GuardianLurker
Adventurer
Yep.
Like I said, I don't have a problem with the existence of hihg-level commoners in general.
But a 13th level commoner in a thorp of 20-80 just stretches the bounds of what I'd consider a reasonable *random* occurence.
So here's what the distribution would look like in the most extreme case:
1 3rd lv Adept
1 1st lv Aristocrat
1 13th lv Commoner,
2 6th level Commoners,
4 3rd level Commoners
1 9th level Expert,
2 4th level Experts,
4 2nd level Experts,
1 5th level Warrior,
2 2nd level Warriors
1 5th level Barbarian,
2 2nd level Barbarians,
4 1st level Barbarians
1 3rd level Bard,
2 1st level Bards
1 3rd level Cleric,
2 1st level Clerics,
1 16th level Druid,
2 8th level Druids,
4 4th level Druids,
8 2nd level Druids,
16 1st level Druids
1 5th level Fighter,
2 3rd level Fighters,
4 1st level Fighters,
1 5th level Monk,
2 3rd level Monks,
4 1st level Monks
0 Paladins
1 13th level Ranger,
2 6th level Rangers,
4 3rd level Rangers,
8 1st level Rangers
1 5th level Rogue,
2 3rd level Rogues,
4 1st level Rogues
1 1st level Sorceror
1 1st level Wizard
----
101 Leveled inhabitants in a thorp, which is supposed to have a max of 80.
With the exception of Druids and Rangers, the "Old Man" is roughly 2.5 times the level of the next closest PC class. And without giving either of those the magic 5% chance, the commoner would be the single highest leveled character in the entire thorp. BTW, if I don't give them the magic 5%, the thorp will have 0 rangers, a 3rd level and 2 1st level druids.
The distribution is just wrong. I can justify the high-level druids and rangers based on their connection to nature, and dislike of civilization, but for commoners?
And how do I justify Commoners being the *only* epic-level characters in the campaign? And how did the 28th level Commoner manage to live 378 years anyway?
Like I said, I don't have a problem with the existence of hihg-level commoners in general.
But a 13th level commoner in a thorp of 20-80 just stretches the bounds of what I'd consider a reasonable *random* occurence.
So here's what the distribution would look like in the most extreme case:
1 3rd lv Adept
1 1st lv Aristocrat
1 13th lv Commoner,
2 6th level Commoners,
4 3rd level Commoners
1 9th level Expert,
2 4th level Experts,
4 2nd level Experts,
1 5th level Warrior,
2 2nd level Warriors
1 5th level Barbarian,
2 2nd level Barbarians,
4 1st level Barbarians
1 3rd level Bard,
2 1st level Bards
1 3rd level Cleric,
2 1st level Clerics,
1 16th level Druid,
2 8th level Druids,
4 4th level Druids,
8 2nd level Druids,
16 1st level Druids
1 5th level Fighter,
2 3rd level Fighters,
4 1st level Fighters,
1 5th level Monk,
2 3rd level Monks,
4 1st level Monks
0 Paladins
1 13th level Ranger,
2 6th level Rangers,
4 3rd level Rangers,
8 1st level Rangers
1 5th level Rogue,
2 3rd level Rogues,
4 1st level Rogues
1 1st level Sorceror
1 1st level Wizard
----
101 Leveled inhabitants in a thorp, which is supposed to have a max of 80.
With the exception of Druids and Rangers, the "Old Man" is roughly 2.5 times the level of the next closest PC class. And without giving either of those the magic 5% chance, the commoner would be the single highest leveled character in the entire thorp. BTW, if I don't give them the magic 5%, the thorp will have 0 rangers, a 3rd level and 2 1st level druids.
The distribution is just wrong. I can justify the high-level druids and rangers based on their connection to nature, and dislike of civilization, but for commoners?
And how do I justify Commoners being the *only* epic-level characters in the campaign? And how did the 28th level Commoner manage to live 378 years anyway?