Upgrading classes

Page 13 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Bradd W. Szonye wrote:

> > I think Brad is alluding to the "can't gain more than 1 level from
1
> > adventure" idea, and didn't realize you're talking about a great
work
> > split into many pieces.
>
> Bingo. And I don't think it's legitimate to split it into pieces.

Of course not. I know *I* only got one level from my quest to put the
rod of seven parts back together.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"~consul" <consul@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com> wrote in message
news:d3oqgr$jkq$2@gist.usc.edu...
> Matt Frisch wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 00:24:22 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
> >> The old lady from Murder She Wrote, not a commoner?
> > I never watched the show, so I can't really begin to guess at her
skillset,
> > but likely not.
>
> Expert. Profession: Writer, well published and well-known. She was
> well-respected and advised a whole lot of folks on matters. She had to
study not
> just writing, but a smattering of chemistry, engineering, biology etc.,
for her
> books. I sort of remember her as the unathletic and pudgy Macguyver.

Your memory needs help.

-Michael
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:48:28 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
<Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Actually, Bilbo WAS a PC class- 'Burglar' (not exactly a Rogue, but close).
> It's the adventure that makes one a PC in the first place. He was on an
> adventiure, therefore he was a PC.

So Bilbo, who'd never done anything more adventerous than take a
stroll in the Shire's fields, and never done anything more strenous
than plan a twenty course banquet, was a PC-classed character
_beofore_ he walked off down the path after the dwarves? How odd. At
best he was an aristocrat without the martial training - IOW an
expert.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:52:31 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
<Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> > Unless, of course, they fight monsters and loot dungeons.

> When they start doiung that they stop being Commoners.

Not according to the rules they don't.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:tpju51pel5ab70lu2evtu8rloaq3v0l638@4ax.com...

>> Actually, Bilbo WAS a PC class- 'Burglar' (not exactly a Rogue, but
>> close).
>> It's the adventure that makes one a PC in the first place. He was on an
>> adventiure, therefore he was a PC.
>
> So Bilbo, who'd never done anything more adventerous than take a
> stroll in the Shire's fields, and never done anything more strenous
> than plan a twenty course banquet, was a PC-classed character
> _beofore_ he walked off down the path after the dwarves?



Sure, as a starting character he was a 1st level Burglar once he started on
an adventure.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd5u4k8.u90.bradd+news@szonye.com...
>> David Alex Lamb <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote:
>>> In article <ZGx7e.6145$lP1.2085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
>>> Michael Scott Brown <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>> "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:slrnd5qojr.nd0.bradd+news@szonye.com...
>>>>> If you're awarding more than one level's worth of XP, then I call
>>>>> shenanigans. If not, you'll need at least a dozen of these great works
>>>>> in a lifetime -- and that's a dozen works so great that they're worth
>>>>> maximum experience (+7 CR). That simply isn't believable. Even
>>>>> legendary
>>>>> geniuses like Leonardo didn't accomplish that much.
>>>>
>>>> Now *I* call shenanigans. Your assertion that a great work isn't worth
>>>> more than one level of XP (at an undefined level, no less) is something
>>>> you
>>>> have *utterly* invented, without any basis but your own twisted sense of
>>>> aesthetics
>>>
>>> I think Brad is alluding to the "can't gain more than 1 level from 1
>>> adventure" idea, and didn't realize you're talking about a great work
>>> split into many pieces.
>>
>> Bingo. And I don't think it's legitimate to split it into pieces.
>
> Why not?

Because I said so!

More seriously, it doesn't feel right, but I don't yet have a good
reason for it. Give me some time to rationalize my gut feeling.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:20:16 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
<mistermichael@earthlink.net> scribed into the ether:

>"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
>news:2tou511uh0fsr55rqb7eolsf3dt39443g9@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 00:11:33 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
>> >> Start with houses, work up to pyramids. Graduate egyptian engineering
>> >school.
>> >
>> > Which is exactly how commoners do it. Thankyou!
>> >
>> > Hint: you just lost the argument.
>>
>> Except that by receving such training, they cease being commoners and
>> become experts.
>
> <falls on the floor laughing>

Yea, whatever.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

~consul <consul@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com> wrote:
> Matt Frisch wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 00:24:22 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
>>> The old lady from Murder She Wrote, not a commoner?
>> I never watched the show, so I can't really begin to guess at her skillset,
>> but likely not.
>
> Expert. Profession: Writer, well published and well-known. She was
> well-respected and advised a whole lot of folks on matters. She had to
> study not just writing, but a smattering of chemistry, engineering,
> biology etc., for her books. I sort of remember her as the unathletic
> and pudgy Macguyver.

High-level commoner with good Int can do this, without the better saves
and improved combat ability of an Expert.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 07:20:27 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye"
<bradd+news@szonye.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> She was a novelist and a busybody: Profession (writer) and Gather
> Information. While she might be an expert, I think commoner is more
> likely.

Commoner and a decent Int (plus being human) will provide all the
skill points and feats she needs.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:8i9v519f1o2md6abj9gna7vsj2e5kebdf8@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 07:20:27 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye"
> <bradd+news@szonye.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>> She was a novelist and a busybody: Profession (writer) and Gather
>> Information. While she might be an expert, I think commoner is more
>> likely.
>
> Commoner and a decent Int (plus being human) will provide all the
> skill points and feats she needs.

You guys *do* realize how silly this argument has become, right? First of
all, she would be a combination of Dedicated Hero and Smart Hero (D20
Modern). Secondly, play GURPS already; D&D was not designed for this level
of detail when it comes to NPC classes.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

((about Jessica Fletcher))

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> You guys *do* realize how silly this argument has become, right? First of
> all, she would be a combination of Dedicated Hero and Smart Hero (D20
> Modern). Secondly, play GURPS already; D&D was not designed for this level
> of detail when it comes to NPC classes.

But this is so much more interesting to me than say figuring out the alignment
of Darth Vader. :)
--
"... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk ..."
--till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:41:33 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
<Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Sure, as a starting character he was a 1st level Burglar once he started on
> an adventure.

You are aware that the rules don't allow trading classes in for other
classes except in certain, carefully explained, circumstances, right?

More reasonable is that he's a Commoner-1 and after a bit of
adventuring he becomes a commoner-1/rogue-1. What's so hard about
that?


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:43:17 -0700, "Malachias Invictus"
<capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

>
> "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
> news:8i9v519f1o2md6abj9gna7vsj2e5kebdf8@4ax.com...
> > On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 07:20:27 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye"
> > <bradd+news@szonye.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
> >
> >> She was a novelist and a busybody: Profession (writer) and Gather
> >> Information. While she might be an expert, I think commoner is more
> >> likely.
> >
> > Commoner and a decent Int (plus being human) will provide all the
> > skill points and feats she needs.
>
> You guys *do* realize how silly this argument has become, right? First of
> all, she would be a combination of Dedicated Hero and Smart Hero (D20
> Modern). Secondly, play GURPS already; D&D was not designed for this level
> of detail when it comes to NPC classes.

Don't be a spoilsport.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:unl061lp3im9q8vsadt1gufet01od8khat@4ax.com...

>> Sure, as a starting character he was a 1st level Burglar once he started
>> on
>> an adventure.
>
> You are aware that the rules don't allow trading classes in for other
> classes except in certain, carefully explained, circumstances, right?
>
> More reasonable is that he's a Commoner-1 and after a bit of
> adventuring he becomes a commoner-1/rogue-1. What's so hard about
> that?


You can do that if you want. I don't find it satisfying because just about
all characters should have a Commoner-1 (or more for older characters)
unless they start adventuring young.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:25:32 +1200, Rupert Boleyn
<rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:

>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:41:33 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
><Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>> Sure, as a starting character he was a 1st level Burglar once he started on
>> an adventure.
>
>You are aware that the rules don't allow trading classes in for other
>classes except in certain, carefully explained, circumstances, right?
>
>More reasonable is that he's a Commoner-1 and after a bit of
>adventuring he becomes a commoner-1/rogue-1. What's so hard about
>that?

I'd like to make the case that he's an aristocrat-1, and that he
levels up to aristocrat-1/rogue-1 after he kills that spider in
Mirkwood.

o He's said to be good with all sorts of thrown weapons, and with bows
("shooting the wand"), and he doesn't have any noticable problems when
he picks up Sting and starts using it. (Simple and Martial Weapon
Proficiencies: Aristocrat has them, commoner doesn't except for 1
measly simple weapon.)

o He's said to be knowledgable about all sorts of things that he
hasn't experienced personally. (All knowledge skills: Again,
aristocrat has them, commoner doesn't.)

o He has a "business manner" for putting off people who try to borrow
money from him (Ranks in Diplomacy, Intimidate, and/or Sense Motive -
class skills for aristocrat but not commoner.)

o In his encounter with Gollum he uses Intimidate and Diplomacy (class
skills for aristocrat, cross-class for commoner), and later he uses
Diplomacy when speaking with Smaug.

o He's independently wealthy to start with - he doesn't have to work
for a living.

o He's connected with the chief families of the Shire and is part of
the "squirearchy" which is as close to a ruling class as the Shire
has.

o As an aristocrat he'd start with 8 hp, rather than 4 as a commoner.
This fits in a bit better with his survival through his adventures.



--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rupert Boleyn wrote:

> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:41:33 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
> <Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>
>>Sure, as a starting character he was a 1st level Burglar once he started on
>>an adventure.
>
>
> You are aware that the rules don't allow trading classes in for other
> classes except in certain, carefully explained, circumstances, right?

Wow, back to the original idea of the thread!!!!

Almost everyone is a "commoner" until they become "something more".
I'd still like to see a coherent rule for such upgrade options...
The default one of Commoner 1/Rogue 1 is somewhat unsatisfying.
YMMV.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Shawn Wilson wrote:
> "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
> news:unl061lp3im9q8vsadt1gufet01od8khat@4ax.com...
>
>>You are aware that the rules don't allow trading classes in for other
>>classes except in certain, carefully explained, circumstances, right?
>>
>>More reasonable is that he's a Commoner-1 and after a bit of
>>adventuring he becomes a commoner-1/rogue-1. What's so hard about
>>that?
>
> You can do that if you want. I don't find it satisfying because just about
> all characters should have a Commoner-1 (or more for older characters)
> unless they start adventuring young.

Or unless they spend their pre-adventuring years *training* to be a
Fighter/Cleric/etc...

-Will
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:31:18 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
<Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
>news:unl061lp3im9q8vsadt1gufet01od8khat@4ax.com...
>
>>> Sure, as a starting character he was a 1st level Burglar once he started
>>> on
>>> an adventure.
>>
>> You are aware that the rules don't allow trading classes in for other
>> classes except in certain, carefully explained, circumstances, right?
>>
>> More reasonable is that he's a Commoner-1 and after a bit of
>> adventuring he becomes a commoner-1/rogue-1. What's so hard about
>> that?
>
>
>You can do that if you want. I don't find it satisfying because just about
>all characters should have a Commoner-1 (or more for older characters)
>unless they start adventuring young.

Isn't this the idea that started the whole thread to begin with? A
commoner level is a small enough thing, that I see no problem with
letting a character exchange it for something else (perhaps for a few
hundred xp) if they've left the peacefull life of a commoner behind.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:31:18 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
<Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> You can do that if you want. I don't find it satisfying because just about
> all characters should have a Commoner-1 (or more for older characters)
> unless they start adventuring young.

That's correct, yes. However it need not apply to PCs - they are
already assumed to be exceptional, so allowing them to start in a PC
class is nerely part and parcel of their extraordinary nature.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Erol K. Bayburt said
[snip]
> I'd like to make the case that he's an aristocrat-1, and that he
> levels up to aristocrat-1/rogue-1 after he kills that spider in
> Mirkwood.

<holds up yellow card>

Off the field Erol, we don't need reasoned arguments in RGFD.

--
Rob Singers
"All your Ron are belong to us"
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 15 Apr 2005 13:03:54 -0700, "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> scribed into
the ether:

>
>Matt Frisch wrote:
>
>> >b) so one NPC class is somehow supperior to another?
>>
>> Name for me one meaningful way that the Commoner class is better than
>any
>> other class in the game.
>
>Irrelevant. they have better numbers, sure, but I don't see how that
>makes them innately supperior.

Then you have serious issues.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Matt Frisch wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2005 13:03:54 -0700, "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> scribed
into
> the ether:
>
> >
> >Matt Frisch wrote:
> >
> >> >b) so one NPC class is somehow supperior to another?
> >>
> >> Name for me one meaningful way that the Commoner class is better
than
> >any
> >> other class in the game.
> >
> >Irrelevant. they have better numbers, sure, but I don't see how
that
> >makes them innately supperior.
>
> Then you have serious issues.

If you say so. igh numbers represent something, though, and you don't
always want that somehting in an NPC. Comoners provide us with a good
DM tool to have someone who is good at what they do but still largely
infereor in a lot of ways. That's not a supperior or inferior thing.
it just makes them good for what the class was designed for. Psssing
judgment on it seems immature.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Chad Lubrecht" <chad.lubrecht@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:2l5161lkoojplcl2aj5af5p741f7lro18h@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:31:18 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
> <Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
>>news:unl061lp3im9q8vsadt1gufet01od8khat@4ax.com...
>>
>>>> Sure, as a starting character he was a 1st level Burglar once he
>>>> started
>>>> on
>>>> an adventure.
>>>
>>> You are aware that the rules don't allow trading classes in for other
>>> classes except in certain, carefully explained, circumstances, right?
>>>
>>> More reasonable is that he's a Commoner-1 and after a bit of
>>> adventuring he becomes a commoner-1/rogue-1. What's so hard about
>>> that?
>>
>>
>>You can do that if you want. I don't find it satisfying because just
>>about
>>all characters should have a Commoner-1 (or more for older characters)
>>unless they start adventuring young.
>
> Isn't this the idea that started the whole thread to begin with? A
> commoner level is a small enough thing, that I see no problem with
> letting a character exchange it for something else (perhaps for a few
> hundred xp) if they've left the peacefull life of a commoner behind.

That is a completely reasonable house rule for a "humble origins" campaign.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Erol K. Bayburt" <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fvv0615midsrmttqdpqqocbrgcc46582gp@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:25:32 +1200, Rupert Boleyn
> <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:41:33 -0700, "Shawn Wilson"
>><Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>>
>>> Sure, as a starting character he was a 1st level Burglar once he started
>>> on
>>> an adventure.
>>
>>You are aware that the rules don't allow trading classes in for other
>>classes except in certain, carefully explained, circumstances, right?
>>
>>More reasonable is that he's a Commoner-1 and after a bit of
>>adventuring he becomes a commoner-1/rogue-1. What's so hard about
>>that?
>
> I'd like to make the case that he's an aristocrat-1, and that he
> levels up to aristocrat-1/rogue-1 after he kills that spider in
> Mirkwood.

He gets nothing for the goblins or Gollum?

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rick Pikul" <rwpikul@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news😛an.2005.04.15.05.31.11.188897@sympatico.ca...
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:48:28 -0700, Shawn Wilson wrote:
>
>>
>> "Will Green" <will_j_green@yXaXhXoXoX.com> wrote in message
>> news:WZD7e.3538$716.3522@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>> Shawn Wilson wrote:
>
>>>> "Will Green" <will_j_green@yXaXhXoXoX.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:cG%6e.1752$716.460@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>>>>Don't be retarded. What fighting training did Bilbo have before
>>>>>he
>>>>>set out on his adventure? In what way was he "elite?"
>>>>
>>>> I think he was equal to any 1st level character short of a
>>>> professional fighter type. BAB 0 is BAB 0.
>>>
>>> Nah. He certainly wasn't a PC class -- like I said, they're
>>> *elite*.
>>> They're already hero-grade. Bilbo was just this guy. Total
>>> average
>>> Joe.
>>
>>
>> Actually, Bilbo WAS a PC class- 'Burglar' (not exactly a Rogue, but
>> close). It's the adventure that makes one a PC in the first place.
>> He
>> was on an adventiure, therefore he was a PC.
>
> Go check out his introduction again:
>
> "This hobbit was a very well-to-do hobbit, and his name was Baggins.
> The
> Bagginses had lived in the neighbourhood of The Hill for time out of
> mind,
> and people considered them very respectable, not only because most
> of them
> were rich, but also because they never had any adventures or did
> anything
> unexpected...."
>
> It was Gandalf that named him a burgler, and Gandalf was lying.
> Bilbo
> waa the first Baggins to do something like that, and he wasn't given
> much
> choice in the matter.
>
>>>> Then they wouldn't be Commoners, they'd be 'Burglars' or some
>>>> such.
>>>
>>> Unless they were Commoners.
>>
>>
>> Commoners don't fight monsters and loot dungeons.
>
> What was Bilbo at the start of _The Hobbit_ if not a commoner?
>
> --
> Phoenix

Maybe just maybe an aristocrat, but probably just a commoner with deep
pockets.