to a fighter lord, ie a 9th fighter whose has attracted their band of armed followers. Instead of a castle/hold, they've got a pirate ship, or perhaps a small fleet.

Oddly enough, the Monster Manual says "Buccaneers will always be led by a captain of 8th or 10th level." Presumably they spend all of 9th level building a castle before deciding they want to get back into piracy.

 

[Derren]

Now 3e & 4e are quite different. Both have skills systems as core. This changes the equation. Low-level characters cannot be an experts in their fields (barring cheap tricks like half-elf uber-diplomats). So in both 3e & 4e, lower-level characters have neither the combat skills nor the non-combat skills to justify the rank of "pirate lord". Using them to model "pirate lords" seems like an... odd choice.

You fail to mention what level of skill you consider appropriate for a pirate lord.
Ignoring the literal interpretation of "pirate lord", meaning a noble turned pirate, all what the title implies is that the pirate is recognized and has a lot of people, most likely a fleet, serving him (and he not being democratically elected like many pirates).
I fail to see how you can derive any minimum skill requirements from that. While basic competency is required to not lose the respect from his man (and 1 level of fighter certainly covers that), all what is needed is above average charisma and intelligence (for tactics). Neither must the pirate lord be the best fighter in the fleet nor the best sailor.

 

[Mallus]

I fail to see how you can derive any minimum skill requirements from that.

Let's try to derive them, then!

Question #1: What do you think a reasonable Difficulty Class range would be for the skill checks involved in making/keeping yourself leader of a hundred or so bloodthirsty, undemocratic pirates?

edit: this assumes either 3e or 4e. I've already conceded you can represent the non-combat abilities of a hypothetical pirate lord using a 1st/low-level character in the older editions. Even though, as [MENTION=6690511]GX.Sigma[/MENTION] pointed out, that's not how the AD&D Monster Manual chose to do it.

Question #2: How many hit points, and related combat abilities, would you need to stay alive as the leader a hundred or so bloodthirsty, undemocratic pirates, assuming both external and internal threats?

 

[Derren]

Let's try to derive them, then!

Question #1: What do you think a reasonable Difficulty Class range is for the skill checks involved in making/keeping yourself leader of a hundred or so bloodthirsty, undemocratic pirates would be?

Question #2: How many hit points, and related combat abilities would you need to stay alive as the leader a hundred or so bloodthirsty, undemocratic pirates, assuming both external and internal threats?

While you are the one who made up numbers without any explanation and thus you should be the one who needs to answer this question I will humor you.

1. You have a very wrong idea about pirates. They were probably the most democratic people during the Age of Piracy as captains were most of the time elected and had laws on their ship, including "social security". But ok, lets assume pirates are just a chaotic evil orc horde on a ship.

2. Assuming that the sailors are all level 1 commoners and experts 1 or 2 levels of fighter is enough to have way more skill than any of them. If they are all level 1 warriors, 2 levels are probably for the best. Of course that is only necessary if you hold them together by force. A unrealistic concept but you seem to expect it for some reason.
Otherwise, skill ranks in (naval) tactics and a above average intelligence and charisma is all you need, especially when you also got a letter or marque or otherwise governmental sanction or just be the owner of the ship.

3. The skill DCs entirely depends on your performance as captain. Screw up and you have a hard time to stay in power. Loot rich targets without much casualties and it is literally smooth sailing. As such no definite DC can be given. If you have any form of additional legitimacy as captain (election, birth right, endorsement of the previous captain) it gets even more easy.

 

[Mallus]

While you are the one who made up numbers without any explanation and thus you should be the one who needs to answer this question I will humor you.

Ahem... when talking about AD&D I did give you numbers: the default assumption of a pirate lord being between 8th-10th level, citing the PHB & the MM. Fair's fair and all.

1. You have a very wrong idea about pirates. They were probably the most democratic people during the Age of Piracy as captains were most of the time elected and had laws on their ship, including "social security". But ok, lets assume pirates are just a chaotic evil orc horde on a ship.

Oh, we're talking about real historical pirates now. I didn't get the memo. Or the goalpost shift. Regardless, I imagine real historical pirates elected captains based on their competencies, which in later D&D is expressed via level. Of which "4th" isn't very high, given most campaign settings I'm familiar. Certainly not high enough for someone labelled a "lord", unless of course the "lord" part is ironic.

We wouldn't happen to be discussing ironical pirates, would we?

2. Assuming that the sailors are all level 1 commoners and experts 1 or 2 levels of fighter is enough to have way more skill than any of them. If they are all level 1 warriors, 2 levels are probably for the best. Of course that is only necessary if you hold them together by force. A unrealistic concept but you seem to expect it for some reason.

OK, so we're talking 3e now, right. Expert & warrior NPC classes. Since level determines not only combat ability, but all other skill competencies via the level-based skill rank cap, a "pirate lord" with 1-2 fighter levels would be hard pressed to consistently make either skills checks or the combat rolls to keep their crew in line.

In fact, fighter would be the worst choice of class. At least a rogue would have the breadth of skills required for the job (if not the bonuses to the rolls).

Also, assuming the crew is mostly 1st level commoners & experts would make them less combat-capable than the staff of your average bakery found in a bad neighborhood of Sharn (the big city in the Eberron campaign setting, in case you didn't know). Who did these pirates pirate? Retirement communities?

3. The skill DCs entirely depends on your performance as captain.

The skills DCs depend on the situations the crew get into. What do suppose they might be for a "fighter lord'? Given the way you low-balled the crew levels, I think the issue here is you're using the words "pirate lord", but you mean something closer to "mediocre scrub captain leading a group of even scrubbier pirates", in which case I concede the point!

 

[Derren]

Ahem... when talking about AD&D I did give you numbers: the default assumption of a pirate lord being between 8th-10th level, citing the PHB & the MM. Fair's fair and all.

And if you would read my post you would have seen that I have replied to your 3 and 4E comment only (and mainly mean 3E because it actually has a skill system).

Oh, we're talking about real historical pirates now. I didn't get the memo. Or the goalpost shift. Regardless, I imagine real historical pirates elected captains based on their competencies, which in later D&D is expressed via level. Of which "4th" isn't very high, given most campaign settings I'm familiar. Certainly not high enough for someone labelled a "lord", unless of course the "lord" part is ironic.

We wouldn't happen to be discussing ironical pirates, would we?

We are talking about pirates. If you have some strange idea of bloodthirsty orc pirates which in every way deviate from the only reference we have, namely real world history, then you need to mention that.
And while you belittle 4the level as low and not worthy of the tilte lord, you fail to explain why and give an numbers which you think are reasonable. And I won't play guessing games with you. Its your turn to provide those numbers and an explanation of why you think those numbers are needed. And while you are at it, explain what a "pirate lord" exactly is.

And what wins you elections is primarily charisma with competency sprinkled in. And a fighter, especially if he has not dumped intelligence, certainly has enough competency to not fail in this regard. Remember, a captain does not have to perform every task required on a ship better than his crew. It doesn't matter how well he ties knots.

OK, so we're talking 3e now, right. Expert & warrior NPC classes. Since level determines not only combat ability, but all other skill competencies via the level-based skill rank cap, a "pirate lord" with 1-2 fighter levels would be hard pressed to consistently make either skills checks or the combat rolls to keep their crew in line.

In fact, fighter would be the worst choice of class. At least a rogue would have the breadth of skills required for the job.

You again fail to provide an explanation what skill checks you think are needed and why. Why fighter? Because that was Hussars point and because I gathered from your short description that you expect that the pirates can only be hold together by liberal and constant application of violence.

The skills DCs depend on the situations the crew get into. What do suppose they might be for a "fighter lord'? Given the way you low-balled the crew levels, I think the issue here is you're using the words "pirate lord", but you mean something closer to "mediocre scrub captain leading a group of even scrubbier pirates", in which case I concede the point!

And yet again you fail to provide numbers and explanations. Why is it unreasonable that most normal people are 1st level? And why does a title have a minimum level requirement? And even if, 2nd or 3rd level, compared to 1st level, is quite a bit better.

 

[tomBitonti]

The skills DCs depend on the situations the crew get into. What do suppose they might be for a "fighter lord'? Given the way you low-balled the crew levels, I think the issue here is you're using the words "pirate lord", but you mean something closer to "mediocre scrub captain leading a group of even scrubbier pirates", in which case I concede the point!

Here's the thing: Most of the skill checks are opposed checks. And a fighter has intimidate, which they would be alright at (but not great, unless they took skill focus in it, or otherwise burned a feat). A fighter should be able to browbeat buccaneers of lower level.

Then, whether that is a scrub crew would be according to the world model: In a D6 style system, a 3'rd level fighter is pretty decent. In a typical D20 game, 3'rd level is pretty scrub.

So you could do it. Still, I see problems, in that any sort of swashbuckling action is per the players and GM's invention. Which is fine; it's just not the way 3.5E or 4E usually works: There would likely be a lot of circumstance bonuses, with player ingenuity serving in place of the defined statistics of their characters. And, you could not have a dedicated first mate, since that is effectively the same as have a companion, and that requires Leadership. Also, any place that has fixed DC's instead of opposed checks could be a problem.

Thx!

TomB

 

[Derren]

Also, any place that has fixed DC's instead of opposed checks could be a problem.

Nearly all fixed DC checks you come across in 3E fall into the 10-20 range. A few ranks and a not dumped ability score is enough to perform well when taking 10 and taking 20, if applicable ensures success most of the time.
Don't forget, even though some people play it that way, skill DCs were not scaled in 3E.

And of course you could have a dedicated first mate. He would just not level with you and a lot more free will than a cohort.

 

[Mallus]

And while you belittle 4the level as low and not worthy of the tilte lord, you fail to explain why and give an numbers which you think are reasonable.

Paizo's pirate-themed Adventure Path "Skull and Shackles" featured a pirate lord as one of the central antagonists. I believe he was around 13th level. I don't recall a pirate captain lower than 7th or 8th level, plus comparable officers with various class levels.

The main antagonist for the 1st module was 4th level.

I think these are reasonable numbers for D&D-style pirates.

 

[Derren]

I think these are reasonable numbers for D&D-style pirates.

Because? A adventure part is scaled to a specific level range and of course the antagonists would be the indicated level to engage the PCs in fair combat. Yet that alone does not qualify as that level being the only appropriate level of characters who have the same title as said antagonists
It would also help if you would define what, in your mind, a "pirate lord" actually is.