PDA

View Full Version : NPC The Game



quiet1mi
2009-09-27, 02:17 AM
I am thinking about running a D&D game where there are no "PCs". That is No PC classes.

Simply put, Pick an NPC class and Play...

Warrior
Expert
Adept

I am still thinking what I would do for Commoner and Aristocrat... I would mainly balance things with fluff, if you are an Aristocrat you have rights and responsibilities, while Commoners I cannot think of anything other than you could blend into the crowd of just commoners...

Things would be flavored in different ways depending on what you are trying to emulate...

What do you guys think... Should I still allow PRC classes?

taltamir
2009-09-27, 02:19 AM
sounds really interesting... although, id just omit the commoner.. isn't the commoner simply "common"? as in, there is nothing special about it, it is as common as dirt, everyone has the same skills, or lack thereof...
you could say a commoner becomes an expert or a warrior or an adept after his first level up and have everyone start up as commoners...

Although... apprentice progressions are also fairly nice.

Andraste
2009-09-27, 02:54 AM
Sounds somewhat interesting. It could get boring though, being so weak, and you would have to adjust a lot of things, like CR and stat generation, but I think I might try it.
As for the PRCs, I would make new ones, since they're meant to be used for the PCs, so NPCs would probably not even meet the requirements for most.

Also, your title made me lose the game.

Ravens_cry
2009-09-27, 03:15 AM
Also, your title made me lose the game.
No you didn't. (http://xkcd.com/391/):smallsmile:
It's Okay, You're Free.

woodenbandman
2009-09-27, 09:51 AM
Expert or Adept are the most playable. Expert can be used in Iaijutsu focus builds, and Adepts have spells so yay for spells. They are actually better than bards at spells due to a better list (Sublime Chord kind of invalidates that though).

Mongoose87
2009-09-27, 10:46 AM
No you didn't. (http://xkcd.com/391/):smallsmile:
It's Okay, You're Free.

There's nothing about that in the rules.

Another_Poet
2009-09-27, 11:25 AM
I think it's a cool idea.

I have played commoners before and survived. I would suggest you offer something like this:

Commoner - If you can survive as a commoner, at 4th level you gain either 1d6 sneak damage as per rogue, 1 favoured enemy as per ranger, or rage 1/day as per barbarian. You are just that badass.

At every 3 levels thereafter you gain another of these abilities. You can choose the same ability multiple times and its effects stack.


edit: Be aware, in a game like this templates are super power boosts. A power-hungry player might look to get his Expert bitten by a werewolf or vampire.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-27, 11:40 AM
I think this campaign would be pretty fun, albeit tending torward the lethal side. Commoners tend to bite the dirt pretty fast, especially at low levels, and most other NPC classes aren't much better off.

For bonus points, use adventurers as villians of sorts. Even the good ones inflate the crap out of the local economy, start bar fights, and generally raise a ruckus until you distract them with a "quest".

PS: Aw, I just lost the game.

The Rose Dragon
2009-09-27, 11:45 AM
No you didn't. (http://xkcd.com/391/):smallsmile:
It's Okay, You're Free.

The only way to win the game is to never think about it.

I developed a mental discipline so hard that I can write a 400-page thesis on the Game and never think about it for even a moment.

I'm that good.

((Also, XKCD sucks that way.))

TheCountAlucard
2009-09-27, 02:28 PM
That's why I like Platinum Angel. :smalltongue:

Calmar
2009-09-27, 03:04 PM
This sounds interesting. But I think I could only work in a roleplay-heavy game with fewer combat. For example, playing commoners or experts who try to get out of a prison unseen, or warriors from the city watch on patrol could be cool.