Post/Author/DateTime	Post
not Yoda 07-22-06, 07:59 PM	D&D lost it's flavor with the invention of the "Commoner Class". In fact the "Aristocrat" class is as poorly thought out. In previous editions of D&D commoners had 1d6 of hit points. They really only had a prayer of defeating very low level characters. Now your 7th level fighyer might suffer a terrible fate at the hands of an 11th level "Commoner" that drives a yam wagon. This serves to steal the thunder of your characters. Commoners should not have levels. If you wan't them to be tougher combatants give them levels of warrior or a PC class. When It comes to profession or craft skills 4 points and ability modifier is fine. They do not typically engage in the type of activity that results in XP. If they do they should have levels in a class that reflects this. In most campaign worlds there are enough high level pc's and monsters to make pc's feel vulnerable.
Dead_Karma 07-22-06, 08:04 PM	ummmm, icould be wrong, but i think the point behind a commoner class is the fact that well, the get the xp that they need to gain levels to be better commoners. just like an adventurer gets xp for adventuring. i think that plowing a field is like a cr2 common task that gains 4 said commoners something like 25 common xp. :) just joking, thought i'd post something trying to be funny. probably failed as usual. oh well
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 08:18 PM	Commoners get exp for fighting back pests (mice, rats, etc.) and vermin (boll weavels, corn borers, etc.) So, they do get some experience points...Plus there's always the "Defeat the halflings who have started to pick some of my fruit crop while they're passing through" by driving them off, style adventures... Hmmm...I should write an adventure for low level commoners and Experts...Maybe allow in an Aristocrat and Adept as well...Could be fun ;)
Dead_Karma 07-22-06, 08:21 PM	Hmmm...I should write an adventure for low level commoners and Experts...Maybe allow in an Aristocrat and Adept as well...Could be fun ;) that is a good idea. send an army of common farmers to go and defeat the shire 3 hills over. bbeg is a halfling with 20 levels in commoner and oh maybe between 5 and 10 in aristocrat.
Rhialto 07-22-06, 08:23 PM	Umm, you know, if you don't like them, you don't have to use them.
Shaggy_Shaggs 07-22-06, 08:23 PM	:rofl: 7th level fighter vs 11th level commoner? No contest, fighter wins easily every time. Commoner 11 HP: 11d4 (27.5) + 11*Con mod BAB: +5 Base Saves: +3/+3/+3 Feats: 4 Ability Boosts: 2 Weapon Proficiencies: 1 simple weapon Armor Proficiencies: None Fighter 7 HP: 7d10 (38.5) + 7*Con mod BAB: +7/+1 Base Saves: +5/+2/+2 Feats: 7 Ability Boosts: 1 Weapon Proficiencies: All simple and martial weapons Armor Proficiencies: All armor, all shields Where the hell did you get the idea that an 11th level commoner beats a 7th level fighter?
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 08:25 PM	that is a good idea. send an army of common farmers to go and defeat the shire 3 hills over. bbeg is a halfling with 20 levels in commoner and oh maybe between 5 and 10 in aristocrat.I'd make the BBEG a halfling with 8 levels as a commoner and then 6 as an Expert in cheesemaking...Seems he didn't pay the farmers what he owed them for their milk to make his cheese...
Dead_Karma 07-22-06, 08:28 PM	I'd make the BBEG a halfling with 8 levels as a commoner and then 6 as an Expert in cheesemaking...Seems he didn't pay the farmers what he owed them for their milk to make his cheese... :heehee good one when the farmers show up have the halfling use milk by products that's gone bad and use his milk intolerance attack.
Verelor 07-22-06, 08:32 PM	D&D lost it's flavor with the invention of the "Commoner Class". In fact the "Aristocrat" class is as poorly thought out. In previous editions of D&D commoners had 1d6 of hit points. They really only had a prayer of defeating very low level characters. Now your 7th level fighyer might suffer a terrible fate at the hands of an 11th level "Commoner" that drives a yam wagon. This serves to steal the thunder of your characters. Commoners should not have levels. If you wan't them to be tougher combatants give them levels of warrior or a PC class. When It comes to profession or craft skills 4 points and ability modifier is fine. They do not typically engage in the type of activity that results in XP. If they do they should have levels in a class that reflects this. In most campaign worlds there are enough high level pc's and monsters to make pc's feel vulnerable. Your argument is even more rediculously errant and meritless when you consider that: - Commoners almost never get past 5th level, let alone 10th. - A 5th-level fighter could defeat a 20th-level commoner (who I would seriously like to see done convincingly) with his little pinky finger.
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 08:34 PM	:heehee good one when the farmers show up have the halfling use milk by products that's gone bad and use his milk intolerance attack.He hits you with his Cottage cheese attack, save vs. Lactose Intolerance... :D
not Yoda 07-22-06, 08:35 PM	And what may I ask has the 8th level commoner been fighting to get xp?
not Yoda 07-22-06, 08:38 PM	Really, the main point is why have them at all.
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 08:38 PM	And what may I ask has the 8th level commoner been fighting to get xp?See Post #3
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 08:39 PM	Really, the main point is why have them at all.Why not have them? Even the downtrodden deserve some love!
Dead_Karma 07-22-06, 08:40 PM	He hits you with his Cottage cheese attack, save vs. Lactose Intolerance... :D what's the dc for that? i think maybe 15? or maybe it depends on the type of dairy. think we might be onto something. run modern might have the bbeg with that kind of attack. not yoda, we answered the question. rats, insects, and those pesky little halflings. :)
not Yoda 07-22-06, 08:42 PM	Why not have them? Even the downtrodden deserve some love! The downtrodden can form a Mob (see swarm) and get what they want... or hire adventurers.
Wolf_Boy 07-22-06, 08:43 PM	Don't forget xp for a succesful skill check. Even a commoner will wrack up a decent amount of xp over time that way. In fact I find the concept of towns being made up of 99% 1st level commoners to be pretty damn stupid actually. I mean seriously, it's not that hard to gain a level with simply skill checks that a person would make quite regularily over a years time. Not to mention the occasional challenges everyone faces in their day to day lives over their entire lives. It seems wholly unrealistic that 99% of the world's population is completely mediocre at basically everything.
Jancarius 07-22-06, 08:45 PM	Generally, if the commoner see's enough combat to advance past 3rd level, he starts taking levels in other classes. As far as I know, the only high level commoner in any published WotC material is that L17 elf commoner in Sharn: City of Towers whose like 475 years old. Talk about a waste of 5 centuries. Commoners are basically racial HD for the common races and little else. Also, commoners have 1/2 BAB, NO good saves, and no class features. What kind of fighter is going to lose to that?
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 08:46 PM	Generally, if the commoner see's enough combat to advance past 3rd level, he starts taking levels in other classes. As far as I know, the only high level commoner in any published WotC material is that L17 elf commoner in Sharn: City of Towers whose like 475 years old. Talk about a waste of 5 centuries. Commoners are basically racial HD for the common races and little else. Also, commoners have 1/2 BAB, NO good saves, and no class features. What kind of fighter is going to lose to that?He/she is just a slacker man, not everyone is motivated...He might have gotten more exp. if he would have gotten off of the couch to get his own nachoes...
Arivia 07-22-06, 08:48 PM	I really, really love the people who complain about an element in 3e without reading advent of 3e-Dragon. There was a letter in Scale Mail that nailed why NPCs have NPC class levels exactly. Essentially, with experience being given out for overcoming an encounter, NPCs have class levels so that they can be dealt with properly on the experience chart when overcome as a challenge. For example: A group of commoners blockade a road the PCs need to travel along. When overcome diplomatically, their 11th-level leader presents the PCs with experience equal to their level and their efforts. Example 2: Jabar the Merchant King is famous for besting all others in his mercantile schemes, having amassed an empire that could buy out the caliphate thirty times over. A player who gets the best out of him in a major dealing gets experience for defeating such a legendary character --- reflected in game rules as a 20th level expert.
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 08:48 PM	The downtrodden can form a Mob (see swarm) and get what they want... or hire adventurers.Where are they going to get the money to hire adventurers? Commoners would be your typical serf who was merely a subsistance farmer working the land of his/her lord for the right to have their house near the keep...You still didn't answer why not have them?
Verelor 07-22-06, 08:49 PM	Really, the main point is why have them at all. Because this is d20 D&D, where things actually get internally consistent once in a while. Not so ala Gary Gygax.
Dead_Karma 07-22-06, 09:23 PM	commoners: when you'd rather not kill you party members for xp
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 09:27 PM	commoners: when you'd rather not kill you party members for xpGraffiti found in a Dragon's lair: "Commoner, the other White Meat"
Jancarius 07-22-06, 09:33 PM	Because this is d20 D&D, where things actually get internally consistent once in a while. Not so ala Gary Gygax. Quoted for Truth.
not Yoda 07-22-06, 09:36 PM	Because this is d20 D&D, where things actually get internally consistent once in a while. Not so ala Gary Gygax. Are you saying d20 needs unneccesary rules to be considered fun? The mighty merchant has 40hp because he can price gouge better than anyone in the land? :rolleyes: What is with the Gygax bashing? I don't think I've ever seen why anyone insists on villifieng the man. Some people still play his version after thirty years. Not being perfect has become the calling card of humans everywhere. Are you immune to this stereotype?
Count Arioch the 28th 07-22-06, 09:45 PM	Hey NotYoda, you haven't answered to the fact that an 11th level commoner has no real way of beating a 7th level fightrer like you claimed. Answer to that by either stating why you think this, or retracting your comment before I consider any further argument from you. Once you've done that, you can answer to the claim that not being able to slaughter countless numbers of commoners with 1d6 HD robs teh game of it's flavor.
Verelor 07-22-06, 09:57 PM	- A 5th-level fighter could probably beat a 15th-level commoner (let alone your 7th to 11th scenario), and that isn't taking into account the fact that anything higher than 10th level has no business being a commoner at all. - 90 to 95 percent of commoners are level 1 or 2. Nuff said. - "Are you saying d20 needs unneccesary rules to be considered fun?" No, it doesn't, but a class table is not in any way an unnecessary rule; contrary, it is in the same recognizable format as all the otehr classes. - "The mighty merchant has 40hp because he can price gouge better than anyone in the land?" You are talking about an advanced level member of the expert class now, not a commoner. - "What is with the Gygax bashing? I don't think I've ever seen why anyone insists on villifieng the man. Some people still play his version after thirty years. Not being perfect has become the calling card of humans everywhere. Are you immune to this stereotype?" I do not bash Mr. E. Gary Gygax, he is a good man deserving of respect like everyone else. Love. ;)
not Yoda 07-22-06, 09:58 PM	While not likley to win, the commoner still poses a threat having enough feats to know how to use implements of war and have nearly as many hp.
allenchan 07-22-06, 09:59 PM	Commoners have higher levels solely so its possible for them to achieve higher skill checks like crafting things. I'd much rather have my local village blacksmith be a midlevel commoner then ANY levels of fighter, because only the PCs and important/powerful NPCs should have PC classes. You claim it steals the thunder of the PCs, I claim it does the exact opposite, by stressing the rare breed of the adventurer. ps: to those interested, also consider the VP/WP variant instead of HP, in which case even a level 20 Commoner would still have about 4 WP and die quite easily.
Iddig Ap Nil 07-22-06, 10:02 PM	Commoners have higher levels solely so its possible for them to achieve higher skill checks like crafting things. I'd much rather have my local village blacksmith be a midlevel commoner then ANY levels of fighter, because only the PCs and important/powerful NPCs should have PC classes. You claim it steals the thunder of the PCs, I claim it does the exact opposite, by stressing the rare breed of the adventurer. ps: to those interested, also consider the VP/WP variant instead of HP, in which case even a level 20 Commoner would still have about 4 WP and die quite easily.Actually, I'd go with Expert for the blacksmith, personally. For me, the commoner is the guy eeking out a living...Just barely, who hasn't picked up a tool more complicated then a hoe or shovel, or plow, who hasn't travelled more then 5 miles from his home, etc...
Count Arioch the 28th 07-22-06, 10:02 PM	And really, the whole topic is moot. a PC's interaction with nthose of NPC levels should be so irrelevant that it doesn[t matter if they're leveled, that they have a couple levels, or they have near godlike levels of power, your PCs simply shouldn't interact meaningfully with commoners to the point where ti becomes an issue.
Verelor 07-22-06, 10:03 PM	While not likley to win, the commoner still poses a threat having enough feats to know how to use implements of war and have nearly as many hp. Wrong. Totally wrong. An 11th level commoner has about half the hit points of a 7th-level fighter. He has a worse attack bonus He does not have the elite array, meaning much worse ability scores He has worse saving throws He has only 4 feats to the fighter's seven He has no armor proficiencies at all and is only proficient with a single simple weapon. In conclusion, an 11th-level commoner is completely outclassed by a 7th-level fighter.
Shaggy_Shaggs 07-22-06, 10:03 PM	And he keeps harping on hp... 10 gp says he made a significantly larger bet that he could take out a peasant in one strike with a poorly built character, lost, and is sore abot commoners being able to have double digit hp now.
Fiery Avenger 07-22-06, 10:06 PM	First of all, the Commoner NPC Class exists so that, in the event of an encounter - one has the capability to log and gauge how much Exp to give one's players. Secondly, commoners: when you'd rather not kill you party members for xp Is not only rather disturbing as truth, but quite lacking as a joke :P (Only kidding, it was quite nice) And last of all, Gygax was okay, but Verelor was right - internal consistency is of the utmost importance to me - I would hate to think how a party would fight anything not-monstrous without the NPC classes (a 1st level party can't take multiple 1st level fighters - but 1st level warriors? Works well enough.) and the Commoner continues this - it's a DM tool, nothing more, nothing less, and shouldn't be removed. That being said, it has no reason to stay - it really only exists for the DMs, and as such the Players really don't even need to know it exists.
not Yoda 07-22-06, 10:25 PM	I've seen more than one post saying that thier levels are irrelevant but nothing to justify the space they take up in the books. As for the argument that they are needed for calculating xp please note that if you agree that an 11th level commoner is no match for a 7th level fighter why on earth would you award xp for defeating them if they are so sub-optimal.
Arivia 07-22-06, 10:29 PM	I've seen more than one post saying that thier levels are irrelevant but nothing to justify the space they take up in the books. As for the argument that they are needed for calculating xp please note that if you agree that an 11th level commoner is no match for a 7th level fighter why on earth would you award xp for defeating them if they are so sub-optimal. Apparently I don't exist. *proceeds to Home of Imaginary Posters because she's tired and her Vampire game just wrapped up*
Dead_Karma 07-22-06, 10:36 PM	i feel so cheated. i was hoping that we would take this thread and come up with rather entertaining stuff. guess i'll go to the classes forum and start a thread whining about how the classes are all balanced. :D
not Yoda 07-22-06, 10:42 PM	I really, really love the people who complain about an element in 3e without reading advent of 3e-Dragon. There was a letter in Scale Mail that nailed why NPCs have NPC class levels exactly. Essentially, with experience being given out for overcoming an encounter, NPCs have class levels so that they can be dealt with properly on the experience chart when overcome as a challenge. For example: A group of commoners blockade a road the PCs need to travel along. When overcome diplomatically, their 11th-level leader presents the PCs with experience equal to their level and their efforts. Example 2: Jabar the Merchant King is famous for besting all others in his mercantile schemes, having amassed an empire that could buy out the caliphate thirty times over. A player who gets the best out of him in a major dealing gets experience for defeating such a legendary character --- reflected in game rules as a 20th level expert. Please forgive me for overlooking this post. :embarrass I only vaguely recall the article if you could please refresh my memory.
savant_warlord13 07-22-06, 10:46 PM	I have done away with the warrior class and the adept in my campaign, and NPC classes are only one level
Arivia 07-22-06, 10:46 PM	Please forgive me for overlooking this post. :embarrass I only vaguely recall the article if you could please refresh my memory. As I said, it was a letter to Scale Mail; the second part of my post was essentially a restatement of it.
Kresalak 07-22-06, 10:56 PM	Graffiti found in a Dragon's lair: "Commoner, the other White Meat" Commoner, the other other white meat! Commoner, it's what's for dinner! I want my common-back common-back common-back... ribs. And various other Fat Bastard quotes, subbing "commoner" for "baby".
Ezell Pike 07-22-06, 11:07 PM	I have done away with the warrior class and the adept in my campaign, and NPC classes are only one level I would give them three lvls. But yeah, that would about do it.
Dead_Karma 07-22-06, 11:15 PM	also if you have a creature large enough commoners can make pretty decent clubs. well, at leaset until they are beaten into a bloody pulp. still if said creature lives near a town then it has a decent supply of them, plus then the local ruler has a reason to hire adventurers. or did the adventurers put said creature there as a ploy to try and make money? :devil:
Archmage_Vall 07-22-06, 11:21 PM	Petrified 1st level commoners also make nice decorative statues, and bricks to make evil spellcasters' towers out of.
Dead_Karma 07-22-06, 11:28 PM	Petrified 1st level commoners also make nice decorative statues, and bricks to make evil spellcasters' towers out of. i like the way you think. don't forget to use their corpses for mortar for the road leading to said spellcasters tower. and someone wanted to know why commoner levels. lol
mathogre 07-23-06, 12:33 AM	First I skimmed the table of contents for MM4. No, really I did. Mundanes, you know. Night of the Living Commoners. Hmmm... a third D&D movie... Then I looked online at the ToC for PHBII. "Yes. I want to play an inferior that the Real Adventurers meet so I can get my butt kicked." I'm not sure I understand the point of this thread. If you're looking at commoners as NPCs from the DMG, I'll risk quoting that book: "Commoners make poor adventurers." They should serve as "spice" to the game, but only minor at that.
Dead_Karma 07-23-06, 12:37 AM	I'm not sure I understand the point of this thread. If you're looking at commoners as NPCs from the DMG, I'll risk quoting that book: "Commoners make poor adventurers." They should serve as "spice" to the game, but only minor at that. i'm not quite sure either. hence the reasoning behind my posts. for commoners do have their place, but ya know they take up to many pages in any book they are in. :D
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 07-23-06, 01:10 AM	I have done away with the warrior class and the adept in my campaign, and NPC classes are only one level So what exactly do your players face if they meet run of the mill orcs? Because those are warriors. Now all you can do is make them have a PC class, upping the challenge significantly, making them commoners, removing any sort of challenge whatsoever, making them aristocrats, which is stupid, or making them experts, which doesn't make sense.
ArcTan 07-23-06, 01:26 AM	D&D lost it's flavor with the invention of the "Commoner Class". In fact the "Aristocrat" class is as poorly thought out. In previous editions of D&D commoners had 1d6 of hit points. They really only had a prayer of defeating very low level characters. Now your 7th level fighyer might suffer a terrible fate at the hands of an 11th level "Commoner" that drives a yam wagon. This serves to steal the thunder of your characters. Commoners should not have levels. If you wan't them to be tougher combatants give them levels of warrior or a PC class. When It comes to profession or craft skills 4 points and ability modifier is fine. They do not typically engage in the type of activity that results in XP. If they do they should have levels in a class that reflects this. In most campaign worlds there are enough high level pc's and monsters to make pc's feel vulnerable. Then follow their advice and make almost everyone in the world a lvl 1 commoner. Look, like it or not, you can advance anything in D&D. You can give a kobold 300 HD, if you like (it doesn't say you can under Advancement in the monster entry, but mechanically it's feasible). That's just part of the modularity of the system, that classes and HD work in a predictable way. It doesn't mean every possible advancement makes sense, or should make sense. If you don't think a lvl 19 commoner makes sense, then don't ever have lvl 19 commoners. Problem solved. I've never actually had a DM attack the party with a high-level commoner anyway. They are ridiculously weak when you compare them to *anything with a similar amount of HD*, anyway.
ArcTan 07-23-06, 01:31 AM	I have done away with the warrior class and the adept in my campaign, and NPC classes are only one level This is awful wrongheaded of you. It means that you can't have, for instance, human guards at the BBEG's castle who are a realistic threat. Either they're one-level commoners and can't even do things guards are supposed to do, like wield swords, or you have to make them *real characters* with real PC class levels, which undermines the whole point of making PCs feel like they're better than ordinary folk. There should be a middle ground, when making a 4-HD guard, between 4 levels of commoner and 4 levels of fighter. That's what warrior is for. (And even if you want to balance it by simply reducing the number of fighter levels they get, handling warrior is much *easier* than handling fighter levels, which is the main reason they were created -- statting up a whole horde of PC-classed castle guards is a really annoying exercise.)
Rolof 07-23-06, 02:48 AM	There's a couple very good reasons for commoners and the other NPC class levels to advance... 1)Shopkeepers: Due to expanded rules and uses of skills, like diplomacy, if shopkeepers have no levels, they're push overs. You can change a shopkeepers attitude to 'helpful' with a DC (30 + shopkeeper's diplomacy skill) to receive a 10% discount on all bought items. The most a shopkeeper can hope for if they're only first level is maybe a +1 mod in charisma and + 4 from skill points. So you now have a DC 35. Your party bard will love you, and the whole group will have the bard do all their shopping for the 10% discount. (Or the sorcerer, or whoever the party "face" is. An eighth level diplomacy monkey could have +11 ranks, +7 mod in charisma [18-4, 2 bumps-1, eagle's splendor-2], skill focus +3, circlet of persuasion +3, halfElf +2, negotiator +2, and synergy bonus of +2 = +30.) 2)Smiths: Your party's fighter wants a masterwork sword? He better make it himself, no weaponsmith in the land is going to sell masterwork weapons, just maybe with bonus to metalworking that Dwarves get, they can make them. No masterwork weapons unless made by actual fighters means magic weapons will be in short supply, too. (Commoner 1 smith +1 int, +4 craft = +5. Masterwork DC is 20...how often do you see that happening? Plus the extra time, materials wasted on failed rolls...masterwork probably would double or triple in price.) 3)Kings and other rulers: In the older editions of D&D, any ruler was a force to be reckoned with. They had to be, if a king was only a 1st level commoner, they'd be assassinated with the greatest of ease. So every king was a 20th level fighter. I was actually HAPPY to see they changed this with 3.5 by coming up with NPC classes. Now there's mechanics to explain a ruler having a more reasonable number of HPs without being the biggest badass in the land. All the above roles would have to be filled by adventurers when they retire, or else everything winds up screwy. There is ONE thing I do find annoying though-knowledge checks. Nobody can achieve over 10 in untrained knowledge checks so a 1st level commoner has just as much chance of having some info about dragons as a 10th level fighter, since they both lack knowledge/arcana as a skill.
ArcTan 07-23-06, 06:54 AM	All the above roles would have to be filled by adventurers when they retire, or else everything winds up screwy. There is ONE thing I do find annoying though-knowledge checks. Nobody can achieve over 10 in untrained knowledge checks so a 1st level commoner has just as much chance of having some info about dragons as a 10th level fighter, since they both lack knowledge/arcana as a skill. It helps if you think of the Knowledge skills as representing specialized, academic knowledge about something, *not* all knowledge in general. It'd be nonsensical for a fighter to combat and defeat a dragon *in a campaign* and then for the fighter to come up against the same kind of dragon and have the DM tell him he doesn't know anything about dragons since he didn't put any points into Knowledge (arcana). For that matter, your character who has become a lycanthrope is going to know quite a bit about how lycanthropes work after a while, by virtue of *being a lycanthrope*, regardless of whether she has points in Knowledge (nature). Knowledge checks are rolled to see what chance you have of remembering a random useful fact about something *not based on your actual experience* -- something you "read somewhere". A fighter who's actually seen a dragon fire off its breath weapon doesn't need the Knowledge roll to know about it. Moreover, "base knowledge" that every reasonably well-informed person would know doesn't factor into Knowledge skills -- you don't need Knowledge (local) to know how to get to your house from the town square, or Knowledge (geography) to know what the capital of the country is. Knowledge purely and simply represents the ability to pull info out of thin air by virtue of having studied a lot, to say "Ah-ha! I remember -- dragons must wait this long after using their breath weapon to recharge it!" In other words, only make players roll Knowledge checks to see if they randomly know something they *have no other reason to know* -- otherwise just tell them.
Another Gnome 07-23-06, 07:09 AM	Concerning experience, commoners also form the bulk of any army. Sure, at 1st level they couldn't hit the broad side of the barn, but when their opponents are no better, it actually makes wars a lot more interesting from a mechanical point of view (at least until you start rolling dice :P ).
Verelor 07-23-06, 11:02 AM	I've seen more than one post saying that thier levels are irrelevant but nothing to justify the space they take up in the books. As for the argument that they are needed for calculating xp please note that if you agree that an 11th level commoner is no match for a 7th level fighter why on earth would you award xp for defeating them if they are so sub-optimal. Um, the space they take in the books!? You mean like 1/2 of one page? Nice argument. :clap: And if it even has a chance to threaten your life or is even the tiniest challenge, it warrants an exp reward. Concerning experience, commoners also form the bulk of any army. You're talking about warriors.
Grynn 07-23-06, 11:38 AM	You're talking about warriors.It depends. An army of professional soldiers is likely to be populated with warriors, but a conscript army or volunteer militia will have quite a few commoners in its ranks. They won't fight very well, but they can march in formation like everybody else.
Erloas 07-23-06, 11:39 AM	I'm sure the commoners get a lot of RP xp :) As it says though, that some things they do get them exp and they get better as they go, its just that they don't run into much to level up. It would seem though that no commoner would end up that high, mostly because if they are doing that much fighting or crafting or dealing with other people they would probably end up multiclassing to another NPC class. Though a commoner might get a lot of fighting in bar fights and such without ever becoming more then a commoner. As for all the feats they get, the DMG even points out that most NPCs would pick feats that aren't directly going to help them in combat. You aren't going to get a commoner that takes weapon focus greatsword. Maybe a commoner cook would take weapon focus spatula, but I don't think that will help too much in a fight. I think the advancing levels of commoners actually adds depth to the game rather then take it away like the OP implies.
an_idol_mind 07-23-06, 11:47 AM	I personally like the commoner and aristocrat classes. One problem I found with previous editions of D&D and AD&D was that everyday NPCs, like merchants and royalty that the characters run into, either had to be 0-level characters or had to have adventurer classes and levels. Now I can present a career diplomat or a respected old farmer of a community as someone who, while not having the skill to actually adventure, won't die if a fighter with 17 strength throws a rock at them.
not Yoda 07-23-06, 01:38 PM	To reflect a commoner or for that matter an aristocrat being better give them levels of expert. Commoner class is as much of a waste as the current grapple system. Edit: a commoner is the guy that does menial stuff like plowing a field. An expert is the blacksmith that has been appenticed or the scribe. Edit part 2: Blacksmithing can include armorsmithing, general blacksmithing (horseshoes and such) weapon smithing, and so on.
Androlphas 07-23-06, 03:12 PM	I can't believe nobody has mentioned demographics. In your typical small town, the chances of meeting an 11th-level commoner are pretty slim. On average, the highest level commoner in a small town is 8th level, and that's only one person. Let's say this hypothetical small town has a polulation of 1,000. Out of that number, 910 are commoners. The level breakdown for these commoners would be as follows: 8th level - 1 4th level - 2 2nd level - 4 1st level - 903 As you can see, high-level commoners are not that...well...common. This one 8th level commoner is probably someone remarkable. Maybe a farmer and part-time militia member who has defended his home against goblin raiders for quite a few years, and certainly not someone who would take lip from some cocky adventurers. Even so, his low attributes, hit points, and lack of any special abilities ensure that he's no match for adventurers of the same level.
Iddig Ap Nil 07-23-06, 03:14 PM	To reflect a commoner or for that matter an aristocrat being better give them levels of expert. Commoner class is as much of a waste as the current grapple system. Edit: a commoner is the guy that does menial stuff like plowing a field. An expert is the blacksmith that has been appenticed or the scribe. Edit part 2: Blacksmithing can include armorsmithing, general blacksmithing (horseshoes and such) weapon smithing, and so on.There ya go! You're starting to learn...Now, the reason for the commoner class is to have a person who's not very good at only a few things ;) Seriously though, historically there is precedence for a commoner "class", just as there is in fiction, mythology, and fantasy. The commoner is the rabble who sometimes appears out of nowhere to throw a random turnip at the despot and his soldiery. If you don't want to use Commoners when you run, more power to you. However, keep in mind that there are plenty others who do think that they make sense and have a place for them in their settings and I say more power to them. Neither side will enlighten the other to the truth of the matter, in the meantime, I've got a Halfling Commoner 8/Expert 6 Cheesemaker to build so that a bunch of lame-o farmers can try to overcome his not-paying for their milk ways... :cool:
Doomclown 07-23-06, 03:17 PM	Are you saying d20 needs unneccesary rules to be considered fun? The mighty merchant has 40hp because he can price gouge better than anyone in the land? :rolleyes: It's part of popular fantasy that people who are skilled are also exceptionally tough for no reason. Like how Batman can survive explosions because he's rich and knows karate. I guess his 15th level scowl is capable of protecting his face from shrapnel or something.
not Yoda 07-23-06, 03:20 PM	It's part of popular fantasy that people who are skilled are also exceptionally tough for no reason. Like how Batman can survive explosions because he's rich and knows karate. I guess his 15th level scowl is capable of protecting his face from shrapnel or something. I feel like I must point out the Vigilante prestige class here.
ZeronHitaro 07-23-06, 03:24 PM	About the only way I can see a commoner being a challenge for a fighter is if the commoner had Vow of Poverty.
not Yoda 07-23-06, 03:27 PM	There ya go! You're starting to learn...Now, the reason for the commoner class is to have a person who's not very good at only a few things ;) Seriously though, historically there is precedence for a commoner "class", just as there is in fiction, mythology, and fantasy. The commoner is the rabble who sometimes appears out of nowhere to throw a random turnip at the despot and his soldiery. If you don't want to use Commoners when you run, more power to you. However, keep in mind that there are plenty others who do think that they make sense and have a place for them in their settings and I say more power to them. Neither side will enlighten the other to the truth of the matter, in the meantime, I've got a Halfling Commoner 8/Expert 6 Cheesemaker to build so that a bunch of lame-o farmers can try to overcome his not-paying for their milk ways... :cool: So you agree to disagree. Or are you saying, Here is a better way to reflect on this? Commoner being a NPC begginer class that leads into another NPC class like Warrior :confused:
Iddig Ap Nil 07-23-06, 03:44 PM	So you agree to disagree. Or are you saying, Here is a better way to reflect on this? Commoner being a NPC begginer class that leads into another NPC class like Warrior :confused:Yes. To clarify a bit more, I'm agreeing to Disagree, but I'm also saying that the commoner is a good "beginner" class for NPCs, as people increase in "level" they get better at what it is that they do, for instance, I'm getting pretty good as a newscast director, but that's also what I do for a living. Prior to going to university to learn the basic skills for that, I was a low-skill employee in a factory, but I was pretty good at my job there as well. I'd wager I'm probably pretty close to Commoner (factory worker) 6/Expert (newscast Director) 4 at the moment if I were to pin a class or two on me. I stopped my "level advancement" as a commner when I went to school to receive specialized training in my present profession (tech schools work just as well as universities, by the way). If you were to take a setting based on the Dark Ages, most of the populace would be some form of commoner, with other NPC classes thrown in for good measure, such that a lad who grew up on a farm, but was then apprenticed to the local smith might become a Commoner 4/Expert (smith) 1. The nobleman's son might be an Aristocrat/Warrior (to show his martial training that he gets, unless there is a need for a PC class to be added in, then he might be an Aristocrat/Fighter, or an Aristocrat/Cleric, and so on. I certainly don't recommend taking more then, say 10 levels as a commoner, as you say, that would be just silly, but there's nothing wrong with using it to model a Farmer who's never done anything else, a child just starting to learn a trade as an apprentice, or even the Village Idiot who really has no skills of measurable worth.
CryoSilver 07-23-06, 03:50 PM	Steve, the Uncommon Commoner (http://www.sylnae.net/3eprofiler/view.php?id=29683) Steve is the world's most famous and amazing dirt farmer. What few know about him though, is that as a child, he was abducted by ninjas, who trained him the use of the spiked chain, the better to protect his dirt farm from those who would steal his precious dirt. After years of fighting off would-be dirt thieves, Steve became more and more powerful and skilled, both in the srt of dirt farming, and in the use of his spiked chain.
Dead_Karma 07-23-06, 04:58 PM	course to make things interesting the paragon template from the epic level handbook could be applied to the commoner.
Iddig Ap Nil 07-23-06, 05:01 PM	course to make things interesting the paragon template from the epic level handbook could be applied to the commoner.YES! The Halfling will be a Paragon Commoner!!
Dead_Karma 07-23-06, 05:18 PM	how about a paragon half fiend/half dragon/war forged/Halfling Commoner 8/Expert 6 Cheesemaker halfling? that should be simple enough for those farmers. :devil:
Iddig Ap Nil 07-23-06, 05:22 PM	how about a paragon half fiend/half dragon/war forged/Halfling Commoner 8/Expert 6 Cheesemaker halfling? that should be simple enough for those farmers. :devil:I don't have any Eberron books...So Warforged is right out... :weep:
Dead_Karma 07-23-06, 06:01 PM	I don't have any Eberron books...So Warforged is right out... :weep: yeah cause i think otherwise you need the mm3
Iddig Ap Nil 07-23-06, 06:15 PM	yeah cause i think otherwise you need the mm3Don't even have that :D
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 07-23-06, 09:12 PM	It's part of popular fantasy that people who are skilled are also exceptionally tough for no reason. Like how Batman can survive explosions because he's rich and knows karate. I guess his 15th level scowl is capable of protecting his face from shrapnel or something. Batman survives explosions because he's wearing body armor.
High Octane 07-23-06, 09:43 PM	Batman survives explosions because he's wearing body armor. No Batman survives because he is @#$%ING BATMAN! You explain any action Batman is capable of by saying "HE'S BATMAN!" The sooner everyone understands this, the better.
Aeolus91 07-23-06, 11:06 PM	Plus Batman's got foam abs and pecs to help cushion the blast. :D Commoners get to high levels through story XP, bringing in a successful harvest for example, or taking part in a mob that burns down a local grave-robbing scientist's castle. Plus some commoners don't take levels in other classes because there's no one to train them. You can't become a fighter without a sargeant to train you (or going to Fighter's Camp '86). You can't be a wizard, or a druid, or a cleric, you can't even become an Expert unless you have someone to apprentice under! The commoner class is what you take when you level up and have nobody to teach you anything new. The above is IMHO, of course. Rawr! :dragon:
Manic Man 07-23-06, 11:13 PM	Steve, the Uncommon Commoner (http://www.sylnae.net/3eprofiler/view.php?id=29683) Steve is the world's most famous and amazing dirt farmer. What few know about him though, is that as a child, he was abducted by ninjas, who trained him the use of the spiked chain, the better to protect his dirt farm from those who would steal his precious dirt. After years of fighting off would-be dirt thieves, Steve became more and more powerful and skilled, both in the srt of dirt farming, and in the use of his spiked chain. :pile: those silly ninjas, they should have tested him for ninjahood, with his stats he would be a worthy Ninja farmer
Manic Man 07-23-06, 11:16 PM	About the only way I can see a commoner being a challenge for a fighter is if the commoner had Vow of Poverty. Well the commoner doesn't give up much to take the feat, he's poor enough as it is :P
Dead_Karma 07-24-06, 12:23 AM	batman survies becauese he's the heroe, and the main character of the batman stories. it'd also work if he was the archvillan, but they wanted hiom to be good
enlightened 07-24-06, 02:47 AM	I know that everybody handles the issue differently in their games, but if you don't allow common people to have different levels of ability (i.e. varying levels of the class "commoner"), then it creates a situation in which a 50 year old farmer who has been working on a farm for 38 years (since he was 12) is no better at farming (Profession:farmer) than his 12 year old grandson who just started to work. In the world that we play in, the average adult is about a 10th level something(commoner6/expert3/cleric1, etc.). And the average orc is a warrior3/barbarian2. ........different strokes. :)
Potato_Dragon 07-24-06, 03:27 AM	I came up with an idea once that potentially solves 3 things that some people might consider problems - the commoner class, front-loading, and limited flexibilty among 1st-level characters. It would involve a lot of playtesting to make sure things are balanced, though. Basically, the classes lose a lot of the stuff that they gain at 1st level (for example, a fighter probably won't automatically gain proficiency in all weapons and armor) and get only half maximum hp for 1st level, and only 1x skill points instead of 4x. One assigns them "backgrounds", which represents the things they learned growing up. This gives them bonus hp (1d4 to 1d8, depending on the background) and skill points, specific feats, etc. This way, you can make a barbarian wizard without ever taking levels in the barbarian class, and a commoner can simply be someone who has a background (probably peasant) but no levels whatsoever - a true 0th-level character. This probably eliminates a need for the warrior class as well - a common soldier just has a "warrior background" like a typical fighter or paladin, but nothing else, and anyone who gets good at fighting with weapons and armor should probably just take levels in fighter. The expert, aristocrat, and adept probably should stay, though I'd prefer to beef them up a little bit, noncombat-wise - not to make them on par with the PC classes, but to make them reasonably useful for the rare player who wants to add a few levels of those classes for roleplaying/flavor reasons, or to advance in a nontraditional role in combat-light games. Any opinions on whether such a thing might be a good idea?
Manic Man 07-24-06, 04:24 AM	One assigns them "backgrounds", which represents the things they learned growing up. This also gives them bonus hp (1d4 to 1d8, depending on the background) and skill points, specific feats, etc. This way, you can make a barbarian wizard without ever taking levels in the barbarian class, and a commoner can simply be someone who has a background (probably peasant) but no levels whatsoever - a true 0th-level character. There is something called Life Paths for Mechwarrior, the RPG extension for Battletech. Maybe you could take a look there for some inspiration
sidekick 07-24-06, 07:20 AM	Okay so I haven’t read much of this thread, as well I’m lazy and wanted to give my opinion as it is (always) the best ;). SO commoner’s stealing the thunder of adventurers? You must be using commoners wrong. Under the RAW outlook at XP for NPCs there simply shouldn’t be high level commoners. I mean how many are going to keep on levelling u pas commoners? They’re not. Sure their frirst 2 levels? Yeah okay, but after that if they’re getting all their XP from killing things, then as a DM I think you owe them some multi-class loving – say hello to the warrior or fighter class… High level commoners should be rare in the extreme. Sure 3-5th level. Okay that I can believe (as mayors or town leaders, skilled hunters etc). But an 11th level commoner? Nah. Unless… There is another way to look at it. In Eberron, NPCs have limits. There is only so much potential in certain people. BUT NPCs can ‘earn’ xp from doing tasks that are related to their field of expertise. For example Sharn has a 13th level NPC. She’s a chef. And a damn good one too! After 300 years of dedicating herself to the culinary arts, I can understand 11-13th level for an NPC. But those sorts of people are few and far between. In general most people are 1st level commoners, some are 2-3rd level. Very few should be higher than 4th. Also, keep in mind. An 11th level commoner is no warrior. They’re probably just the best teamster in the tri-village area. They’re not going to challenge a highly skilled and trained warrior (fighter7). I mean – would you? I sure woudn’t. That guy has kick ar5e armour, a BIGGG sword and a bunch of very mean looking friends. All that commoner can do is wield a pitchfork and is really good at craft(X) and profession (farmer). I really don’t’ see the issue. Thanks for listening to my random musings and happy gaming.
Another Gnome 07-24-06, 07:58 AM	It's part of popular fantasy that people who are skilled are also exceptionally tough for no reason. [off topic]That so reminds me of Spider-Man 2. Aside from Spidey himself surviving a trip through a stone wall by virtue of being strong, did anyone else find it odd that a superhero able to bench 10 metric tons goes and punches Doc Ock, a physically average and unprotected middle-aged human, full in the face repeatedly, and the guy doesn't even flinch? I mean, shouldn't a single blow have knocked his frigging head off..? Although in the movie's defense, at least when Doc was lifting heavy objects, there was always at least one tentacle rooted in the ground as far as I could tell, unlike in several instances of the comics where the legs of our average middle-aged man are apparently able to support the weight of half a building without breaking a sweat. :rolleyes: [/off topic]
Leilond 07-24-06, 08:38 AM	Come on! It look to be a silly rant! A city could have 50% of 1st level commoner, 30% of 2nd level and 20% of 3rd level... pheraps one or two higer level very skilled and experienced "rat hunters", PHERAPS Every NOW AND THEN you could encounter a well skilled "Weaponsmither" that can be higher level, only to have enought rank in "Craft(Weaponsmithing)" to create an exotic weapon (DC 18) in a belivable amount of time (+10 DC) and with mastery... The famous and great Weaponsmither all over the region or the like! There's no need to put 20th level commoner in the game at all... And more Wich feat do you chose for commoners? 2 or 3 Skill focus Diligent Negotiator Persuasive These are the feats for commoners If you give them "Weapon focus", "Dodge"... and lots of combat releated feat... well you're designig very bad your commoners!
OravennasBrother 07-24-06, 01:16 PM	What do you mean? 11th level commoners are vital for those parties that would rather NOT face an Adult Black Dragon just to get XP for a CR 10 opponent.* * RAW note - NPC's are worth XP as a CR one less than their level. If they have the elite array, they are worth XP as a CR equal to their level. On Demogfraphics - RAW a Small Town of 901 - 2000 has a single commoner of 4th to 16 level, and lower level commoners (to 2nd) based on the level of that one highest commoner. For a 10 level commone you also have 2 5th level and 4 2nd level. But for that rare 1 in 256 town with a level 16 commoner you have 2 8th levels, 4 4th lvels, and 8 2nd level commoners for a total of 15 and from anywhere around 750 to 1700 level 1 commoners.
HermitIX 07-24-06, 01:57 PM	I feel the need to point out that you don’t have to kill things to get Exp. You get Exp for overcoming challenges. Commoners have challenges in their lives they are just not the things epic stories are made of. Having a flooded cellar, finding a lost child, or making sure to have enough food for the winter, are all challenges that could give exp, with out combat. A level 20 commoner has spent his life doing minor things and has manages to become a little bit bad ass. Remember that our characters are the exceptional ones. Attributes of 9-10 are average. When you complain about only having 14 con, you are already significantly above average. So the non exceptional person can still improve them selves they just don’t get the turn on to outsiders, stop ageing, or throw lighting bolts.