Variable Bad Guys

[Oly]

it's the funny thing about roleplaying games, as pc's we are supposed to be heroes and the main characters in the story but when you look at books, comics and movies the heroes in those are always breaking any sort of 'level' system or restriction thats placed on the pc's.

It's the funny thing about some roleplaying games, those that use a level based system. Before this goes too far I'll also say that level based systems have their upside too and I choose to use the Conan one for Conan over and above anything else.

Going back to the point about the creation of NPCs this is also why I often just make up my own without worrying too much if they're "legal". I want an NPC who can do X, Y and Z to a certain level of competency and the level system makes that a lot of work, if not impossible.

 

[Trodax]

Its a matter of changing yoru basic assumptions. Stock dnd has a basic assumption that 90% of "everybody else" is a level 1 Comoner. Now building a game world on that assumption certainly has many advantages but it also has its disadvantages too, most of which revolve around the sorts of problems that we've been discussing in this thread.

Now IMC I changed this basic assumption. Instead my assumption is that your "average, competent adult" is 3rd or 4th level wheras 1st level represents - literally - an untrained child. You build the game world in much the same way you just start off in a different place.

Yeah, I've certainly been operating under the "average Joe is a level 1 Commoner"-assumption. I think what first got me thinking in these terms was the way NPCs were statted up in the early supplements (in the corebook a Turanian soldier = level 2 and a Pictish barbarian = level 1). (My basic assumptions might also be sort of a carry-on from D&D.) However, the various NPCs statted up by Vincent in many of the later sourcebooks seem to have been done using your approach; they are often of a quite high level (for example, in Shadizar a City guard = level 3 and an elite Royal guard = level 6, IIRC).

Anyway, I'm intrigued by your approach, and have started to think about giving a try at ramping up the levels a notch for my next Conan game. I'd be very interested in seeing how combat plays out with your approach (I really see combat as the area that will be most affected by this). I'm thinking there will be quite a bit of subtle differences in a game where the "baseline enemy" (if there is such a thing!) is 4th as opposed to 2nd level: the importance of initiative, massive damage, criticals hits and so forth. For example, a feat like Great Cleave will be tremendously more useful if you're fighting 30 1st level mooks than if you're up against 10 3rd level mooks (this feat has been used to awful effect a couple of times in my games when the PCs have been up against 1st level barbarians with no armour, let me tell you).

 

[Trodax]

Heck, levels simply don't work well for Conan. Young rogue Conan was nearly as dangerous as King Conan.

This isn't a problem due to levels per se, as almost all RPG's have rules for character advancement in some form (what I mean is that the issue is the same if Conan advances from being a 1st level barbarian to a 20th level barbarian in a level-based game, or advances from having broadsword 50% to broadsword 450% in a skill-based game). That being said, it is probably true that advancement is more "extreme" in level-based games than in many skill-based games.

In literature (and the real world), characters usually don't change all that much, but when gaming people seem to enjoy when their characters grow and aquire new, kewl powers over the course of a campaign (I know I do!). It's a very well ingrained assumption that your character should become better over time when you play, I guess (however, there are games out there that don't really have character advancement; Spirit of the Century, for example).

 

[kintire]

Heck, levels simply don't work well for Conan. Young rogue Conan was nearly as dangerous as King Conan.

This isn't a problem due to levels per se, as almost all RPG's have rules for character advancement in some form

I'm also not completely convinced its entirely true. Young Rogue Conan did pretty well against a group of Numalian Watch: King Conan piled the corpses of the finest swordsmen in Koth around his feet.

 

[Lord Jolly the Scribe]

Also, to go from beating down some thugs in Zamora to becoming a feared pirate under an assumed name is also a big leap. :shock:

 

[sbarrie]

Also, to go from beating down some thugs in Zamora to becoming a feared pirate under an assumed name is also a big leap. :shock:

No, to go from getting beat up by some thugs in Zamora to becoming a feared pirate would be a big leap. Going from beating down Zamoran thugs to pirating is just finding your niche.

 

[sbarrie]

I'm also not completely convinced its entirely true. Young Rogue Conan did pretty well against a group of Numalian Watch: King Conan piled the corpses of the finest swordsmen in Koth around his feet.

There is certainly progress in the character's abilities, just not the astronomical progress seen in RPG levels.

 

[Starkus]

Sorry, chiming in late.

In my game (all homebrew), most of the typical 'chump' (i.e. standard patrols / soldiers / house guards etc.) are 1st level to 3rd level. As I see it, Conan beat down a lot of your typical fodder types with ease. Every combat wasn't a challenge for him, and as the players progressively get more powerful, they should expect to take with ease such simplistic enemies as would comprise your typical Nemedian patrol.

My party is 4th level now, and is just starting to get to the point where they can handle most chump with ease. This is to be expected, so, you compensate logically by a number of methods. Authorities become upset when their patrols don't report back and send out greater numbers of people. Also, you should have some leader types about to send along as well, if the party becomes totally audacious. Eventually you will whip their asses through sheer numbers or send them packing like little bitches. Its fun to watch. Crushing their over sized egos... but I digress.

Bottom line is that this isn't like DND where strangely enough, 20th level characters never see a damn kobold anywhere. You should look at the world as regions of difficulty. Messing with powerful people really does mean messing with powerful people - like in a "20th level powerful" type of sense - like in a "you will die if you do something stupid type of sense."

I admit, it took a few sessions to shake my party of the old DND mentality of scaled encounters, but I feel that the overall outcome is more realistic and gritty, which I find to be a refreshing change of pace.

Stark

 

[Lord Jolly the Scribe]

I agree with you Stark. One thing I found hard about Conan when I first started making up adventures was I couldn't just pull a monster from a book and have them slaughter away without ruining the game for them. It takes time on my end to write up some good goons and bigger baddies for me to chuckat players and I don't want to deprive my players of just example baddies if I can give them good flavor. I want the game to feel like a mix of hack-and-slash with roleplaying and adventuring with thought. It takes a little more to create good setting in the Conan world than some DnD games, but what you get are happy, satisfied players who can't wait til the next game and can't wait to meet the next cool ally or enemy.

 

[Halfbat]

It takes a little more to create good setting in the Conan world than some DnD games, but what you get are happy, satisfied players who can't wait til the next game and can't wait to meet the next cool ally or enemy.

Absolutely. That's one of it's advantages, I think. It encourages thinking through NPCs. And it's probably why Conan RQ will work pretty well as well.

As for the levels - I think that it's not until 3rd at least that you start getting some interesting, usable NPCs and it's worth running them as that. Even having higher-level commoners works quite well, especially given their hit point disadvantage.

I think working characters up from level 1 gives them a better development path and buy-in and allows the players to adjust the shape a little as they progress. Starting from level 3 means the characters are interesting from the start, and possibly less brittle.

 

[bc99]

Good post, and something to think about. I believe a lot of the problem comes from the need to scale encounters in DnD to throw tougher monsters at the PCs, and that Conan players usually played DnD in the past so it's a habit to break. A previous poster noted that in DnD after level 1 you never see a kobold. I never liked that aspect of DnD.

For Conan, a typical warrior or guard should be level 1-3. The PCs should chop through them, with the off chance that one of NPCs might get a good shot in on one of the characters.

And that's exactly what happens in the Conan stories. Many times he faces lesser opponents, but takes a sling stone against the head, or a sabre blow to his arms... sure he hacks through a lot of enemies, but he takes his bruises and often times comes close to death.

Now I play with the rule that everytime a character is hit, regardless of armor, he takes at least 1 point of damage. I like that option, and it does away with people being impervious tanks. They'll take a lot of damage, but throngs of insane cultists or angry picts can still do some big damage... especially if they grapple!

 

[Krushnak]

in my game if their dr stops all damage then they take 1 pt of subdual from 'winding'. so eventually they will drop from exhaustion but not death unless of course they take the feat tough as nails.

 

[Azgulor]

I really think that by "expanding" the level structure this way it gives me many more options as a GM espically when the campaign heads towards higher level

To a degree, but if a normal line soldier can be 5th level and an elite trooper is 10th, a 2nd level PC is a total spod. That just isn't Conan for me: PCs should matter from the word go, at least a little. Its all a matter of taste of course.

So do what I do, start the campaign at 3rd level (or higher)

Its a matter of changing yoru basic assumptions. Stock dnd has a basic assumption that 90% of "everybody else" is a level 1 Comoner. Now building a game world on that assumption certainly has many advantages but it also has its disadvantages too, most of which revolve around the sorts of problems that we've been discussing in this thread.

Now IMC I changed this basic assumption. Instead my assumption is that your "average, competent adult" is 3rd or 4th level wheras 1st level represents - literally - an untrained child. You build the game world in much the same way you just start off in a different place.

Now, as I said this does not in fact solve the basic dilemma of what to do when the PC's outclass all the "normal" folk (20th level PC's vs 10 level elites is as bad as 8th level PC's vs 3rd level elites). But it does give the GM more "wiggle room" and I have found that oftentimes that little bit of extra space is enough to get by (espically if you only plan to take the PC's up to maybe level 12 or 14, which is often a good place to stop).

Later.

I've done a similar setup for my campaigns as well. The default D&D assumption of 90% of the world being 1st level doesn't work - it just isn't believeable. In order to preserve the PCs heroic stature, starting level is 3 (unless they want to play the Wide-eyed farmboy in search of adventureTM).

For "regular" NPCs, I employ the "learn something everyday" philosophy which someone posted over at ENWorld. An NPC earns 1 experience point per day once they reach young adult age. This puts most adult NPCs in the 2nd-4th level range.

Your average craftsman is now a 3rd level Commoner rather than a 1st-level nobody who isn't any better mechanics-wise than his apprentice.

Your average peasant militia is comprised of Commoners. Your feudal levies are Com 1/Sold 1 or Com 2/ Sold 2. Your career soldiers are Sold 2 or 3. Commanders, guildmasters, master craftsman, etc. are higher level, and also typically middle-age or older.

PCs still stand out b/c they hit those levels at much younger ages and have much faster advancement rates.

I've also used the 1 XP/day award for significant periods of downtime for PCs. If I want the campaign timeline to advance 2 years, my players usually find this an acceptable alternative to saying they didn't gain any experience in that 2-year period. (I've had groups that resisted ANY significant downtime as they felt it "slowed" their character too much.)

(For those who play D&D as well, I've also found this works well for representing demi-human races in a more believable fashion. Elves and dwarves, with their longer lifespans are higher level. Elven and dwarven craftsmen are superior not b/c their elves or dwarves but b/c they have greater average character levels than their human counterparts. In warfare, their numerical deficiencies are compensated by the fact that their peasant militias are comprised of 6th-level Commoners!)

Azgulor

 

[Kemper Boyd]

Your career soldiers are Sold 2 or 3. Commanders, guildmasters, master craftsman, etc. are higher level, and also typically middle-age or older.

It's worth noting that in feudal armies, it is not improbable to have a level 2 or 3 noble as commander, since your title is more important than your martial or tactical skill. Hyborian age nations that have a more professional fighting force (or a meritocratic system, like the Kozaks) are more likely to have commanders with higher levels.

 

[Azgulor]

Your career soldiers are Sold 2 or 3. Commanders, guildmasters, master craftsman, etc. are higher level, and also typically middle-age or older.

It's worth noting that in feudal armies, it is not improbable to have a level 2 or 3 noble as commander, since your title is more important than your martial or tactical skill. Hyborian age nations that have a more professional fighting force (or a meritocratic system, like the Kozaks) are more likely to have commanders with higher levels.

Good point. Nobles would definitely be in the mix. Although I would add that those nobles might have higher levels due to all that politicing they have to do!

Azgulor