Levels for children?

[lylsyly]

I am looking for ideas about granting levels for children. I am talking about the street urchins/homeless waifs, abandoned, orphaned, whatever, stealing to survive, hiding at night, that kind of thing. I read somewhere about half levels (?), but can't find it now.

Your thoughts?

[legomaster00156]

1 NPC class level.

[Jormengand]

Children can gain class levels just like adults do. This also means that most of them are first-level commoners, just like most adults are. There is nothing intrinsically stopping a child from being a powerful sorcerer, though.

A child probably gets a +2 bonus to dexterity and a -2 penalty to strength and constitution, as well as being a size category lower than its adult form would be.

Stealing to survive and hiding in the night suggests a rogue or at least expert level, or possibly two - consistently making hide and move silently checks against even untrained WIS 10 guards requires a decent dexterity and lots of skill points (being small helps, though).

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by ghostshadow
I read somewhere about half levels (?), but can't find it now.

There are rules for apprentice levels on p. 40 of the 3.0 DMG, which came up in a recent thread.

A while ago someone came up with their own subsystem for apprentice levels (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=8498.0), and there's a more recent third-party PDF (http://paizo.com/products/btpy8gu2?The-Genius-Guide-to-ApprenticeLevel-Characters) on the Paizo site, if you want to see how it's been done in Pathfinder.


Originally Posted by Jormengand
A child probably gets a +2 bonus to dexterity and a -2 penalty to strength and constitution, as well as being a size category lower than its adult form would be.

Every so often this question comes up, as to what adjustments are appropriate for a child.

I would say +2 Dex and Cha, -2 Str and Wis, and definitely Small.

.

[Jormengand]

I would say +2 Dex and Cha, -2 Str and Wis, and definitely Small.

I wouldn't say that children have a stronger force of personality (not to mention conventional attractiveness) and yet a worse sense of intuition. I wouldn't say that they're good at disguising and intimidating but bad at seeing and hearing.

In general, I tend to stay away from the mental ability scores of children the same reason I wouldn't consider giving ability score bonuses or penalties according to sex: each ability score measures so many different things that the ability score assignments reflect the assigner more than the assignee.

[Palanan]

This can be argued any number of ways; that was just an off-the-cuff example. There were several threads on this issue a year or two ago, and probably many more before that.

Pathfinder has a Young template somewhere, not sure if the OP is open to Pathfinder material.

[legomaster00156]

Actually, Pathfinder has a full set of rules (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/more-character-options/young-characters) for playing Young characters.

[Jormengand]

Actually, Pathfinder has a full set of rules (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/more-character-options/young-characters) for playing Young characters.

I personally prefer the young template, because it doesn't arbitrarily say "No manifesting your arcane powers from dragon heritage before you're 15!" or indeed "Right now, you can be a warrior. As soon as you're 15, you can retrain instantly as a wizard! This makes all the sense!" (If you hit adulthood at level 3, this might actually be a good idea from a mechanical perspective - mitigate the danger of being a low-level character with a d6 hit die).

I dunno: I work with kids and it strikes me as ludicrous to have a ruleset that basically hinges on the idea that they can never have the resourcefulness to be a rogue or the martial arts skills of a monk. Kids can and do learn that sort of thing, and if you're a player character, you're always exceptional.

[legomaster00156]

Oh, I dislike the NPC class-only part, too, if only because NPC classes are no fun at all to play. I always ignore that part of the rules.

[Pleh]

A truly self reliant urchin on the streets is no mere commoner. They are an expert at the very least, if not a bona-fide low level rogue. Being a child only makes the feat even more impressive (just like it's impressive to see a child master what adults study for decades to learn).

But the 3.5 penalties to mental stats aren't without justification. The human brain isn't fully developed until you're well into adulthood. Perhaps they could have been written more accurately as penalties to particular skills rather than to ability scores, but the idea that there are some mental abilities they couldn't do like adults isn't really that far off.

[Ashtagon]

First up, ask yourself what you plan on having these children do, and how they will interact with the PCs.

Are they there for the PCs to kill? Hope you're playing an evil campaign if this is the case.

Are they there as potential allies? Stat them out as human (if teenager) or halfling (if in the single-digit age range), and role-play the heck out of it. It'll be more balanced and simpler to set things up for them in the long run.

Here's my old post in which I discussed the merits of playing children. Basically, anything approaching realistic would mean kids will get beaten by adults in any contest that matters.

http://www.thepiazza.org.uk/bb/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=8366

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon
First up, ask yourself what you plan on having these children do, and how they will interact with the PCs.

Why are you assuming the children aren’t the PCs?

The OP didn’t specify, but it’s a reasonable option. And there’s no reason why they can’t be better than adults at certain things, especially things that involve dexterity and a slight frame. Fagin didn’t pick any pockets himself.

[Ashtagon]

Why are you assuming the children aren’t the PCs?

The OP didn’t specify, but it’s a reasonable option. And there’s no reason why they can’t be better than adults at certain things, especially things that involve dexterity and a slight frame. Fagin didn’t pick any pockets himself.

If they children are intended to be human PCs, I'd still go with stat them out as humans or halflings and role-play the heck out of it.

And yes, realistically, sincerely, in any contest in which the adults are paying attention and are physically fit (i.e., not modern sedentary office worker types or their equivalent), adults will beat children. At best, children get a +2 circumstance bonus in various situations (GM call), to reflect that adults probably aren't going to take them as seriously and so may get taken by surprise when the kids do non-childlike things.

Fagin used children as pickpockets not because they were inherently better pickpockets, but because they were not Fagin, and so if and when they were caught, Fagin remained safe from legal repercussions.

[lylsyly]

Actually, Pathfinder has a full set of rules (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/more-character-options/young-characters) for playing Young characters.

This seems my best bet, except I am going to set 6 as the starting age. 6-8 get 1 level, 9-10 get 2, 11-12 get 3, and 13-14 get 4 levels. I suppose just the NPC classes will do, although I would like to put together something for the children that seem drawn towards the bard class (maybe a split between expert and adept).

I have to ask, if I use the Survivor class (SS), would that be too strong? Seems to me that survival would almost have to mean that you did develop those abilities (or maybe that would be too strong).

Some of them will be NPCs, but I want them to be built like PCs because I am going to spring a huge trap and have the children help the party escape. If a PC gets killed, the can immediately pick up a child character. Should work out (I think).

I appreciate the well reasoned responses.
Thanks all.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by ghostshadow
I have to ask, if I use the Survivor class (SS), would that be too strong? Seems to me that survival would almost have to mean that you did develop those abilities (or maybe that would be too strong).

Survivor is perfectly thematic, especially if this is a harsh urban environment. And I wouldn’t expect it would be too strong, for much the same reasons.


Originally Posted by ghostshadow
Some of them will be NPCs, but I want them to be built like PCs because I am going to spring a huge trap and have the children help the party escape. If a PC gets killed, the can immediately pick up a child character.

Sounds like a really interesting scenario, with some good potential for action and roleplaying.

I assume this is an urban campaign? Are the children organized into a thieving or scavenging crew? And what's their motivation for helping the party?

[lylsyly]

1. I assume this is an urban campaign? 2. Are the children organized into a thieving or scavenging crew? 3. And what's their motivation for helping the party?

1. Yes
2. Sort of now, thinking of whether I should try to steer the PCs into helping them get really organized.
3. Working on that, leaning towards just trying to gain the gratitude of the PCs and asking them to solve a "little" problem for them.

[Segev]

I'll just second (or third, or whatever we're on) the notion that kids can level up just like adults, but like adults, don't have to.

(In one game setting I ran, designed to be a bit higher-powered, I actually had PCs start at level 3, because all adults of PCable races were at least level 3. Kids, therefore, could be level 1 or 2 while still being weaker than the grown-ups in general.)

For traditional 3e D&D, making them NPC classes is appropriate for most, with the stand-outs having a level or two of PC classes. Or more, if they're really doing the kind of thing that levels you up. Consider that PCs often go from 1 to 20 in less than a year if they're hardcore adventurers (and don't die).

[Nifft]

Children should have CR, not level.

They are blatantly Non-Parent Characters.

[Dragonexx]

-2 Str, +2 Dex, one size category smaller than normal. Done.

[Mordaedil]

I play as a child prodigy wizard in my current campaign (Where in the first encounter I got mauled by a bear) and we decided to kind of use Pathfinder rules and fudge it a little bit, so I take -2 to Str, Con and Wis (oh boy, that left my roll of a 5 wisdom into a 3), but get +2 to Dex and Small size, but I get to play as a wizard anyway. I figure it's fine because eventually she'll age and the penalties will go away.

If you aren't making a hero child, just use a halfling as base with the extra stuff that a human gets instead of the stuff halflings get.

[Mystral]

I am looking for ideas about granting levels for children. I am talking about the street urchins/homeless waifs, abandoned, orphaned, whatever, stealing to survive, hiding at night, that kind of thing. I read somewhere about half levels (?), but can't find it now.

Your thoughts?

D&D is generally not meant to be played at such a power level, since even level 1 NPCs are adults who are fully trained at their job (even if it is dung farming).

I see two possibilities, the 4th edition way or the homebrew partial level way.

Either you let them level like normal characters, but you drastically raise DCs and ECLs (such that a Character who would normally be a warrior of level 3 is more akin to a fighter of level 8).

Or you let them start at a power level significantly lower than level 1 PC's and have them gain the features of their class in 3-5 "pre-levels".

I'd suggest that you go the first route, especially if you plan to do combat. Having your characters stay on level 1 for a long time is problematic, because any hit could be their last.

[Segev]

Either you let them level like normal characters, but you drastically raise DCs and ECLs (such that a Character who would normally be a warrior of level 3 is more akin to a fighter of level 8).

Or you let them start at a power level significantly lower than level 1 PC's and have them gain the features of their class in 3-5 "pre-levels".

I'd suggest that you go the first route, especially if you plan to do combat. Having your characters stay on level 1 for a long time is problematic, because any hit could be their last.

I don't see why you can't have child-PCs just level normally, without having to muck about with amplifying the setting around them. Sure, they're "child prodigies" or otherwise highly unusual kids, but PCs are GENERALLY highly unusually competent individuals. That's what PC classes represent much of the time.

Want a 10-year-old human rogue? Play one.

The only changes you need to consider are related to whether their size should be reduced. Playing "Halfling, but with the human feat instead of Halfling racial traits" is one way to handle it. Just saying you're a "small-sized Human" is another. Making up your own template also works.

But trying to say "this character isn't as strong as 'real' characters of his level" is only going to lead to frustration.

[Flickerdart]

I would not give children any ability score bonuses. Children are not more charismatic than adults - they can be cute, but charisma means influence and children are not all that good at getting what they want except by crying. They are also not more dextrous than adults - their motor skills and hand-eye coordination are still developing.

-2 STR, -2 WIS, Small size seems about right for a 10-15 year old, use adult stats after that. Younger than 10, kids are useless at pretty much everything.

[Segev]

Small size for a 15-year-old (member of a medium-sized race)? No, no. Definitely not. Especially since 15 is the base age from which "starting ages" are calculated.

Edit to add: A while back, I was looking into the relative sizes of halflings to human kids to see if an elven child could pass for a halfling. Turns out, human children aren't below 3 feet tall much past 6 years old. Halflings are Small. Medium creatures start somewhere in the 4 feet region, and humans of 10-13 tend to be that tall.

[lylsyly]

..... Younger than 10, kids are useless at pretty much everything.

Really???? I broke my leg at 11, my hospital records have my height listed at 6 foot even. when I was ten I could rebuild the motor on my mini bike, build a bloody dog house all by my self .... I could go on but ....

[Flickerdart]

Really???? I broke my leg at 11, my hospital records have my height listed at 6 foot even. when I was ten I could rebuild the motor on my mini bike, build a bloody dog house all by my self .... I could go on but ....

If you do the math, you'll find that 11 is not under 10. Children undergo a lot of physical and mental development in the span of a very short time.

[lylsyly]

If you do the math, you'll find that 11 is not under 10. Children undergo a lot of physical and mental development in the span of a very short time.

10 isn't under ten either, but if I could do those things at ten, OBVIOUSLY I wasn't useless under 10 or I wouldn't have learned the skills I had.

[Flickerdart]

10 isn't under ten either, but if I could do those things at ten, OBVIOUSLY I wasn't useless under 10 or I wouldn't have learned the skills I had.

Yeah, that's what learning does - it makes you useful. By your logic, you could never have been less smart than you were at 11, otherwise you'd never have learned any skills. And somehow I doubt you were very handy as an infant...

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Flickerdart
By your logic, you could never have been less smart than you were at 11….

No, that isn’t what the OP said, and continuing to argue about it doesn’t contribute to the thread.

[lylsyly]

No, that isn’t what the OP said, and continuing to argue about it doesn’t contribute to the thread.

Which is why I am done with it. Should of never looked at it after I said thanks the first time. :shakingheadwhilepinchingnose:

I do appreciate the well reasoned responses by all.

BYE!

[Bartmanhomer]

All children have a Challenge Rating of -1.

[Nifft]

I would not give children any ability score bonuses. Children are not more charismatic than adults - they can be cute, but charisma means influence and children are not all that good at getting what they want except by crying.
Provably untrue.

Advertising directly to children demonstrably boosts toy sales.


All children have a Challenge Rating of -1.

You get XP for a CR 18 critter if you can solve the encounter without combat.

That does tend to make the encounter last a bit longer, though...

[Bartmanhomer]

Also children get penalties with -2 Strength and Wisdom.

[Nifft]

Also children get penalties with -2 Strength and Wisdom.

Adolescents get +4 Wis, but many have that bonus surgically removed.

[Bartmanhomer]

Adolescents get +4 Wis, but many have that bonus surgically removed.

Really? Wow! That's a good bonus for Adolescents.

[Nifft]

Really? Wow! That's a good bonus for Adolescents.

Nah, it's a good bonus for dentists.

[Bartmanhomer]

Nah, it's a good bonus for dentists.

Lol! Good joke. :smile:

[Someguy231]

Make all the children lvl 20 Swordsages, so that they're the children from Skyrim.

[Mystral]

I don't see why you can't have child-PCs just level normally, without having to muck about with amplifying the setting around them. Sure, they're "child prodigies" or otherwise highly unusual kids, but PCs are GENERALLY highly unusually competent individuals. That's what PC classes represent much of the time.

Want a 10-year-old human rogue? Play one.

The only changes you need to consider are related to whether their size should be reduced. Playing "Halfling, but with the human feat instead of Halfling racial traits" is one way to handle it. Just saying you're a "small-sized Human" is another. Making up your own template also works.

But trying to say "this character isn't as strong as 'real' characters of his level" is only going to lead to frustration.

Generally, I'm with you, if someone wants to play a child prodigy that fights dragons at 12 years, and everyone at the table is cool with that, they should be allowed to.

That's not what OP was asking for, though. He was asking for homeless streeturchins and waifs who hide at night. Children who have to contend with a world where everyone adult has an advantage over them, is better equiped and more experienced than them. In a world like that, the guard who catches you steal your dinner is not a nuissance that can be dealt with by waiving your sword or diplomacy at him for 12 seconds, it's a dangerous encounter, and it's a triumph if you get to escape unharmed or somehow lure him into a trap and knock him unconcious.

[Segev]

Generally, I'm with you, if someone wants to play a child prodigy that fights dragons at 12 years, and everyone at the table is cool with that, they should be allowed to.

That's not what OP was asking for, though. He was asking for homeless streeturchins and waifs who hide at night. Children who have to contend with a world where everyone adult has an advantage over them, is better equiped and more experienced than them. In a world like that, the guard who catches you steal your dinner is not a nuissance that can be dealt with by waiving your sword or diplomacy at him for 12 seconds, it's a dangerous encounter, and it's a triumph if you get to escape unharmed or somehow lure him into a trap and knock him unconcious.

Sure. And 1 level of commoner or expert puts you in the right place for that, honestly.

[Mystral]

Sure. And 1 level of commoner or expert puts you in the right place for that, honestly.

Not really, because D&D at Level sucks, especially if you have just 1d4 hit points. Anything can kill you with one hit, and although this might sound appropriate for children, it makes for a boring game.

[Segev]

Not really, because D&D at Level sucks, especially if you have just 1d4 hit points. Anything can kill you with one hit, and although this might sound appropriate for children, it makes for a boring game.

It works out well for NPCs who are supposed to be weak and need to play it super-safe even against a "lowly" street guard.

Moving the goal posts back and forth and telling me I'm wrong because I'm trying to score on the wrong side of the field AFTER you've moved them back to the other side is a little mean. :P

[Ashtagon]

Alternatively, give adults three bonus levels.

[Doctor Despair]

I've entertained the thought of using Bloodline levels in conjunction with level-0 or childhood gameplay. The character takes the 3 levels for the price of level 1 XP over the course of some encounters in a tutorial of sorts, or something like that, while they get used to mechanics before introducing class features into the mix. I've never thought about how it would work mechanically though. I guess you'd have them use a racial hitdie that is retrained into a class level when they finish all 3 bloodline levels? Probly a bad idea, but I'm always looking for ways to splice Bloodlines into conversation :p

[Gruftzwerg]

I would go with small (or tiny in chase of a small race) size. You should set a age, where the player has grown out of his smaller size.

Further I would suggest "immature attribute penalties" because of their young age. Make em similar to the aging penalties just dropping and not increasing.
e.g. for Humans: (not stacking !)
1-3 years: -6
4-9 years: -4
10-16(?) years: -2

Since Constitution is also effected, the lowered HP fits the children too imho.

[Sheogoroth]

I prefer to use unforgotten realm rules for Beggars and use it for all functional noncombatants.

1hp with effective 0AC.

Source (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OewfdCuEiC4)

[D.M.Hentchel]

I've always been a fan of applying ability score penalties across the board. I genuinely cannot think of anything I was better at as a pre-teen than I am as an adult. Then also apply additional modifiers for size adjustments.

-1 across the board for pre-adolescent
-2 across the board for pre-teen
-5 across the board and -1 size for child
-6 across the board and -2 size for toddlers*

On the subject of levels. Children in desperate situations often raise their siblings and work to survive. It seems to totally reasonable that children gain EXP like adults, just with ability based drawbacks. Actual progress of time does of course prevent children from reaching high levels and most children do nothing to earn XP.

I once had a player who wanted to play an vastly underaged wizard so that he could show up wizards much older then him with his mastery of magic.

I can picture a character who grew up on the streets and was already very skilled at sneaking, pickpocketing, and even knows how to fight, but can't do any of it as well as when he reaches maturity.

*probably never should come up

[Jormengand]

-6 across the board and -2 size for toddlers*

I'm just imagining a 32 point buy rogue toddler with 8/10/8/8/4/4 for stats who goes around with her tiny shortbow dealing 1d3+1d6-1 (average 4.5) damage to people with his +2 bonus to hit, vs FFAC (+8 size bonus to hide means she won't be seen) and therefore one-shotting NPC warriors with something alarmingly approaching regularity. As a toddler.

Oh, and this toddler has a half chance of offhand knowing the answers to simple questions untrained. Just saying. :smalltongue:

EDIT: For example, if you mention Anima Mages to her, she has a 50% chance of knowing that they use a rare form of spellcasting that lets them suddenly augment their spells. Mention every class in the ToM to her and she'll know about almost half of them.

[SirNibbles]

I would go with small (or tiny in chase of a small race) size. You should set a age, where the player has grown out of his smaller size.

Further I would suggest "immature attribute penalties" because of their young age. Make em similar to the aging penalties just dropping and not increasing.
e.g. for Humans: (not stacking !)
1-3 years: -6
4-9 years: -4
10-16(?) years: -2

Since Constitution is also effected, the lowered HP fits the children too imho.

Penalised constitution would also mean they're more susceptible to disease and poison which is pretty accurate.

However, I disagree with your flat system.

You may have noticed that an average adult can easily outdo a child in almost any kind of competition. That includes a genius child (one who, at adulthood, would have 18 Int). That means that, as a 1 year old, they would have 12 Int (with your system). That's above the average adult.

I would recommend a percentage-based system:
1-3: all stats are 35% of normal, rounded down (minimum 3)
4-9: all stats are 60% of normal, rounded down (minimum 3)
10-16: all stats are 85% of normal, rounded down (minimum 3)

With a percentage based system, a genius child would have 6 Int. A very strong baby, being tiny, would be able to carry 30 lbs as a heavy load. A weak baby would only be able to carry 15 lbs.

Alternatively, you could use a system that utilises both percentages and static increases. I still would prefer percentages if you were to only use one.

[D.M.Hentchel]

I'm just imagining a 32 point buy rogue toddler with 8/10/8/8/4/4 for stats who goes around with her tiny shortbow dealing 1d3+1d6-1 (average 4.5) damage to people with his +2 bonus to hit, vs FFAC (+8 size bonus to hide means she won't be seen) and therefore one-shotting NPC warriors with something alarmingly approaching regularity. As a toddler.

Oh, and this toddler has a half chance of offhand knowing the answers to simple questions untrained. Just saying. :smalltongue:

EDIT: For example, if you mention Anima Mages to her, she has a 50% chance of knowing that they use a rare form of spellcasting that lets them suddenly augment their spells. Mention every class in the ToM to her and she'll know about almost half of them.

Well by toddler I meant the 5 year old range (don't actually know the name of that age group), but still.

I would also like to note that (at least in my head) that a human "toddler" having a character level would not be something that would naturally happened.

I think I need to write in something that says you have the standard array until you reach childhood

[Doctor Despair]

A percentage system also means children can't have scores of 0, barring undead or things like that. Circumstancial penalties to skill checks could be worthwhile as well.

[Bartmanhomer]

I try making a male drow rogue child and ask the DM if it ok, but my DM won't allowed it because it's too dangerous. :frown:

[Segev]

I try making a male drow rogue child and ask the DM if it ok, but my DM won't allowed it because it's too dangerous. :frown:

Save the concept for another game with another DM, then. There's nothing wrong with a DM shooting down a concept he isn't comfortable with in his game.

[D.M.Hentchel]

A percentage system also means children can't have scores of 0, barring undead or things like that. Circumstancial penalties to skill checks could be worthwhile as well.

I am really starting to like that method

[Jay R]

In a game of original D&D, I rolled STR 4, DEX 16, CHA high, WIS low, and the rest low-to-average. I was considering dumping him, when the DM said, "That's a nine-year-old kid. He could get away with anything." So I went with it - in large part because the character idea was exciting to both me and the DM.

He once took down a sentry by walking up sniffling and crying, and saying, "Where's my daddy? I can't find him. I'm cold, and I'm tired, and I'm hungry, and I'm thirsty, and I want my daddy!" As the sentry bent down to comfort him, the kid sneak attacked.

[Bartmanhomer]

In a game of original D&D, I rolled STR 4, DEX 16, CHA high, WIS low, and the rest low-to-average. I was considering dumping him, when the DM said, "That's a nine-year-old kid. He could get away with anything." So I went with it - in large part because the character idea was exciting to both me and the DM.

He once took down a sentry by walking up sniffling and crying, and saying, "Where's my daddy? I can't find him. I'm cold, and I'm tired, and I'm hungry, and I'm thirsty, and I want my daddy!" As the sentry bent down to comfort him, the kid sneak attacked.

I remember you mentioning that in my other thread. :smile:

[Particle_Man]

There was a d20 game called GRIMM (off of grimm's fairy tales) that literally had child pcs with levels (up to 6 per class, like "bully", "nerd", etc.). Maybe there is something you can use there?

[Eisfalken]

I recall that the d20 rules for Game of Thrones treated children exactly like a kind of reversed age category: you had lower ability scores and it imposed size modifiers at the youngest levels, and I think they said to restrict class features, but other than that it wasn't really any different. You rolled up a regular character, applied the age modifiers, and ran with it.

It actually worked pretty good, basically justified Arya gaining levels but still being limited in ways. She started off technically Small and lower stats, but since she was the right point to "age up" while also gaining levels, she developed rapidly into a fairly equal-level adventurer by those rules (Medium size removed some stat penalties, age up removed others, and then she also gained levels in stuff).