Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AaronOfBarbaria" data-source="post: 6729325" data-attributes="member: 6701872">Thoughts from a guy that likes 5th edition just slightly more than my previously preferred BECMI and AD&amp;D 2nd edition:There is no reason, not one, to assume the rules for PC progress during a campaign have anything at all to do with the rate at which NPCs &quot;level up&quot; or with how many NPCs of what level the world might host.NPCs don't inherently have levels; the butcher in the village isn't &quot;Level 1 fighter&quot; or &quot;level 4 expert&quot; or anything like that, even that wise sage in the tower north of the city isn't &quot;wizard 18&quot; even if using the Archmage NPC stats to represent him if any are ever needed. So if giving them levels and assuming their progress through those levels matches the intended rate of progress through levels for PCs causes problems, just don't do it.I'm of the opinion that only special NPCs should even be considered for giving PC-class write-ups, and then their level should be assigned to fit whatever purpose they are meant to serve in the campaign, not some arbitrary &quot;well, this guy rules a dominion, so he must be at least 9th level&quot; thing. In my version of Mystara, for example, King Stefan Karameikos is a 13th level fighter not because I think his military career actually involved enough experience to reach that level, but because if any character in a campaign I'm running sees him in battle, that is the level of &quot;jeez, the King is one heck of a warrior&quot; he is meant to be - other kings in the setting that aren't meant to be fierce enough combatants to inspire a cultural belief that they are a reincarnated hero of legend, I just use the Noble or Knight stats for and call it good. Never, in any circumstance, thinking on the topic of how much XP they might or might not have gained.Separation of &quot;these are the rules so that playing the game is fun&quot; and &quot;this is how the world works&quot; is very, very important to me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AaronOfBarbaria, post: 6729325, member: 6701872"] Thoughts from a guy that likes 5th edition just slightly more than my previously preferred BECMI and AD&D 2nd edition: There is no reason, not one, to assume the rules for PC progress during a campaign have anything at all to do with the rate at which NPCs "level up" or with how many NPCs of what level the world might host. NPCs don't inherently have levels; the butcher in the village isn't "Level 1 fighter" or "level 4 expert" or anything like that, even that wise sage in the tower north of the city isn't "wizard 18" even if using the Archmage NPC stats to represent him if any are ever needed. So if giving them levels and assuming their progress through those levels matches the intended rate of progress through levels for PCs causes problems, just [I]don't do it.[/I] I'm of the opinion that only special NPCs should even be considered for giving PC-class write-ups, and then their level should be assigned to fit whatever purpose they are meant to serve in the campaign, not some arbitrary "well, this guy rules a dominion, so he must be at least 9th level" thing. In my version of Mystara, for example, King Stefan Karameikos is a 13th level fighter not because I think his military career actually involved enough experience to reach that level, but because if any character in a campaign I'm running sees him in battle, that is the level of "jeez, the King is one heck of a warrior" he is meant to be - other kings in the setting that aren't meant to be fierce enough combatants to inspire a cultural belief that they are a reincarnated hero of legend, I just use the Noble or Knight stats for and call it good. Never, in any circumstance, thinking on the topic of how much XP they might or might not have gained. Separation of "these are the rules so that playing the game is fun" and "this is how the world works" is very, very important to me. [/QUOTE]

Verification