Why be a Commoner?

[the_mighty_agrippa]

Commoners are commoners because they have to eat. Most people, even today, don't have the time or resources to up & change careers, so they just keep on in the same type of job forever. Imagine having three kids and trying to find an apprenticeship to become an expert while still keeping the family fed.

PCs are supposed to be highly skilled.

 

[crazy_monkey1956]

Commoners aren't supposed to be an appealing option to players, or even non-players. They're the grunt labor force of the campaign world. My campaigns make life even harder for commoners because I've house ruled that commoners a) are illiterate and b) don't know common (as in the language). Common is uncommon in that it is a trade language for merchants and adventurers. All of this has no effect on PCs, it's just flavor. And, that's really all commoners are...background dressing.

Quentin

 

[Celebrim]

My campaigns make life even harder for commoners because I've house ruled that commoners a) are illiterate and b) don't know common (as in the language)

Commoners are illiterate in my campaign as well, but 'common' is such a useful fantasy trope that I don't know if I'd ever get rid of it. It's really hard to role play when no one can communicate, and the 'overcoming the langauge barrier' problem gets old in a hurry.

 

[rgard]

hey I have 2 levels in commoner.
let me tell you the HD and BAB change would make very little difference in my life.
while the craft (house) skill points have been of great use, the ranks in handle animal less so.
it is a little difficult to explain the knowledge skills (history), (gaming), (architecture)

Well said!

 

[Tzeentch]

I don't think it's very silly to ask the question of why these NPC classes exist. They are so bad that even the writers tend to ignore their intended purpose (mook jobs) in writing - hence the surprising number of low-level Fighters guarding walls and manning outposts and taking those jobs from the poor Warriors. You'll notice that the NPC classes are largely ignored and relative abundance of low level main classes assumed in the sourcebooks (Complete Warrior, for example, assumes lots of low-level Fighters in its magical warfare section). Eberron created an entirely new, pretty useful, NPC class because the existing ones don't even fit in the theme of standard D&D tropes, and ignores even that class a lot of the time

I hope that, if they still exist in 4e, they are cut down to at most 5 levels and given a modicum of a reason to exist (backbreaking Commoner labor doesn't even rate a good Fort save? Even those wimpy wizards who have never seen a callus or suffered the sniffles are tougher). As is they are just fodder for joke characters (level 20 commoner with skill focus (basketweaving), etc). Really there could be a single 5-level "Non-Player Class" that could replace all of the existing ones without a lot of work, assuming you want to keep the main classes out of reach of non-heroic individuals.

The only truly good thing the current system did was eliminate the lame 0-level NPCs from AD&D.

* I'm intrigued by this Dragon article that was mentioned, what issue was it in?
* Allowing Commoners/NPCs to "trade in" levels also is a cool idea (and at least gives a reason to run a "prequel" campaign where farmhands and the village herbalist find their destiny). I'll be stealing that and the xp for housechores idea in the future I'm sure for any "from the dirt" campaigns even if I don't use the NPC classes as presented.

Thanks for your commentary.

 

[green slime]

Because of all the l33t p0w34z and sk177z!

 

[Crothian]

Most races don't have racial levels so humans can't take levels in humanoid they have to be class. I imagine most characters with commoners levels didn't choose it, it was chosen for them.

 

[green slime]

Most races don't have racial levels so humans can't take levels in humanoid they have to be class. I imagine most characters with commoners levels didn't choose it, it was chosen for them.

You Naughty Marxist you! Next you'll be suggesting it is all due to upbringing/nurture instead of blood/nature!

 

[Crothian]

You Naughty Marxist you! Next you'll be suggesting it is all due to upbringing/nurture instead of blood/nature!

Actually, I'm pretty sure the NPC doesn't choose his levels: the DM does and for that matter the PC doesn't either the player does.

 

[Destil]

I like the commoner, expert and aristrocrat classes. I think they fit in pretty well with the assumptions of most settings.

Warriors and Adepts I have more problems with. I'd rather they just be lower level fighters and clerics. Eberron gives a good reason for them to exist and adds the magewright, which is good.

My biggest problem with the class is that it's far too good. I don't think sub-fodder type mooks should have to gain HD, saves or BAB to increase skill points. Because of this I allow commoners and experts to advance in skill points only (aristrocrats are supposted to be trained in combat/duals in most midevil worlds).

On the other hand I lothe humanoid Hit Dice. Humanoids should either have class levels or monsterious humanoid HD (I'm against meidum creatures with any racial HD, in general).