D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

[Maxperson]

That's flat out untrue. In AD&D, adventurers were considered VERY rare. One of the bigger changes that came with 3e was the guidelines for leveled NPC's in a community. And those guidelines were heavily criticized as creating very high powered worlds.

But, no, leveled NPC's were certainly not a thing pre-3e. Mostly because anyone that wasn't an actual character class, had monster stat blocks. A Bandit wasn't an X level PC. A bandit had d6 HP and a completely separate stat block from, say, a trader.

No, classed NPC's were a very rare thing in AD&D.

Other than them being in the vast majority of 1e modules and supplements you mean. Without even combing through these modules for more...

DMG 1e: every single encounter table has character(NPC) for the PCs to encounter.
I1: 20 characters are listed to be used as PCs or NPCs.
I2: Has 33 listed in the first freaking meeting with the PCs, though only 4 are higher than level 0. The random encounter table included clerics. I saw a bard, and I didn't go very far into the module.
I3: Has at least one NPC cleric in it.
I4: Has three classed NPCs in it.
I5: Has five classed NPCs in it.
I6: Has ten by page 9 and just continues to climb from there.
I7: Has enough that it included an abbreviation legend for Cleric, Thief, Fighter and Magic User. I didn't bother looking further as it was a given that there would be plenty.
I stopped the I series at that point and looked elsewhere.
B1: 5 classed NPC bodies on page 9. The end lists classed NPCs and says that they are easier to find that henchmen. It then goes on to list the names and stats for 48 classed NPCs.

Yeeaaaaaaah, they're rare alright. 8 for 8 on modules, and listed on all the encounter tables in the DMG. I'm not going to look further as they are all over the place.

 

[Maxperson]

Huh?

Didn't I JUST post about T1 where virtually none of the NPC's use PC rules? Like about less than 10%?

I'm getting confused.

Sorry, but in a word where every village is going to have classed NPCs, it's simply a false statement to say that they are rare. Line a thousand NPCs up to watch a game and 100 of them will be using PC rules.

 

[hawkeyefan]

The Scarlet Brotherhood would probably be your strongest point. Funny, I have never used them. Castle Greyhawk is an adventure. The Circle of 8 is a group of archmages, none of which are sleeping with gods or who rule major city-states or nations... and their goal is essentially to maintain "balance" which appears to mean they are very selective in what they intervene in. Tenser the Archmage seems to be the most active. He is used as the hook to run into the Isle of the Ape and is central to the "plot" of a late 2nd edition adventure that appears to be trying to clean up after a really dumb idea involving Rary and Robilar pulling a FRealmsian move on the Circle of 8. In Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure, he and his henchmen are offered as Pre-Gens to play through the adventure. You don't have to use them but they still serve as a good guide for how capable PCs ought to be for the adventure. (That's why I like Pre-Gens. I don't use them for players. I use them to get a sense of what the designers think can handle the adventure.)

Your other remarks are just picking up bits and pieces of what I said that really make more sense in the context of the post. The trade route, for example, is one of the things FRealms gets wrong-ish in world-building along with strange political systems.

Castle Greyhawk is more than just an adventure...it's the iconic dungeon that gives the setting its name. The adventure that shares its name is garbage. I think most of is are willing to overlook it from a canonical standpoint. Not that canon meams all that much to me, but I know it's a big deal to others. I think even the most canon-minded of us would ignore the Castle Greyhawk adventure.

Which kind of seems like what you're doing here. You attribute Greyhawk story elements you don't like as being "FRealmsian" and you make concessions for over the top power levels and plot points wiyhjn Greyhawk, but decry them in he Realms.

Seems a bit odd.

And for the record, I like Greyhawk just fine. Zagyg and Iggwilv are both part of my campaign, along with a lot of other Greyhawk characters and ideas.

I just realize that the two worlds aren't really that different. They both owe what they are to Tolkien, with sprinklings of Lieber, Moorcock, Howard, and the other usual suspects.

Zagyg and Celestian are the only gods in Greyhawk that I know of who hang out, rarely, with mortals, namely Mordenkainen, Heward, Keoughtom, and Murlynd. This is mostly on other planes and usually involves Keoughtom who is a Quasi-Deity. Zagyg has few worshippers and is not particularly active on Oerth. Celestian is likewise withdrawn from Oerth and has few worshippers. Mordenkainen may be running with a couple of gods and quasi-deities but they aren't particularly active in the campaign setting.

Vecna seems to be a pretty big one that you're missing. St.Cuthbert was a mortal who ascended. Just having that established means that it's a game element and is something the PCs can attempt. Especially given what we know of the early games by Gygax and crew.

 

[MackMcMacky]

Mordenkain has mention and appearances in more products and modules than I thought, and in one module the players get to play him briefly for gods sake. Elminster doesn't ever come close to being played briefly to accomplish anything. As an information source and quest giver, he really doesn't do much.

Sorry, but no. There is a qualitative difference between asides to Mordenkainen and the way Elminster is used in several early Forgotten Realms adventures. You actually quoted me giving evidence to that and look past it. Mordenkainen is offered as a Pre-Gen character if the DM and players are so inclined. However, nothing requires you to use the Pre-Gens and no modification of the campaign setting or the adventure is required if you choose to use your own PCs.

 

[MackMcMacky]

And? As I said, it changes nothing about my point. You might as well bring up Karsus who dwarfs Elminster and makes him look like a magical child.

Your point appears to ignore that the actions of a Demi-God in the past do not present anything like the same dynamic as the actions of a powerful NPC in the present of a campaign setting.

Your arguments for similarity are oversimplifications.

 

[Bluenose]

Late 2E introduced that in the High Level Campaigns Book (IIRC). Basically about 1 in ten had a level in a class (lvl 1), 1 in a million was level 18.

Seems low but even in a pre industrial society imperial Rome would have had around 60 lvl 18 characters kicking around, 120 lvl 17 ones and something like medieval France could have had 20-30 lvl 18 NPCs.

If one person out of a million is level 18 and then you have twice as many at each lower level, that's a lot more than one in ten with class levels. One in four, roughly. Relevantly for this thread, it's pretty clear that FR doesn't bother to follow that rule, hugely inflating the number of high-level NPCs.

 

[MackMcMacky]

Castle Greyhawk is more than just an adventure...it's the iconic dungeon that gives the setting its name. The adventure that shares its name is garbage. I think most of is are willing to overlook it from a canonical standpoint. Not that canon meams all that much to me, but I know it's a big deal to others. I think even the most canon-minded of us would ignore the Castle Greyhawk adventure.

Which kind of seems like what you're doing here. You attribute Greyhawk story elements you don't like as being "FRealmsian" and you make concessions for over the top power levels and plot points wiyhjn Greyhawk, but decry them in he Realms.

Seems a bit odd.

And for the record, I like Greyhawk just fine. Zagyg and Iggwilv are both part of my campaign, along with a lot of other Greyhawk characters and ideas.

I just realize that the two worlds aren't really that different. They both owe what they are to Tolkien, with sprinklings of Lieber, Moorcock, Howard, and the other usual suspects.



Vecna seems to be a pretty big one that you're missing. St.Cuthbert was a mortal who ascended. Just having that established means that it's a game element and is something the PCs can attempt. Especially given what we know of the early games by Gygax and crew.

Why are you going on about the Castle Greyhawk module. Nobody, including TSR/WOTC/Hasbro, looks at that as anything but a glitch. The difference between Greyhawk's powerful people is that they were intentionally placed in the background whereas in Forgotten Realms they are in the background, always, and in the foreground too often.

Vecna wasn't originally in Greyhawk. His impact on Greyhawk depends on two modules. If you don't use those modules, Vecna is either just some lich in your campaign whose hand and eye are floating around causing trouble or Vecna just isn't used. That changed in 3E... or did it? Was Vecna's listing ever used as inspiration for 3E? I don't know. I didn't care for the illusion of options in 3E. I played BECMI, 1E, 2E, 2.5E, and now 5E. I tried 3E and didn't care for it. However, I am a player now in a Pathfinder game - I prefer AD&D and 5E over Pathfinder but that is what the DM is comfortable with.

 

[billd91]

Sorry, but in a word where every village is going to have classed NPCs, it's simply a false statement to say that they are rare. Line a thousand NPCs up to watch a game and 100 of them will be using PC rules.

So... 10% is somehow common enough to not be rare? Even the 1e Monster Manual defined the rare frequency as occurring 11% of the time. How rare do you think rare should be? Instead of 1 in 10, maybe 1 in 100? 1 in 1000? How much depends on splitting hairs over the definition of rare?

 

[Jester David]

So... 10% is somehow common enough to not be rare? Even the 1e Monster Manual defined the rare frequency as occurring 11% of the time. How rare do you think rare should be? Instead of 1 in 10, maybe 1 in 100? 1 in 1000? How much depends on splitting hairs over the definition of rare?

As a profession?
In the real world, the most common profession is something like 0.1%. Which, in several states, are teachers. Because, let's face it, everyone interacts with multiple teachers in their life (even excluding post-secondary).
Making PC classes 10% of the population means being a wizard is somehow more common than being an elementary school teacher. More people know magic than teach grades 1-6.


This was really a 3e problem, as it codified how often NPCs would have class levels. Moreso than other editions. And it was pretty damn high. Adventurers were common. The Realms and Eberron both ran with that.

 

[Demetrios1453]

If one person out of a million is level 18 and then you have twice as many at each lower level, that's a lot more than one in ten with class levels. One in four, roughly. Relevantly for this thread, it's pretty clear that FR doesn't bother to follow that rule, hugely inflating the number of high-level NPCs.

But that's only a (debatable) point for previous editions. Where are all those high-level NPCs in 5e books, now that a century, two land-altering catastrophes, and a magical plague have passed? As I said previously in the thread (although it's now well buried pages ago), a look-through of the gazetteer of the North in SKT shows that the area is now filled with commoners, nobles, scouts, tribal warriors, and veterans, with only a few more powerful NPCs scattered about (a couple of archmages in Everlund, a random vampire, and some dragons)...