An Examination of Levels in the Conan game for GMs...

[Supplement Four]

How fast should a character jump from one level to the next? This is a question that we GMs have to consider when running our games. Here's my own thoughts on the matter, as I prepare to launch my Conan campaign.



EXPERIENCE

First off, the GM has a lot of control in determining when characters level in the Conan RPG vs. vanilla D&D. The experience system in Conan is completely different from its mother game from which it was sprung. There is no experience for killing monsters or finding treasure as there is in vanilla D&D. Experience is awarded based on goal attainment, risk, problem solving, and roleplaying. Where the D&D DM figures experience from pre-set numbers assigned to monsters and treasure, the Conan GM decides on experience awards based on what he needs it to be to keep his campaign lively and challenging.





STATIC UNIVERSE (in terms of Character Level)

Next, remember that the Conan RPG is a static environment with regards to levels. 20th level is the maximum level attainable. At first, that sounds like a bad thing, but if you take a good look at it, it's a very, very good thing. It means that the entire universe uses the same scale.

The D&D universe is dynamic. There is no max level. Therefore, with a low level adventure, you may find a typical guard to be 1st level, and his Sergeant to be 4th. In a mid-level adventure, those same roles may be filled with 5th level guards and 8th level sergeants. In other words, the gaming universe scales to the characters. It's a dynamic universe that changes to fit the PC's needs.

The Conan game takes the reverse (and imo, superior) approach. By having a level cap, the universe remains the same no matter the level of the player characters. A veteran guard that is 3rd level in one adventure should be 3rd level in later adventures, no matter the level of the PCs. The Sergeant of the guard should be 5th level, again, no matter what level the PCs have obtained.

This means, while gaming in the Hyborian Age, that low level PCs can't go into a town and wipe out the entire legion. Low level PCs may not be able to defeat even one guard. But, isn't that how it should be? "Low Level" means short on experience. Low level characters are not that experienced. At 3rd level, they should be able to go into a town and wipe it out (as they could in a dynamic D&D world where the guards are all 1st level).





MAXIMUM LEVEL

The next thing to consider is: The maximum level attainable in the game is level 20, but the game also states that characters of 12th level or higher are exceedingly rare.

This means that the universe is scaled between 0 level (commoners and such) and 11th level. This doesn't mean that the PCs, the exceptional beings that they may be, won't reach 12th level or higher. What it does mean, though, is that you can use the 0-11 level range as a gauge when setting levels to NPCs in your game.

A barkeep who's seen many brawls in his day might be the equivalent of a 1st level Soldier. One who's lived though all sorts of hell in his day, thrown out many an adventurer, and may have had some time in the village militia, might be a 2nd level Soldier. But, the vast majority of them are 0 level laborers.

Fresh faced new recruits in the town watch are typically 1st level. Veterans of some action are 3rd. The grizzled old sergeant is 5th. And, the noble lieutenant may be 6th. The general? Probably 8th, tops.

You get the idea.

The meanest, nastiest character around that everybody knows and fears is a 10-11th level character. They don't get much higher than that.

Scale the universe between level 0 and level 11.

(This is also a major reason why there aren't many published Conan adventures in the 10-20 range. Those adventures should be epics, indeed, with the fates of kingdoms, or the entire life of humanity itself, at stake.)





PC LEVELING SPEED

As I mentioned in the first topic, the GM has total control over the speed at which PCs will level. Given everything that's been said above, a good rule of thumb on level is that a character should average one level per game year if adventuring is fairly consistent. Thus, it takes one year of adventuring to get to 1st level, then it takes an additional 2 years to get to 2nd level. 3rd level means the character has about 6 years experience. And entire career, taking the character to 11th level, will take 66 years. Starting at age 15, that will make the character 81 years old.

This is a very loose rule of thumb. The GM may want to speed the PCs through the first 3 levels or so to get them experienced, and then slow down as the PCs grow from there.

There is a lot of factors that may speed or slow the leveling process, which the GM must consider on its own terms. PCs could very well race to 5th level and then stay that level for several game years. It's all in the GM's hands.

What I've mentioned above can be used as a figuring point, too. Some GMs may want to speed the characters faster than what I've outlined above. Figuring that the adventuring life of a character may end at age 50, the rule of thumb can be changed to one level per six months of adventuring. Now, the average to level 11 is 33 years, so a 15 year old, after a 33 year career, would be 48 years old and 11th level.





THE GM IS THE STORY TELLER

It's the GM's world, and he must determine what is best for his game, of course. I have no doubt that what I've written above needs to be tweaked here and there. I only mean it as food for thought--for GMs to think about when constructing their games.





Agree or disagree? What are your comments? :shock:

 

[Supplement Four]

A quick follow up to this line of thinking...

In order to scale the time spent in a level so that the lower levels take shorter periods of time while the higher levels take longer periods of time, and still give the GM a rule of thumb to use for doling out experience, consider that 1,000 experience points is equivalent to one hard month of adventuring.

Thus, a Soldier at level 2 will have 1 month or more of true combat experience (not garrison duty or off-time), since level 2 is obtained after gaining 1000 XP.

A third level character has 4 mos. combat experience. A sixth level Soldier has 35 mos. combined experience in acutal war conditions.

Looking at it this way, an 11th level character will have 220 months of actual experience. That's over 18 years, but we're talking about experience and not down time. Figure down time is 2/3 of a character's career, thus to get to Level 11 will take 55 years (which goes with what was said in post #1). Most NPC characters will not obtain this--which is how it should be.



So, on average, how long should it take a character to get to 2nd level? About 3 mos (1 mo. adventuring and 2 mos. down time).

Moving from 4th level to 5th level should take about a year (4 mos. adventure, 8 mos down time). But, moving from 1st level to 5th level should take about 5 gaming years (20 mos. combined adventuring with 40 mos. down time).





Thinking about charcter levels this way (in terms of how much experience XP really represents) sheds a whole new light on the way I look at NPCs.

A grizzled old 6th level war veteran in not just a 6th level Soldier. He's a character with almost 9 years experience!



More food for thought. :wink:





EDIT: Doing some more thinking on this, I think this concept is still a bit flawed and needs refining. Down time should increase with level. As it is, we're expecting a 6th level Soldier to see 6 mos. of action between level 6 and level 7, but it will take him a year and a half to get there.

What if he doesn't see 6 mos. of action? And, at 7th level, he's got to see even more action.

I'm thinking that the down time multipler should be the character's level. So, a 6th level character needs to see 6 mos of action, combined, over a 3 year period (that's the six mo. action difference between 6-7th levels multiplied by the character's level for down time: 21,000 - 15,000 = 6,000. 1,000 xp = 1 mo. action, so that's 6 mos. x level 6 = 36 mos., on average for a 6th level character to reach 7th level).

Given this line of thought, it would take, on average:

Starting age: 15 years old.

1st level character 1 mo. to reach level 2.
Age 15 with 1 mo. experience.

2nd level character 4 mos. to reach level 3.
Age 15 with 5 mos. experience.

3rd level character 9 mos. to reach level 4.
Age 16 with 14 mos. experience.

4th level character 12 mos. to reach level 5.
Age 17 with 26 mos. experience.

5th level character 25 mos. to reach level 6.
Age 19 with 51 mos. experience.

6th level character 36 mos. to reach level 7.
Age 22 with 87 mos. experience.

7th level character 49 mos. to reach level 8.
Age 26 with 136 mos. experience.

8th level character 64 mos. to reach level 9.
Age 31 with 200 mos. experience.

9th level character 81 mos. to reach level 10.
Age 38 with 281 mos. experience.

10th level character 100 mos. to reach level 11.
Age 46 with 381 mos. Experience.



Or, something like that. :wink:

 

[Supplement Four]

Another thought to investigate is the downtime multiplier.

A GM could set a "threat level" for the character's environment--this threat level will range from 1-10.

1 = 90% chance that character will not survive.
2 = 80% chance that the character will not survive.
3 = 70% chance that the character will not survive.
...
8 = 20% chance that the character will die.
9 = 10% chance that the character will die.
10 = 0% chance that the character will die.

So, a 1st level Soldier garrisoned at Tarantia might have a Threat Level of 9. It's pretty safe there, but there's still a 10% chance that the soldier will die in training, or in clearing up a bar fight, or chasing bandits around the captial city.

The character's brother, also a 1st level Soldier, is sent to Fort Sukai, out on the western Pict border. It's a pretty hostile area, so the GM decides that there's a 50% chance that the character will be killed. This corresponds to a Threat Level 5.



Use the Threat Level as a downtime multiplier to find out how long, on average, it takes to reach the next level.

The Tarantia Soldier should take around 9 mos to reach level 2.

(Remember, 1000 XP = 1 mo. action; Figure number of action mos required then multiply by the downtime multiplier. So--1000 xp to 2nd level = 1 mo. 1 x 9 = 9 mos.)

His brother, out on the Pict border, is seeing action at least weekly. His Threat Level is 5, so it will take,on average, that character about 5 mos. to reach level 2.

(This 4 mo. difference, eventhough it's almost half the time, doesn't look like much now. But, compare to characters going from 6th to 7th level and look at the time difference.)

What I like about this is that being stationed out in the "hot" areas really does lead to quicker advancement!





GM's can use this to determine NPC age, or to determine what level a 25 year old NPC should be. The GM can also use this as a rule of thumb to help him decide on how much XP to award the PCs, attempting to keep them to the average time.

So...if a GM wants to populate a fort on the Aquilonian frontier, he'll know that the higher level characters will be younger than their Tarantia-stationed counterparts.

If a character from the PC group leaves and is not played for a bit (let's say a priest went to serve a sanctuary somewhere), and the PC's run into that character two game years down the road, the GM can use this method to guide him on the Priest's growth over the last two game years.

Or, let's say the GM plays an adventure with the players, then skips 3 years ahead, when the PCs are three years older. This method can be used to give the PCs XP to represent that which the characters earned over the three year period.





It needs some work. I'm just brainstorming here. But, you get the idea.

Thoughts?

 

[Jacek]

Boy, I'm reading slower than you're writing it all

I like the direction you're heading, it's both good read and also seems to make sense. However from what I see it's only applicable to continuous campaigns and not to those one-shot-adventure series where the PCs jump around the entire world ceaslessly and yet the actual adventuring "action time" is limited to some several days each. But you're right that it may be a good reference point for creating NPCs.

Keep it up.

 

[Supplement Four]

However from what I see it's only applicable to continuous campaigns and not to those one-shot-adventure series where the PCs jump around the entire world ceaslessly and yet the actual adventuring "action time" is limited to some several days each.

I disagree! :shock:

In any adventure, the GM needs a captain of the guard, so he makes up one on the spot. During role playing with the PCs, they ask what he looks like. The GM describes him in his mid-30's.

Players can use the rule of thumb to guess his level. In Ophir, the guy probably started his career around age 17. The way the GM is playing him informs the players that he knows what he's doing and can handle himself in a fight. So, the guy probably saw action somewhere, sometime in his prior life, and got promoted to this safer post as guard captain of Ianthe. He doesn't have an air of nobility about him--that snobbish Ophirean presence that seems to bleed through all the Ophirean nobles. That means he's got about 18 years experience. At 1000 XP per mo, that's 216,000 experience points--but guessing the average threat factor for this guy is low (high in his early career followed by low in his later career), so let's go with an average threat factor of 7 (he's had an average 30% chance to die in his adventures up until know). Divide XP by 7, and it can be estimated that the guard captain has around 30,000 XP. That makes him about 8th level.

The GM can use similar figuring to level NPCs when populating his adventure for the player to play through.

But...the campaign where the PCs skip around can especially benefit from this type of thinking because the GM can easily figure how much XP to give the players in-between hops.

Let's say an adventure happens in Argos, and then the next one picks up in Turan, as the player go hopping all over the map. No problem.

1. The GM just guestimates how much time passes between the Argos adventure and the Turan adventure.

2. The GM sets a Threat Level to that time spent "off camera".

3. Viola! This system is used to give the PCs a little XP to account for their small adventures (the character growth that they experienced) in between the two adventures.

Keep it up.

Ideas are still perculating. I want to make the rule of thumb less fussy, more intuitive to use, probably basing on Threat Level, character level, and XP, as I've been doing, but in a quick, general method.

Let this simmer a bit.

 

[Azgulor]

In general - I agree.

I take a similar approach yet it's not quite as hard-coded as what you're suggesting.

My default assumption is the NPCs earn an XP per day. A 20-yr veteran is going to be higher level than a 18-yr old conscript.

Regardless of the specifics chosen, I wholeheartedly agree with the anti-D&Dism of scaling with the PCs. When the PCs are 1st level - they're not badasses yet. When the PCs are 10th level, they should be able to mop the floor with your average local guard. The king's elite troops on the other hand...

Overall, well thought out and useful ideas!

 

[Supplement Four]

My default assumption is the NPCs earn an XP per day. A 20-yr veteran is going to be higher level than a 18-yr old conscript.

I'm thinking of going with three factors: XP per week; Threat Level; and Character Level.

Threat Level modifies XP per week. The higher the threat, the more XP the PC gains, on average, per week*.

Character Level will modify time. Each level takes longer and longer to achieve**.







*We're talking about Average XP Per Week. A character could go two months without earning a single XP point, and then spend three days doing something that earns him 2000 points in total, then do nothing for the rest of the year. That's an average of 38 XP per week.



**This way, low level characters will increase level fairly quickly, not taking years at Level 1, 2, or 3. Every level, though, the process takes longer--it's longer to get to level 3 than it was to get to level 2. In effect, a character will rise up a few levels quickly and then stay at a level for a good while.





Example of what I'm thinking.

Threat Level is 1-10, representing a general percentage chance that the character could be killed doing what he's doing. Threat Level 1 means a 10% chance. Threat Level 5 means a 50% chance. Threat level 10 means its near impossible to survive (probably close to 100%).

Fate will need to favor a character living through a high Threat Level (because it's dang near impossible to live through a TL 5-10).

Most TL's will be 1-5, with 5 being the most dangerous that anybody knowingly expose themselves to, because of the natural instinct to survive. Still, a character or player may not know the actual risks. And, there are Alamo-like situations, like the Battle of Thermopylae, where the participants know their going to die but risk their lives anyway. Situations like that carry a Threat Level of 10. Fate Points can help Conan characters survive encounters such as these, where Death has a 100% chance.

Taurus the Prince of Thieves, breaking into the Elephant Tower, did not know what Threat Level he was risking, but he did know that the risk was great. He probably thought the TL was around 3 or 4. In actuality, the TL was probably closer to 6 or 7. Conan sure wouldn't have made it had it not been for Taurus' toys, like the lotus powder to kill the lions or the rope of human hair to climb the tower. So many things could have gone wrong that Conan must have used a Fate Point or two to beat the situation: The lions in the perimeter; the guards at the base; the giant spider at the top. Heck, Conan was lucky that Yara was comatose when the barbarian first approached him. Otherwise, the mage himself would have probably dropped him. I'd say that was a TL 8 encounter. Conan had about a 20% chance of survival. Fate points used forced a lot of things to go Conan's way.

So...most people, during the Hyborian Age, live through a TL 1. This means that there's a 10% chance that they'll die from being run over by a carriage in the street, or from the knife blade of some mugger, or by a jealous ex-lover.

Those people who "live on the edge", like Thieves, who put themselves, routinely, into situations where there is increased risk of being killed, probably live in a Threat Level 2 or 3, giving them a 20-30% chance of being killed if they routinely place themselves in harms way.

A character living on the frontier, or a Cimmerian clansman, probably lives with a day-to-day Threat Level of 2. The Aquilonians at Venarium though they were living under a Threat Level of 3 (large, equipped force going against unorganized barbarians with inferior equipment), but, as it turns out, really lived under a Threat Level of 9 (nobody survived Venarium).

As time goes by, a GM needs to assign a TL to the PC's activities. This can be "in front of the camera", while the game is going on (to guid the GM in how fast the PCs should be advancing) and while the game is continuing "off camera", as in a game that ends in Cimmeria then picks up again in Stygia--the GM should ask himself what the journey from Cimmeria to Stygia was like (probably a TL 2).

Once the TL is know, you simply divide the base weekly XP award by your threat level, then multiply by the Character's Level to figure how old the PC is--or how long it should take to reach the next level.

The question is: What is the base weekly XP total?

 

[Hervé]

I'm reasoning differently. The experience system is loose enough in Conan to allow GMs to tailor their campaigns to their needs. If I plan to run a long term campaign, I give experience slowly, and on the other hand, I tend to be more generous with campaigns with a shorter lifespan. Generally, I decide of the power level I want my players to attain by the end of the campaign and give experience accordingly.

 

[Vambelte]

I really don't go that far...

After years playing this system you learn that the prime levels for your players to be are between 6th and 16th. The 16th level being basicaly the maximum level a player can get, just because it starts to get really hard to challenge a group of five 16th lvl PCs. If you have have just two, maybe tree PCs, probaly you can go a litlle bit above 16th and still find challenge whitout trowing an army on the players every session.

Whit that in mind I've decided that the levels 2 to 4 are very easily achievable, like one game session per level. It gets a bit more harder from that point.

So when I designed generic NPCs for every culture I used that progression. Basically any NPC you face can be lvl2 or lvl4, those whit some more experience will be lvl6. Of course I'm talking about the fighting NPCs, the commoners are just lvl1/2. I did this in order for my players to keep respecting numbers, no matter their level. If the PCs are on the 12th lvl and they know that every city guard is around lvl2, whit just a few captains on lvl5, they will no be afraid of the consequence of their actions.

In my games the players think twice before assaulting any group whit double their number of fighters, because they can give a lot of trouble, and that's how I think it should go. This isn't a game where one PC kills 20, 30 enemies on a fight... well at least I don't think it should be...

 

[Spectator]

Interesting thread.
According to logic presented here, how would the inhabitants (TLAZITLAN) of XUCHOTL, the Green Stone City in "RED NAILS" be leveled?

By the threat level concept (going into the hallways = death by clan warfare), continuity of the clan warfare (all they did was feud, since food and shelter were providied for), and age of the inhabitants ( no new inhabitants born in decades), then just about every male warrior who was in his mid twenties would have been at least 6th to 8th levels in experience, right?

Is that right?
It sounds feasible to me.

 

[Supplement Four]

I want to simplify the system. Instead of 10 Threat Levels, maybe have three or four (Safe, Normal Risk, Hazardous).

I think the character's level should stand for how many years, at Normal Risk, it takes, on average, to increase a level.

So, a 1st level character takes about a year to go to 2nd. It takes 2 years for a character at Normal Risk to go to level 3 (and it was 3 years ago he started at 1st level). It takes 3 years to get to level 4, and the character has aged 6 years since starting level 1.

Safe would be used for Commoners and Bar Keeps and what not. Double the time.

Normal Risk is the Base.

Hazardous means a character is exposed to great risk. Halve the time.



This is much simpler. Bar Keeps would be Safe. Your average, everyday wall guard would be Normal Risk. PCs are typically at the sharp end, so they'd be Hazardous.

And, it's conceivable and probably that a character will go through different threat levels during his life. A 17 Year Old Aquilonian who joins King Conan's force would be at Normal Risk while in Tarantia. Then, when he's shipped out to the Pict border, he spends time doing Hazardous Duty. He'll advance quicker then. Then, once he's done his tour, he's sent back to Tarantia for garrison duty--back at Normal Risk.



Looking for a simple rule..maybe this is it...or something close to it.

 

[Supplement Four]

Well, what I did was take my thoughts from above and then implement the super, duper, short version. Super simple.

A character's level is the average time generally required in that careers. So, a 1st level character generally has less than a year's experience, and once a character has a year's experience, he is usually experienced enough to move to level 2.

A 4th level character generally has 6 years under his belt: one year spent at 1st level; 2 years at second level; and 3 years at 3rd level.

And so on.

This is a general rule of thumb. Players can use this rule of thumb to estimate an NPC's experience based on his age. Most Solidiers start around age 15, so if you see an NPC that is about 20 years old, you can safely surmise that he's about 3rd level.

Now, this is only a very simple rule of thumb. All sorts of circumstances can make the time spent at any particular level either longer or shorter.

If you're talking about combat experience, the Army private who spent a year in Germany is bound to be less experienced than the Army private who did a year tour in Vietnam.

So, the Tarantia town guard, 20 years old, is probably 3rd level. The soldier who spent time on Aquilonia's Pictish border may very well be much higher level.

This is how characters reach the very high levels--by exposing themselves to extreme conditions in their chosen field.

As a GM, if I want to put in an "average" Sargent of the Guard, that I think is about 30 years old, using my rule of thumb, this character should be a 5th level character. Any particular experience in the character's background can change that--we're only talking rule of thumb, here.

And, characters advanced at a different rate at different times in their lives. If you start a character from scratch, then raise him to 2nd level, when the GM says, "OK...it's not a year later...and...", your character should still be 2nd level because he needs to spend about 2 years at that level given normal, everyday experience.

Those PCs exposed to constant adventuring are liable to be very high level at young ages, allowing them room to reach some of the very high levels not usually attained by characters later on in life.

But, it's a simple rule of thumb.

I like it, and it works well. No mess to implement. Easy to ignore.

 

[kintire]

I have a couple of issues. Well, one issue and a different approach!

My issue is as soon as you start talking about baarkeeps. I think you need a bit more focus on what people are levelling AS. Your system works okay for fighter types, but does the local blacksmith really have to kill picts to improve at his trade? Did the best jeweller in Tarantia really have to cut a swathe through Nemedians for ten years in order to build up enough levels to spend those skill ranks on Craft: Jeweller? Someone levelling up as an expert craftsman should get xp from pushing himself at his craft, not necessarily from fighting. That Barkeep in a safe area could well be a level 8 Barkeep from years of high intensity barkeeping, while never having picked up a sword.

My approach is rather different. In the books, and to quite a degree in real life, personal development doesn't work that way. Conan is already extremely formidable in his late teens, and while he is certainly more formidable in his forties his experience has broadened more than deepend. I suspect that the Conan of Hour of the Dragon, would defeat the Conan of Frost Giant's Daughter or God in the Bowl, but not overwhelmingly. Similarly, athletes today are often world class in their twenties or even late teens, and hone their skills from their. I tend to hand out levels rapidly, or even start people quite high, and then drop to a crawl or stoop entirely at the desired level.

 

[Supplement Four]

I think you need a bit more focus on what people are levelling AS.

I am taking that into account. Note above that I talk about experience in that career. The examples are soldiers, so I use combat examples. But, a blacksmith's experience is making weapons, improvising, and fixing things. The same rule would apply--but, no, he doesn't have to kill Picts to get better. He just has to get experience being a blacksmith.

So, I think you read me wrong a bit above.

A Blacksmith in a typical town would probably use the rule of thumb (and level as a commoner with a focus on blacksmithing). A Blacksmith working for the Aquilonian border guard in the Westermarch would probably level faster than the rule of thumb, by just the sheer volumn of work he does for the military border guard out there.

The rule of thumb can be applied to any situation.

Conan is already extremely formidable in his late teens, and while he is certainly more formidable in his forties his experience has broadened more than gon, would defeat the Conan of Frost Giant's Daughter or God in the Bowl, but not overwhelmingly.

Conan is a poor example for the rule of thumb. He's had all sorts of adventures that would accelerate his experience level.

My Rule of Thumb keeps average people to the level 1-11 range, based ion their age. I chose this range as that's what the Core Rules suggest, saying that characters at 12th level and higher are very rare.

Similarly, athletes today are often world class in their twenties or even late teens, and hone their skills from their. I tend to hand out levels rapidly, or even start people quite high, and then drop to a crawl or stoop entirely at the desired level.

I made the rule of thumb to fit the Conan d20 leveling system, not real life. In d20, as people get more experience, they get better. In RL, this isn't always true, especially for physical experience. That's why not to many men are boxing in their 50's and 60's. Baseball players retire at age 32. And so on.

 

[Spectator]

The only problem with these various models is that (even at the incredibly slow level earning system) there will be a bad-ass bunch of 55 year blacksmiths, farm-laborers, prostitutes, woodcutters, etc...
I think it is very unrealistic (even in an RPG) to assume that kind of blanket advancement.

Is it just me?

 

[Supplement Four]

The only problem with these various models is that (even at the incredibly slow level earning system) there will be a bad-ass bunch of 55 year blacksmiths, farm-laborers, prostitutes, woodcutters, etc...
I think it is very unrealistic (even in an RPG) to assume that kind of blanket advancement.

Is it just me?

I respect the point. But, if you've been bangin' on the anvil for 40 years, shouldn't you have learned a little somethin'?

Under my Rule of Thumb, the 55 year old Blacksmith, who's been hammering away since he was 15 years old, will be an 8th level Blacksmith.

Doesn't that sound about "right"? :wink:







Remember, it's only a general rule of thumb. Maybe the 55 year old Blacksmith only tinkers with bangin' the steel every once in a while. So, he's 4th level, the experience adding up over the years. Or, maybe in his youth, he served in King Yildz's army and saw a lot of experience back when he was in his 20's, so he's actually 10th level.

These are details established by the GM that are not the "norm". This is the realm of the GM--any tweaking like this that must be made.

The "average" 55 year old blacksmith, though, should be about 8th level.

I think it works well if nobody takes it as a hard-n-fast rule instead of a rule-of-thumb.

 

[kintire]

I made the rule of thumb to fit the Conan d20 leveling system, not real life. In d20, as people get more experience, they get better

The Conan d20 levelling system says that someone of level X is basically better than someone of level <X and worse than someone of X<. That's all. You gain levels by getting points for achieving stuff, but given that you're changing that system anyway, why be wedded to it?

You rule of thumb is a useful shorthand for how powerful a minor NPC should be, but I wouldn't apply it to PCs or major characters.

I respect the point. But, if you've been bangin' on the anvil for 40 years, shouldn't you have learned a little somethin'?

You will be better than you were 35 years ago. But not necessarily better than someone who's been Blacksmithing for 5 years. People have different potential and talent.

 

[Supplement Four]

...but given that you're changing that system anyway, why be wedded to it?

I'm not really changing the system. I'm just describing it, given the parameters stated in the 2E rule book.

Nowhere does it say 1 experience level = 1 year of experience, but the rules do discuss the hard level cap of 20 and state that it should be extremely rare to meet a character of 12th level or higher.

So, all I did was put some logic to it.

Is it logical to find a 20 year old 10th level fighter given the parameters of the game? Nope. The GM is free to create a 10th level 20 year old, but for most people, I've extrapolated from the game rules that a 10th level character should be about about 70 years old! (With room from the GM to make him younger--realzing that he's close to the highest level character the PCs should normally encounter, given the rules). And, a 20 year old character should be about 2nd or 3rd level.

It's just extrapolation of what's explained in the rules--not a change of the rules at all.

You rule of thumb is a useful shorthand for how powerful a minor NPC should be, but I wouldn't apply it to PCs or major characters.

Why wouldn't you?

I would use the rule of thumb and then tweak if necessary.

For example, if the bad guy is 10th level, but I don't want the bad guy to be 70 years old (as the rule of thumb would indicate), I'd tweak it from there. I sure wouldn't make him 20. But, I could see cutting off 20 years and making him 50, thinking that he, like the PCs, has seen some accelerated experience situations--enough to make him as skilled at 50 as regular people are at 70.

You will be better than you were 35 years ago. But not necessarily better than someone who's been Blacksmithing for 5 years. People have different potential and talent.

That's why it's a rule of thumb. If the GM decides that a Blacksmith with only 5 years of experience is as experienced as a Blacksmith with 35 years under his belt--then so be it.

But, if the GM has no feeling one way or the other, the Rule of Thumb answers that question.

 

[kintire]

Is it logical to find a 20 year old 10th level fighter given the parameters of the game? Nope

Why not? Conan was already spoken of around the campfires at 15. I bet that makes him 6th level at least, and he could easily be 10th level five years later. PCs and heroic NPCs will perhaps be lagging behind Conan himself, but a 10th level 20 year old is certainly possible.

It's just extrapolation of what's explained in the rules--not a change of the rules at all

Its an interpretation: one that relies on the idea that you improve at an even rate throughout your life. Some people do, but people who push themselves to their limits tend to rocket up early, and then see their improvement tail off as they reach their potential. I could easily see someone 10th level a 20, and then around 12 at 40.

Why wouldn't you?

Because major characters in Conan are the sort of people who push themselves to their limits early - generally speaking. People who are important due to position rather than skill not so much.

But, if the GM has no feeling one way or the other, the Rule of Thumb answers that question

And for this sort of purpose its very useful: but as I say I wouldn't extend it to major characters

 

[throrII]

MAXIMUM LEVEL

The next thing to consider is: The maximum level attainable in the game is level 20, but the game also states that characters of 12th level or higher are exceedingly rare.

This means that the universe is scaled between 0 level (commoners and such) and 11th level. This doesn't mean that the PCs, the exceptional beings that they may be, won't reach 12th level or higher. What it does mean, though, is that you can use the 0-11 level range as a gauge when setting levels to NPCs in your game.

That is similar to how I've always seen it. Based on Pirate Isles, the average pirate capatin is 7th level. Similarily, based on Free Companies, the average mercenary company leader is 7th level. It seems that 7th level is perceived as the epitome for 'generic' no-name NPC's.

'Name level' NPC's, such as those detailed at the end of most sourcebooks, seem to average 9-11th level. Only exceptional NPC's (kings, legendary adventurers, historic sorcerors etc) seem to ever be listed as over 11th level.

I feel this gives a ball park range for NPC levels, and PC levels in relation to the world around them:

1-2 level: average for class (normal soldier, thief, acolyte, etc)
3-4 level: elite for class (royal guard, village shaman, sorcerous priest)
5-6 level: leadership level (city guard captain, city noble, city priest)
7-8 level: large group leader (mercenary captain, pirate captain, nomad hoard leader, duke)
9-11 level: elite leader, renowned adventurer (most named NPC's)
12+ level: unique leader, world feared sorcerer, adventurer (Conan, various kings, Xaltotun, Yara)