Knight Background Question - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Wolfen_Fenrison Sep 17, 2014 14:47:45	Can a character with the Knight background equip his retainers and squire without them suffering penalty?
#2 Novacat Sep 17, 2014 16:38:48	The retainers are non-combatants. Whatever equipment you give them, they're not proficient in any weapons or armor.
#3 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:08:26	Novacat wrote:
#4 Yunru Sep 20, 2014 9:10:48	The retainers aren't adventureres and definitely aren't PCs. Thus the rules for PC character creation don't apply to them.
#5 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:13:43	Yunru wrote:
#6 Yunru Sep 20, 2014 9:16:52	Yes the warhorse gets all it's racial abilities and no more. Commoners and Nobles are both defined NPCs, with defined stats. Thus, you get what's in the stat blocks and that's it.
#7 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:17:38	For instance... If you are playing a High Elf and Have High Elf retainers... Where would it say those retainers do not get: Darkvision, Fey Ancestory, Trance, proficiency in Perception, an additional language and a cantrip? The way I read race, including commoners seems to indicate they should get these things.
#8 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:19:58	Yunru wrote:
#9 Yunru Sep 20, 2014 9:23:23	No, Commoners get their stat blocks from the DM Basic rules. Commoner Medium humanoid (any race), any alignment Armor Class 10 Hit Points 4 (1d8) Speed 30 ft. STR DEX CON INT WIS CHA 10 (+0) 10 (+0) 10 (+0) 10 (+0) 10 (+0) 10 (+0) Senses passive Perception 10 Languages any one language (usually Common) Challenge 0 (10 XP) Actions Club. Melee Weapon Attack: +2 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 2 (1d4) bludgeoning damage. Commoners include peasants, serfs, slaves, servants, pilgrims, merchants, artisans, and hermits.
#10 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:33:22	Yunru wrote:
#11 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:35:59	So your trying to say that a common elf does not have Darkvision? How is that logical? What do they suddenly get "mutated" when they become PC's?
#12 Yunru Sep 20, 2014 9:36:45	Right... so your DM can add them. Just like he could anyway by virtue of being DM. It doesn't change the fact that, by default, what you see is what you get.
#13 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:41:21	That is not totally RAW friend... Sorry. You can rule it that way. But there are clear rules (racial traits for NPC's I posted above) that offer contradiction to that. Nothing in RAW says you are totally right... Nothing in RAW says I am totally right... But, the option of either exists....
#14 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:43:27	Check page 53 of the DM's basic rules.
#15 Yunru Sep 20, 2014 9:46:36	Actually you are wrong, not me: Racial Traits. You can add racial traits to an NPC. For example, a halfling priest might have a speed of 25 feet and the Lucky trait. Adding racial traits to an NPC doesn’t alter its challenge rating. For more on racial traits, see the Player’s Handbook or the D&D player’s basic rules.
#16 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:48:55	Personally... I ALWAYS opt for logic when given the option as a DM. Races ALWAYS get their racial traits being an example. To do otherwise creates such vast inconsistancies as to simply be absurd.
#17 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:51:09	Yunru... Let's just say... I am glad I do not DM nor play with you... Your game would make little sense... Imagine all the dwarves running around blind in the mines... Funny. To rule NPC get nothing of their race is past silly...
#18 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 9:55:37	If you give NPC's racial traits... That should be acroos the board... Otherwise there the DM is just being mean...
#19 h347h50 Sep 20, 2014 10:41:01	TildenThorne wrote:
#20 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 11:22:50	Where does combat advantage come from? THEY DO NOT FIGHT... NOR WILL THEY ENTER DANGEROUS SITUATIONS. Seems like they ae intended to be more "stay at home friends" as adventure is dangerous (you do not bring a majordomo to "The Temple of Elemental Evil"). At best the skills a retainer (even in my examples) is going to use for you is to provide some out of combat ability... That is clearly stated in the rules. After all it is the ONLY background you CAN lose the benefit of (they will leave if mistreated). Having the retainers have a few skills would cause little disruption in the game. Soldiers can request horses or vehicles, etc. Researchers get access to knowledge otherwise difficult to obtain. As a DM I so NO issue with your retainer being able to forge you a long sword or help you with a carpentry project. Nothing in the rules prohibits this NOTHING! In fact (though optional) the rules exist to back up this idea. So if you think all NPC's need be unskilled and worthless, the benefit has no "benefit" and actually becomes a simple liability. You two are speaking from only one of the two possible, and yes completely legal views of the rules. There in NO place in all the RAW rules that actually states you are verbatum right, all the time... And I am not even invoking the DM is always right rule here. So until you can show RAW language that says I am wrong (without pulling the optional rule card)... Then nothing I am saying IS outside RAW. Sorry! If you do not like it... Do not use the idea... But everything I am giving examples for is in the books.
#21 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 11:17:16	To add to that, I would actually leave your game table gladly, if you ruled your NPC dwarves got racial abilities and a players did not... That is violates in game trust. To use rules in non-universal ways is one of the most abussive acts a DM can do... When I have done it in the past, I have lost whole game tables of players. It is just not "sportsmanly" surely you can see that. Now if as a DM, you did not like the ideas I presented and ruled ALL NPC have no racial traits, I would think your silly... but I would feel you were being fair... Though I would still leave the table and I would expect my players to do the same had I done so as DM.
#22 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 11:23:43	Also emphasis on MINE... They are MY retainers and NOT the DM's NPC's so... How do you figure that counts as player's do not get the choice? Can a player not buy barding for a warhorse... Same sort of "yellow bar" rule it is even in the DM's rules?
#23 Yunru Sep 20, 2014 11:31:20	Because the DM is the one who makes the world. Every character (hell, everything), with the exception of the PC is made by the DM. At best you would design them and run it by the DM for approval.
#24 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 11:43:46	That is the DM is always right rule and still does not by virtue of RAW over turn anything I have said... Give me RAW reasons beyond that one... That rule can smack ANYTHING a DM does not like... So for debates on rules as presented in RAW, that is a cheap way to back up a claim. ANYTHING is up for DM approval.
#25 Yunru Sep 20, 2014 11:51:26	Exactly, so you can only assume that you get the bare minimum.
#26 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 12:04:06	Because the DM is the one who makes the world. Every character (hell, everything), with the exception of the PC is made by the DM. At best you would design them and run it by the DM for approval. If this is how you choose to DM, again... Great! That attitude loses players at any table I have run or played at. Experienced gamers do not tend to like DM's who abuse this idea... Why try and agrue a point of interpretation of the rules? There is nothing in RAW that says my ideas cannot be implimented. To say I am WRONG is a bit of a falicy. It would be better to say, "I see how that could be done via the rules, but... I do not think I would allow that at MY table." Neither of us is wrong by RAW... We are both using interpritations of said RAW rulings. So try being more constructive, please, instead of "my way or the highway" when you cannot point to a RAW source for your assertions. Running by a couple of out-of-combat retainers with a few useful skills should NOT pose such a corrupting problem as to make a DM be as hardline as the language you provide here. Wow... My dwarf smith retainer can make me a sword at half the cost and with the use of time... Whoopie!!! Does that really break your fragile game? He cannot fight, will not follow me to dangerous situations (which is just about anything an adventurer does) and will leave if treated poorly... So even if he has proficiencies in battleaxe, hand axe, light armor, light hammer and medium armor... It does NOT matter. But, the proficieny in one of 3 tool sets (brewer, mason or smith) provides some VERY SMALL use for the character... Otherwise they take up space, bookeeping time and exist just to confuse other players and the DM.
#27 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 12:00:13	Yunru, why does this bother you so? Seems silly to me friend...
#28 Lord_Avalanche Sep 20, 2014 14:04:16	I think the NPC classes presented should at the very least have biological or innate features of their race such as darkvision, fleet of foot, ability point bonuses, lucky and keen senses. Otherwise you've got to wonder what sets an elf commoner apart from a human commoner: why/how did they both emerge from the Clone Factory with no defining features? Is there really just one Commoner race (the Epsilon Semi-Morons, maybe) that works for everyone? A brave new world, indeed. Is a half-orc commoner stronger than a human commoner (on average)? Can a halfling commoner hide behind a human commoners legs? I would say... yeah. Having said that, I am tempted to be more picky as a DM about what might be considered trained features such as martial proficiencies, and cantrips when it comes to commoners. I personally am not sure that every high elf commoner needs to be slinging fire bolts. Other DMs might see this as simply the nature of the race - highly and innately magical, so yeah, they do have cantrips. Others may have it written into their lore that all elves, regardless of caste, are entitled to basic weapon and spell training. To keep it simple, though, I will just add all racial/sub-racial features as suggested - including human ability boost - to NPCs as well. This avoids inconsistencies and awkward questions and it might make parties think twice before playing whack-a-mole with relentless-endurance-fueled half-orc peasants brandishing savage-attack-pitchforks.
#29 Novacat Sep 20, 2014 14:47:08	Guys, why are you arguing about this? The feature is clearly intended as a "work with your DM for the details" kind of feature. There is no 100% right answer because the exact nature of the retainers is up to the DM and player to determine during character creation.
#30 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 15:03:20	Lord_Avalanche wrote:
#31 TildenThorne Sep 20, 2014 15:04:04	Novacat wrote:
#32 Keendk Sep 21, 2014 7:02:44	TildenThorne wrote:
#33 TildenThorne Sep 21, 2014 8:18:30	Keendk wrote:
#34 Timborama Sep 22, 2014 8:05:03	TildenThorne wrote:
#35 Caliburn101. Sep 22, 2014 8:45:28	If a GM tried to make my retainers a clone-blank race without the racial abilities I would tell them to <<enter appropriate commentary on their GM'ing skills>> and then if they didn't change their mind, insist on EVERY NPC in the game not having racial traits. Why should my retainers be **** compared to the rest of the world? How can they possibly exist in a world where every other member of their race IS a member of their race, but somehow these few aren't? The squire is a non-combatant? Do you even know what squires are? Are you claiming they remain young and inexperienced all of their lives and yet happily continue to 'learn' how to be a knight from your character? Or is it that they get snatched away by the Plot Facists the moment they get proficiency to their attack rolls? Not that it's all bad I suppose - my Dwarf would have the fastest fake-dwarves around at 30ft movement... and my Drow retainers could see well in direct sunlight...
#36 Aldente Sep 22, 2014 11:15:40	I support the idea of the retainers providing some out-of-combat value. If they can't do anything, it becomes a terrible background feature. I'm completely ok with them providing some connections (e.g., the noble squire's family ties could open a few doors or one of the commoners might be a member of a guild), but I'm personally ok with crafting too. I think the benefit there is still minor enough that it doesn't upend anything (half-price health potions are ok in my book). I have concerns with them becoming combatants, and I agree with the language that indicates they don't do that. I would need my players to all agree that Bob is bringing along a squire who is going to fight and earn a share of the experience, and I'd be hard pressed to disallow another player from doing something similar without taking the knight background. It's just a direction I'd rather keep out of my game unless playing multiple characters was a general opportunity for any player regardless of background. Oh -- I also firmly support the idea that they should receive racial traits. And I'd give the commoners necessary proficiencies for crafting or similar activities to make that viable. This would all be part of a conversation with the player to make reasonable choices that fit their character concept and aligned with the type of gaming experience we're trying to maintain for our group. Cheers!
#37 TildenThorne Sep 22, 2014 16:35:04	Aldente wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Wolfen_Fenrison

Sep 17, 2014 14:47:45

Can a character with the Knight background equip his retainers and squire without them suffering penalty?

Novacat

Sep 17, 2014 16:38:48

The retainers are non-combatants. Whatever equipment you give them, they're not proficient in any weapons or armor.

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:08:26

Novacat wrote:

Yunru

Sep 20, 2014 9:10:48

The retainers aren't adventureres and definitely aren't PCs. Thus the rules for PC character creation don't apply to them.

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:13:43

Yunru wrote:

Yunru

Sep 20, 2014 9:16:52

Yes the warhorse gets all it's racial abilities and no more. Commoners and Nobles are both defined NPCs, with defined stats. Thus, you get what's in the stat blocks and that's it.

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:17:38

For instance... If you are playing a High Elf and Have High Elf retainers... Where would it say those retainers do not get: Darkvision, Fey Ancestory, Trance, proficiency in Perception, an additional language and a cantrip? The way I read race, including commoners seems to indicate they should get these things.

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:19:58

Yunru wrote:

Yunru

Sep 20, 2014 9:23:23

No, Commoners get their stat blocks from the DM Basic rules.

Commoner
Medium humanoid (any race), any alignment
Armor Class 10
Hit Points 4 (1d8)
Speed 30 ft.
STR DEX CON INT WIS CHA
10 (+0) 10 (+0) 10 (+0) 10 (+0) 10 (+0) 10 (+0)
Senses passive Perception 10
Languages any one language (usually Common)
Challenge 0 (10 XP)
Actions
Club. Melee Weapon Attack: +2 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target.
Hit: 2 (1d4) bludgeoning damage.
Commoners include peasants, serfs, slaves, servants,
pilgrims, merchants, artisans, and hermits.

#10

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:33:22

Yunru wrote:

#11

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:35:59

So your trying to say that a common elf does not have Darkvision? How is that logical? What do they suddenly get "mutated" when they become PC's?

#12

Yunru

Sep 20, 2014 9:36:45

Right... so your DM can add them. Just like he could anyway by virtue of being DM. It doesn't change the fact that, by default, what you see is what you get.

#13

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:41:21

That is not totally RAW friend... Sorry. You can rule it that way. But there are clear rules (racial traits for NPC's I posted above) that offer contradiction to that. Nothing in RAW says you are totally right... Nothing in RAW says I am totally right... But, the option of either exists....

#14

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:43:27

Check page 53 of the DM's basic rules.

#15

Yunru

Sep 20, 2014 9:46:36

Actually you are wrong, not me:

Racial Traits. You can add racial traits to an NPC. For example, a halfling priest might have a speed of 25 feet and the Lucky trait. Adding racial traits to an NPC doesn’t alter its challenge rating. For more on racial traits, see the Player’s Handbook or the D&D player’s basic rules.

#16

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:48:55

Personally... I ALWAYS opt for logic when given the option as a DM. Races ALWAYS get their racial traits being an example. To do otherwise creates such vast inconsistancies as to simply be absurd.

#17

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:51:09

Yunru... Let's just say... I am glad I do not DM nor play with you... Your game would make little sense... Imagine all the dwarves running around blind in the mines... Funny. To rule NPC get nothing of their race is past silly...

#18

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 9:55:37

If you give NPC's racial traits... That should be acroos the board... Otherwise there the DM is just being mean...

#19

h347h50

Sep 20, 2014 10:41:01

TildenThorne wrote:

#20

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 11:22:50

Where does combat advantage come from? THEY DO NOT FIGHT... NOR WILL THEY ENTER DANGEROUS SITUATIONS. Seems like they ae intended to be more "stay at home friends" as adventure is dangerous (you do not bring a majordomo to "The Temple of Elemental Evil"). At best the skills a retainer (even in my examples) is going to use for you is to provide some out of combat ability... That is clearly stated in the rules. After all it is the ONLY background you CAN lose the benefit of (they will leave if mistreated). Having the retainers have a few skills would cause little disruption in the game. Soldiers can request horses or vehicles, etc. Researchers get access to knowledge otherwise difficult to obtain. As a DM I so NO issue with your retainer being able to forge you a long sword or help you with a carpentry project. Nothing in the rules prohibits this NOTHING! In fact (though optional) the rules exist to back up this idea. So if you think all NPC's need be unskilled and worthless, the benefit has no "benefit" and actually becomes a simple liability. You two are speaking from only one of the two possible, and yes completely legal views of the rules. There in NO place in all the RAW rules that actually states you are verbatum right, all the time... And I am not even invoking the DM is always right rule here. So until you can show RAW language that says I am wrong (without pulling the optional rule card)... Then nothing I am saying IS outside RAW. Sorry! If you do not like it... Do not use the idea... But everything I am giving examples for is in the books.

#21

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 11:17:16

To add to that, I would actually leave your game table gladly, if you ruled your NPC dwarves got racial abilities and a players did not... That is violates in game trust. To use rules in non-universal ways is one of the most abussive acts a DM can do... When I have done it in the past, I have lost whole game tables of players. It is just not "sportsmanly" surely you can see that. Now if as a DM, you did not like the ideas I presented and ruled ALL NPC have no racial traits, I would think your silly... but I would feel you were being fair... Though I would still leave the table and I would expect my players to do the same had I done so as DM.

#22

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 11:23:43

Also emphasis on MINE... They are MY retainers and NOT the DM's NPC's so... How do you figure that counts as player's do not get the choice? Can a player not buy barding for a warhorse... Same sort of "yellow bar" rule it is even in the DM's rules?

#23

Yunru

Sep 20, 2014 11:31:20

Because the DM is the one who makes the world. Every character (hell, everything), with the exception of the PC is made by the DM.

At best you would design them and run it by the DM for approval.

#24

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 11:43:46

That is the DM is always right rule and still does not by virtue of RAW over turn anything I have said... Give me RAW reasons beyond that one... That rule can smack ANYTHING a DM does not like... So for debates on rules as presented in RAW, that is a cheap way to back up a claim. ANYTHING is up for DM approval.

#25

Yunru

Sep 20, 2014 11:51:26

Exactly, so you can only assume that you get the bare minimum.

#26

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 12:04:06

Because the DM is the one who makes the world. Every character (hell, everything), with the exception of the PC is made by the DM.

At best you would design them and run it by the DM for approval.

If this is how you choose to DM, again... Great! That attitude loses players at any table I have run or played at. Experienced gamers do not tend to like DM's who abuse this idea... Why try and agrue a point of interpretation of the rules? There is nothing in RAW that says my ideas cannot be implimented. To say I am WRONG is a bit of a falicy. It would be better to say, "I see how that could be done via the rules, but... I do not think I would allow that at MY table."

Neither of us is wrong by RAW... We are both using interpritations of said RAW rulings. So try being more constructive, please, instead of "my way or the highway" when you cannot point to a RAW source for your assertions.

Running by a couple of out-of-combat retainers with a few useful skills should NOT pose such a corrupting problem as to make a DM be as hardline as the language you provide here. Wow... My dwarf smith retainer can make me a sword at half the cost and with the use of time... Whoopie!!! Does that really break your fragile game? He cannot fight, will not follow me to dangerous situations (which is just about anything an adventurer does) and will leave if treated poorly... So even if he has proficiencies in battleaxe, hand axe, light armor, light hammer and medium armor... It does NOT matter. But, the proficieny in one of 3 tool sets (brewer, mason or smith) provides some VERY SMALL use for the character... Otherwise they take up space, bookeeping time and exist just to confuse other players and the DM.

#27

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 12:00:13

Yunru, why does this bother you so? Seems silly to me friend...

#28

Lord_Avalanche

Sep 20, 2014 14:04:16

I think the NPC classes presented should at the very least have biological or innate features of their race such as darkvision, fleet of foot, ability point bonuses, lucky and keen senses. Otherwise you've got to wonder what sets an elf commoner apart from a human commoner: why/how did they both emerge from the Clone Factory with no defining features? Is there really just one Commoner race (the Epsilon Semi-Morons, maybe) that works for everyone? A brave new world, indeed.

Is a half-orc commoner stronger than a human commoner (on average)? Can a halfling commoner hide behind a human commoners legs? I would say... yeah.

Having said that, I am tempted to be more picky as a DM about what might be considered trained features such as martial proficiencies, and cantrips when it comes to commoners. I personally am not sure that every high elf commoner needs to be slinging fire bolts. Other DMs might see this as simply the nature of the race - highly and innately magical, so yeah, they do have cantrips. Others may have it written into their lore that all elves, regardless of caste, are entitled to basic weapon and spell training.

To keep it simple, though, I will just add all racial/sub-racial features as suggested - including human ability boost - to NPCs as well. This avoids inconsistencies and awkward questions and it might make parties think twice before playing whack-a-mole with relentless-endurance-fueled half-orc peasants brandishing savage-attack-pitchforks.

#29

Novacat

Sep 20, 2014 14:47:08

Guys, why are you arguing about this? The feature is clearly intended as a "work with your DM for the details" kind of feature. There is no 100% right answer because the exact nature of the retainers is up to the DM and player to determine during character creation.

#30

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 15:03:20

Lord_Avalanche wrote:

#31

TildenThorne

Sep 20, 2014 15:04:04

Novacat wrote:

#32

Keendk

Sep 21, 2014 7:02:44

TildenThorne wrote:

#33

TildenThorne

Sep 21, 2014 8:18:30

Keendk wrote:

#34

Timborama

Sep 22, 2014 8:05:03

TildenThorne wrote:

#35

Caliburn101.

Sep 22, 2014 8:45:28

If a GM tried to make my retainers a clone-blank race without the racial abilities I would tell them to <<enter appropriate commentary on their GM'ing skills>> and then if they didn't change their mind, insist on EVERY NPC in the game not having racial traits.

Why should my retainers be **** compared to the rest of the world? How can they possibly exist in a world where every other member of their race IS a member of their race, but somehow these few aren't?

The squire is a non-combatant? Do you even know what squires are? Are you claiming they remain young and inexperienced all of their lives and yet happily continue to 'learn' how to be a knight from your character? Or is it that they get snatched away by the Plot Facists the moment they get proficiency to their attack rolls?

Not that it's all bad I suppose - my Dwarf would have the fastest fake-dwarves around at 30ft movement... and my Drow retainers could see well in direct sunlight...

#36

Aldente

Sep 22, 2014 11:15:40

I support the idea of the retainers providing some out-of-combat value. If they can't do anything, it becomes a terrible background feature. I'm completely ok with them providing some connections (e.g., the noble squire's family ties could open a few doors or one of the commoners might be a member of a guild), but I'm personally ok with crafting too. I think the benefit there is still minor enough that it doesn't upend anything (half-price health potions are ok in my book).

I have concerns with them becoming combatants, and I agree with the language that indicates they don't do that. I would need my players to all agree that Bob is bringing along a squire who is going to fight and earn a share of the experience, and I'd be hard pressed to disallow another player from doing something similar without taking the knight background. It's just a direction I'd rather keep out of my game unless playing multiple characters was a general opportunity for any player regardless of background.

Oh -- I also firmly support the idea that they should receive racial traits. And I'd give the commoners necessary proficiencies for crafting or similar activities to make that viable. This would all be part of a conversation with the player to make reasonable choices that fit their character concept and aligned with the type of gaming experience we're trying to maintain for our group.

Cheers!

#37

TildenThorne

Sep 22, 2014 16:35:04

Aldente wrote: