O-level characters are back?

NPC classes can be fun. I don't like it, but I'm not outraged, which is what I feel about most things in 4E.

Well I've just recently started DMing a game and have changed my opinion on NPC classes from indifferent to appreciative. So this is now just another thing to add to my pointlessly long list of things I don't like about 4th Edition.

Does that mean we get to kill them indescriminately?

You know call me paranoid anime fan, but it seems to me that you have stuck up a good number of posts recently whose entire purpose seems to be selling the imagery in 4E.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Or maybe its the lack of sleep and the chicken and icecream and the depression talking. Still.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Make. Me. Wonder.

I still dislike the D&D leveling system altogether.

I can't say I agree with that. I wouldn't run a party who just wanted to run about killing npcs ... and if they tried they'd get a reality check real quick, as militias and bounty hunters were sent after them ... not to mention the constant fear of being knifed in your sleep by a hooker.

If it were planescape, they'd learn even quicker, as there is always something bigger and badder just ready to take some loud talking berk down a few notches. (and of course, unlike the default DnD settings, Planescape doesn't really have such a thing as "pointless monsters waiting to be killed" ... well, unless we're talking about Xaositects)

I like NPC classes in some cases - I love that an extremely skilled sage like Factol Hashtar can be a 20th level expert. Not a wizard or fighter, but a legendary character in his own right. Whether a sage who has never experienced combat should gain hit dice is another question.

One of the key differences in 4th edition seems to be that NPCs don't follow PC rules, though, where one of the main premises of 3rd edition is that they do. So in 3e a NPC needed to gain levels in some class if they were going to improve their skills, while in 4e they don't. If you need an NPC to know a lot, they just know a lot, and you don't have to explain it.

They're getting rid of a lot of skills that they feel don't really need game definition, too, so a shoemaker doesn't need to be a 20th level shoemaker in order to make extremely good shoes. There's no Profession (cobblery) skill for them to have ranks in. They just make quality shoes, and that's all you need to know.

One problem for separating the mechanics of PCs vs. NPCs is what happens when PCs retire and decide to take up a trade? Or what happens when the village blacksmith has to take up arms against invading goblins? Its much easier to have the NPCs statted up.

When I handle NPCs, I generally let them earn a set amount without significant adventuring or whatever to emulate skill advancement. For instance, an NPC Leatherworker who spends a year working leather may earn 1000XP per year for typical work. This allows older characters to be justly more experienced; a leatherworker working for 25 years would be 7th level if he did nothing but routine work. Making masterwork items would give a 300xp bonus per item.

As far as gaining hit dice, I don't have a problem with that. Hit points are more than physical stamina. They also include personal resiliency, luck, etc. So a 7th level leatherworker would be a little tougher than a 3rd level leatherworker simply because they've been around longer and know a few tricks.

This can add some cinematic elements too, as the 1st level PCs' old mentor (parent, whatever) makes a stand to hold off the goblins while the PCs escape.

One thing I think 3rd Ed. did make more difficult is by combining all skills with the same mechanic, they made it less useful to buy up trade skills. Why bother putting points in Skill:Cobbler when you would rather have another few points in Search?

That's effectively what NPCs are in my 3rd edition games. I've never used NPC classes and frankly consider them a waste of page space. Why does the town baker need to be statted out? If the PCs for some reason pick a fight with him, it's as simple as 4 hp, +0 AB (1d6 damage for his improvised club), 10 AC and +0 saves. If he's in the militia, I'll give him a few extra hp, raise his AB by one or two and leather armor if he's expecting a fight. Why worry about anything more than that? Who cares how what his Profession (baker) bonus is?

TS

Agreed. I don't even use the Profession, Craft or Speak Language skills for PCs. If a player wants his character to be the Iron Chef of d&d or speak 17 different languages, it's not going to break anything as long as they have some kind of story reason.

I don't think they're saying that all characters who don't belong to adventuring classes have a single hit die. They're just saying that if they level up, they don't need to use PC rules to do it.

I suspect the MM or DMG will have stats for "typical guard" or "typical aristocrat," and they'll have multiple hit dice and a reasonable attack bonus.

Because in a feudal society, a properly raised aristocrat is presumed to be trained in the knightly arts. Fencing, at the very least. In the abstract D&D combat system, hit points represent ability to dodge, deflect, and parry blows, and ability to endure longer combats without becoming exhausted, able to withstand pain for longer and so on (natural armor class represents toughness of skin and bone).

This is just my opinion, of course. I don't actually know for sure what aristocrat stats will look like in 4e. That's how I'd do it, though - I'd make a typical aristocrat be moderately capable in combat, more than a peasant but less than a professional soldier. Individual aristocrats might be weaker or stronger, and can be adjusted ad hoc by the DM (by adding or subtracting hit points and bonuses) without worrying about what "level" they are.

I'll swallow the "aristocrats are trained fencers and duelists" angle to a point ... but still no one who hasn't been in a real adventure should be able to stand a chance against even a 5th level fighter.

As for the "No kings in 4E" comment, I wasn't aware of this ... I have read nothing about the implied setting for the new edition ... sounds like they're really trying to get back to a "sword and sorcery" feel ... which can be fine ... but kingdoms provide vast potential for political adventure ... are they saying that the official brand of adventure is now "hack and loot"? Okay ... so it probably always was ... but there were vehicles for alternate styles ...

Eh, whatever, not like it's going to change the way I'm doing anything ... and I guess they have to market toward the audience which will make them the most money.

This is why I buy from Indi companies these days.

I will defend this point as said NPC is over 200 and has focused her entire life on being a chef, her only maxed out skill.

as for zero-level character... meh. If they need to do something, they can. I actually find that profession can be usful for PCs and defining their relative skills, but most NPCs don't need to worry about it. The only time it really matters is when they are making opposed checks with the PCs.

Drake