Weirdness with Building Cities

[AnimeTheCat]

A little while ago I had made a post about using undead and whatnot, but what ended up happening was that I went through and did a fair number of calculations to figure out "best case" scenarios. Part of this is rolling to see what your highest level of certain classes are.

What blew my mind was that you can have higher level clerics, druids, wizards, and sorcerers than you can Rangers and Paladins... Seriously? Shouldn't the opposite be true?

What other weirdness have people encountered or had anecdotal weirdness from when building cities?

[XionUnborn01]

I don't see why this is weird I guess. Rangers are supposed to be forest men and paladins are supposed to be out questing for their god, either of which seems to lend itself to being in cities.

[Oracle71]

What blew my mind was that you can have higher level clerics, druids, wizards, and sorcerers than you can Rangers and Paladins... Seriously? Shouldn't the opposite be true?


Actually, since clerics, druids, wizards and sorcerers are typically more powerful than rangers and paladins, it is completely plausible that the full casters can be found at higher levels.

Though rangers and paladins should probably be found in higher numbers.

[AnimeTheCat]

I don't see why this is weird I guess. Rangers are supposed to be forest men and paladins are supposed to be out questing for their god, either of which seems to lend itself to being in cities.

well, rangers can also be guides through the wilderness which city folk would most certainly need. Also, this is the same table used to generate frontier cities and towns. Further, Druids live in glades and the wilderness and would likely have no purpose in a city so why would they get a highest level of 1d6+community modifier? Also, barbarians are wild, uncivilized and typically unwanted in "Cities" but they also have a higher possible level than the paladin and ranger.


Actually, since clerics, druids, wizards and sorcerers are typically more powerful than rangers and paladins, it is completely plausible that the full casters can be found at higher levels.

Though rangers and paladins should probably be found in higher numbers.

maybe for player characters it's plausible that the full casters can be found more at higher levels, but then why do the fighter, rogue, commoner, aristocrat, adept, expert, and bard have higher possible levels? I suppose since they aren't adventureres, it doesn't matter for the adept, expert, commoner, and aristocrat, but what does that argument say against the fighter, rogue, and bard? I always thought that the Ranger was widely considered to be better than paladin, barbarian, and figter... and that Paladin (even though it's meh...) is considered better than fighter since it gets actual real class abilities (and spellcasting).

[Eladrinblade]

What other weirdness have people encountered or had anecdotal weirdness from when building cities?

Cities with 20th level commoners, and it's actually pretty common. Just don't use the city building guidelines; they gave an effort, but the result was bad.

Also, with rangers and druids, 4% of thorps and hamlets have a mid-level druid or ranger, so there area actually a lot of them in the world.

[AnimeTheCat]

Cities with 20th level commoners, and it's actually pretty common. Just don't use the city building guidelines; they gave an effort, but the result was bad.

Also, with rangers and druids, 4% of thorps and hamlets have a mid-level druid or ranger, so there area actually a lot of them in the world.

The city building guidelines just make it super simple to calculate the population, created shops, infrastructure, and economy while still randomizing it.

For instance, if the town, city, Thorpe, etc only has high level martial characters, maybe that is a more production goods focused economy with a militaristic structure and much of the population trained with armor and weapons.

A city with very high level casters and very low level martial could be a research focused city near a ruin where the majority of the population is more learned.

The guidelines just help to accelerate things. I know I can just as easily change the highest levels table, I just though the original rules were odd.

[Fizban]

For reference: the Ranger and Paladin rolls are 1d3+modifier, while the Wizard roll is 1d4+mod and the Cleric and Druid rolls are 1d6+mod. So it's not that big a difference to begin with. I expect the Ranger and Paladin have the lowest rolls because as martial+magic "dual" classes (with a reasonable MAD) they're supposed to be more difficult to learn and rarer. While Clerics and Druids are basically the easiest casting there is with only a single stat needed and built in organizations that tend to have plenty of local power to back them up and do recruiting. Fighters and Rogues (and Barbarians where they're considered common) have the highest roll, because they're the easiest, outside of the NPC Commoner/Expert/Warrior have have much higher rolls.

City generation has nothing to do with power, it's just the place where the setting actually gets to rate the classes in difficulty and rarity, which don't affect PC generation at all.

[rel]

Amounts of goods and GP available in a large city always seemed a bit wonky to me.
Also, the highest level NPC around is often a commoner. How did they get to 20th level dirt farming and why did they insist on taking every level in commoner?

[dhasenan]

Amounts of goods and GP available in a large city always seemed a bit wonky to me.
Also, the highest level NPC around is often a commoner. How did they get to 20th level dirt farming and why did they insist on taking every level in commoner?

Listen. This here radish? This ain't no ordnary radish. You don't get this radish by just stickin seeds inna groun and wai'in. Ya gotta pick em right from the seed, hear? Ya gotta know the soil like it's yer best friend. Ya gotta know in yer bones what the weather's gonna be like six months from now. Or yer not gonna get a radish like this. Yer gonna get a turnip what calls itself a radish, and no flaver ta boot. Me mam taught me, she did, she shown me how ta grow a good radish. It's what us O'Donnels are good at. We're bred for this. What kinda city we'd be if we didn't have O'Donnel radishes? Best you ever dreamed of, and at a reasonable price.

And I coulda been a venchorer. I coulda gone out and got a magic bloodline or been a godbotherer or prance around in metal. But at the enna the day, that don't grow no radishes. Last week, we got a prince out here, right and proper with a crown on. What are you gonna feed im, if'n yer a venchorer? Some lich's family jools? I'll take the radish, evry time.

[Nifft]

Listen. This here radish? This ain't no ordnary radish. You don't get this radish by just stickin seeds inna groun and wai'in. Ya gotta pick em right from the seed, hear? Ya gotta know the soil like it's yer best friend. Ya gotta know in yer bones what the weather's gonna be like six months from now. Or yer not gonna get a radish like this. Yer gonna get a turnip what calls itself a radish, and no flaver ta boot. Me mam taught me, she did, she shown me how ta grow a good radish. It's what us O'Donnels are good at. We're bred for this. What kinda city we'd be if we didn't have O'Donnel radishes? Best you ever dreamed of, and at a reasonable price.

And I coulda been a venchorer. I coulda gone out and got a magic bloodline or been a godbotherer or prance around in metal. But at the enna the day, that don't grow no radishes. Last week, we got a prince out here, right and proper with a crown on. What are you gonna feed im, if'n yer a venchorer? Some lich's family jools? I'll take the radish, evry time.

That's clearly a level 21 Commoner, with the Legendary Radish Farmer [Epic] feat.

[Telok]

Yeah, the radish thing is cute. But you really shouldn't blindly follow the DMG city/world guidelines. They produce demographics that are wildly out of sync with the faux-medieval and dark ages worlds that D&D normally sees.

Those rules say that 90% of a region's population is in the 3 or 4 smallest town types. Not only do those types have a 10% chance for a... what 1d6+5? level druid plus the lower level add on druids, and a 10% chance for a similar level ranger and those lower level add ons, they also have 50%+ chances for adepts and clerics, plus the usual chance for a druid/s of low level if there isn't a higher level one.

Once all the numbers are tallied there are about 85% of the total population as 1st level commoners. Which is fine. There are also about 2% (I want to say 01.85ish) of the total population who can cast Cure Light Wounds at least once a day.

[Fizban]

Once all the numbers are tallied there are about 85% of the total population as 1st level commoners. Which is fine. There are also about 2% (I want to say 01.85ish) of the total population who can cast Cure Light Wounds at least once a day.
And that changes what exactly?

I could dispute your 2% calculation (I think it's closer to 1%), but either way Cure Light Wounds doesn't actually change anything. Seriously, people make a huge deal over cure magic changing society when it doesn't do anything. Cure Light does the same thing for society as Cure Minor, and that is this: stabilize people who are bleeding out, if and only if there is a person with the spell prepared within 100' or so (depending on obstacles and negative hit points). The only thing that can significantly alter is death by childbirth, assuming that's caused by hp damage and bleed out specifically. Maybe reduce death by bleed out after being hit by a horse or something if you keep them all stationed around the town waiting all day instead of doing something productive. These are both nice quality of life things that people would probably handwave anyway "dying in childbirth is lame that's why we have clerics", not an upheaval of the setting.

The spells available on 1st level casters do not drastically change the faux medieval world. They make some specific things better when those specific casters are present.

[Chronikoce]

why did they insist on taking every level in commoner?

Class is a player construct. Characters don't choose to level as commoner, they live their lives in such a manner that they never seek or are exposed to training which would enable the level up to fit a different class.

[Luccan]

Class is a player construct. Characters don't choose to level as commoner, they live their lives in such a manner that they never seek or are exposed to training which would enable the level up to fit a different class.

The real question is, what did he do to become a level 20 commoner? I can imagine many ways to get to level 20, but most of those would involve at least picking up levels in expert or warrior. You know, classes that can actually kind of do things (especially expert, which can be just super-commoner if you want). So honestly, I'd expect an especially lazy or stupid, but extremely lucky NPC to be the level 20 commoner.

[Uckleverry]

The real question is, what did he do to become a level 20 commoner?

NPCs don't gain XP the way PC adventurers do. Their levels can represent innate ability, so the level 20 commoner could be an exceptional low-born peasant type of person. They didn't have a chance at proper education or training, but they still became very good at what they could do. They're most likely a very important or otherwise notable person within the community, but still affiliated with the peasants or other similar demographic.

[Lazymancer]

The real question is, what did he do to become a level 20 commoner?

Experience points are a measure of accomplishment. ... The more dangerous the monsters, compared to the party’s level, the more XP the characters earn. ... A monster is usually overcome by defeating it in battle, a trap by being disarmed, and so forth. ... Suppose the PCs sneak past the sleeping minotaur to get into the magical vault—did they overcome the minotaur encounter? If their goal was to get into the vault and the minotaur was just a guardian, then the answer is probably yes.
As we see, commoner 20 needed to regularly overcome challenges of equivalent level. Given sedentary lifestyle of urban commoners, we can narrow down the source of those challenges: the highest-level challenges in the urban area can regularly be provided only by the state. Consequently, we may deduce that said high-level commoners were regularly challenged by the state. There simply isn't anyone else to constantly provide encounters of sufficient challenge rating.

Given non-violent nature of commoner lives, the second deduction is that encounters they overcame must've been non-violent.

Given that in encounters the opposition is the state and that commoners must be threatened by it, we may make third deduction: commoners are involved in some sort of criminal activity. They are opposing demands of their own state.

Given that state and commoners are regularly pitted against each other in all circumstances (regardless of culture/species), we may make fourth deduction: it is caused by some inherent contradiction of interests.

But what is it that every state - even such primitive state as are common in D&D - constantly demands from citizenry and is always opposed by it in a non-violent way? Taxes.

Case solved: commoners level-up via tax evasion.

[noob]

Yes and those wizards that get to high level in towns usually do through fighting the willforce of the annoying students.
I mean a teacher fights entire classes everyday.
That ought to get you in epic levels in no time.

[Yahzi]

But you really shouldn't blindly follow the DMG city/world guidelines.
Fizban is right that Cure Minor Wounds does as much as Cure Light Wounds; but slightly wrong about the effect. Death by childbirth was one of the biggest constraints on population expansion. It is still one of the most common causes of death for women; but in the D&D world it never happens.

The other spells that matter are Bless Plants, which has the same effect as modern fertilizer, and Remove Disease, which can stop plagues if used quickly enough. Both of these require 5th level casters, but the three spells together allow the population to explode like the modern world.

Which seems necessary, given that there are so many creatures that consume humans as their primary diet. :smallredface:

You are right that the city tables are simply absurd. I came up with a different scheme that assumes peasants are the base supply of XP for rulers but otherwise sticks to the 3E rules. Lords of Prime (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/217953/Lords-of-Prime) takes 1 cp = 1 lb of wheat and makes reasonable, medieval societies that aren't push-overs for wandering murder-hoboes. It's a bit more work than the city tables, but then there's an app that will do all the work for you ( Sandbox World Generator (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/217951/Sandbox-World-Generator)).

[Fizban]

Fizban is right that Cure Minor Wounds does as much as Cure Light Wounds; but slightly wrong about the effect. Death by childbirth was one of the biggest constraints on population expansion.
Really? I know it's bad but I wasn't under the impression it was quite that bad. It's still got to compete with plague and famine.

It is still one of the most common causes of death for women; but in the D&D world it never happens.
Well, assuming one of the local casters is interested in keeping them alive.

The other spells that matter are Bless Plants, which has the same effect as modern fertilizer,
I assume you mean Plant Growth, which not so much. Plant Growth raises the potential productivity of the targeted plants by one third. If their potential is garbage thanks to depleted soil it's not going to help much- the relevant farming advances still need to be made.

and Remove Disease, which can stop plagues if used quickly enough.
Same problem again: Remove Disease does nothing to stop re-infection, so if you don't actually know how diseases work to quarantine them properly there's no way you're making a significant difference with limited castings of the spell. And even if you do, the bigger cities have a rather large population to deal with for a bare handful of casters, even if only a percentage are infected.

Both of these require 5th level casters, but the three spells together allow the population to explode like the modern world.
Assuming the small number of available casters apply them perfectly, which is a long shot at best. It takes a small city to guarantee even a single 5th level caster, but 90% of the population is living in places that have little chance of one- that 5% chance for a free ranger or druid in every thorp is pretty ridiculous, as mentioned above, but that's still 1 in 20 and isn't necessarily a druid.

It's not hard to cover all the crops with Plant Growth for some extra productivity, but stopping a plague with Remove Disease requires much more knowledge and coordination, and even the slightest hint of greed will ensure plenty of women can't afford spellcasting midwives. It doesn't have to be direct either- who's going to send a a valuable (1st level) spellcaster into a slum where they could be mugged or murdered for their boots?

Xp mechanics have nothing to do with NPCs except for specific cases. The PHB already says wheat is 1cp per pound so I'm not sure why this is a revelation? (I'd take a look at the pdf myself but I don't feel like digging out my login, yay forced logins for free stuff). There's no reason for entrenched nobility to be higher level than peasants, though the DM is already free to put the high level NPCs of a city in all the positions of power and most pre-generated city stat blocks do indeed have most of the positions of power filled with the higher level NPCs. There is plenty of reason for the nobility to have better stats, and the DM can assign the elite/non-elite stats to whoever they want. The easiest justification for NPC levels is simply that the best in their fields naturally attract all the business- who settles for second best when there are few specialists and only so many jobs? And so one person gets all the practice and is the highest level. Everyone else settles for scraps and the result is that exponential level degradation of twice as many of half the level.

The most absurd thing about city generation is that the commoner roll is so high. This is obviously to pad out/ensure higher level commoners, but it also means that commoners can and likely do roll higher than 20 for their highest member in metropolises. The acts of a 20th level commoner are only absurd in the same way anyone else can push the craft or profession skills.

[Yahzi]

Well, assuming one of the local casters is interested in keeping them alive.
That's not much of an assumption, since most people casting CLW are clerics, and clerics by definition want worshippers.


Plant Growth raises the potential productivity of the targeted plants by one third.
Which is roughly equivalent to modern fertilizers. Not sure what soil quality has to do with anything; science didn't make poor soil better, it made good soil great.


quarantine
It's still a huge improvement over what the ancients had. It's going to stop some plagues.

My point is that D&D as written cannot explain why the world looks the way it does in every published module and setting.


who's going to send a a valuable (1st level) spellcaster into a slum where they could be mugged or murdered for their boots?
Who's going to mug a dangerous spell-caster? People in the D&D world know that ranks exist; they know that some people are hard to kill and have magic. Peasant rebellions are practically the stuff of fantasy in the real world; in the D&D world they are non-existent. Authority is even more respected and obeyed in the D&D world.

Also, Clerics. Clerics would totally do that.


The PHB already says wheat is 1cp per pound so I'm not sure why this is a revelation?
I was trying to say I stuck very closely to the canon material.


(I'd take a look at the pdf myself but I don't feel like digging out my login, yay forced logins for free stuff).
They're hosting the download service for free, which is nice. You can just make up a new login. :smallsmile:


There's no reason for entrenched nobility to be higher level than peasants
Of course there is. Level represents power. Peasants don't have power. If they did, they wouldn't be peasants.


The most absurd thing about city generation is that the commoner roll is so high.
Agreed. In my world commoner is not a class; everyone starts out as a 1st level commoner, but if you go up in level, you take a class.

[Bucky]

Level represents power. Peasants don't have power. If they did, they wouldn't be peasants.

Commoners don't necessarily have power either, even if they're high level.

[Nifft]

Of course there is. Level represents power. Peasants don't have power. If they did, they wouldn't be peasants. Level represents experience. For PCs, level tends to mean power, but NPCs are not PCs.

Also, of course, even among PCs there's significant variance. A level 20 Fighter with core feats is not going to represent the same level of power as a level 20 Wizard with core spells.


Agreed. In my world commoner is not a class; everyone starts out as a 1st level commoner, but if you go up in level, you take a class.

I do the same thing, which means I mostly just don't use Commoners at all.

[Fizban]

Well fine, I had a nice post and then my computer crashes for what continues to be no discernable reason. So you get the shorter more abrupt version.

That's not much of an assumption, since most people casting CLW are clerics, and clerics by definition want worshippers.
No, gods want worshippers, clerics want to do their god's bidding.

Which is roughly equivalent to modern fertilizers. Not sure what soil quality has to do with anything; science didn't make poor soil better, it made good soil great.
I'm pretty sure you're wrong, or rather hitting the wrong point. Good soil runs out of nitrates, don't know what the productivity hit is but that's why they'd rest fields until they invented crop rotation and then mass fertilizer, which from what I understand is absolutely critical to the repeatable farming we do today. Either way, Plant Growth only has the effects the DM says it has.

It's still a huge improvement over what the ancients had. It's going to stop some plagues.
No its not. It's going to save some important people while the rest get hit by exponential infection rates on communicable disease or otherwise constant infection rates from other vectors.

My point is that D&D as written cannot explain why the world looks the way it does in every published module and setting.
This sentence doesn't make sense. DnD as written is written, it doesn't need to explain why. Magic is small scale and the assumption is clearly that even those rare effects that could have a significant impact if used the right way have not been done so (or have no significant effect, or their effects are already accounted for), unless the DM or a specific setting says they have been (and those are very specific effects that even have the potential).

Who's going to mug a dangerous spell-caster? People in the D&D world know that ranks exist; they know that some people are hard to kill and have magic.
A 1st level cleric is not a "dangerous spell-caster," they're one good attack away from dropping like every other 1HD creature.

Peasant rebellions are practically the stuff of fantasy in the real world; in the D&D world they are non-existent. Authority is even more respected and obeyed in the D&D world.
Aside from any adventure that has ever featured a peasant rebellion, also this has nothing to do with clerical midwifing. Unless you're sending parties of armed guards into the slums to ensure health care for all, the problem is not ended. Your argument is based on the usual assumption that all spellcasters are united in one benevolent government, which is not how it works, especially not when the given odds for a benevolent mageocracy can be measured on the table.

Of course there is. Level represents power. Peasants don't have power. If they did, they wouldn't be peasants.
That has nothing to do with hereditary lines of succession, as in, "the nobility."

[Zaq]

D&D is pretty much good at providing a framework to have a band of 3-6 murderhoboes adventurers crashing around in a dungeon killing things and taking their stuff. That's its core area of focus. The world of D&D is bigger than that, but when you start trying to use printed rules and predefined numbers to generate stuff like the level distribution of a random settlement, well, let's just say that the farther away you get from that core area of focus, the more bizarre the results will be if you try to think about them too hard.

Yes, the rules exist, and yes, the game does gently encourage the GM to have some kind of idea of what the larger setting looks like. But the rules do an awful job of modeling most things that aren't directly related to crashing around in a dungeon, especially when it comes to anything like an economy that isn't about ridiculously valuable magic items that are used to aid in the process of killing things and taking their stuff. You can sit and think about it all day, and if you're genuinely having fun, I'm not going to say that you shouldn't do things that are fun for you. But I'm convinced that the printed rules for figuring out populations and economics of large groups of non-adventurers are basically a one-way trip to madness. You'll honestly probably have less of a headache just making something up.

Truth be told, even the fact that the NPC classes are presented as classes (and therefore you can/should have 5th level Commoners and 8th level Experts and 2nd level Aristocrats so on) is pretty kludgey. I understand that the game had a desire to allow every critter in it to be statted up in a semi-consistent manner (with hit dice determining skill rank caps and BAB and so on), but again, the farther away you get from the concept of the adventuring party, the weaker those rules get, and then we have to discuss the concept of "how did the 5th level Commoner become 5th level?" and "what does a monthly or yearly set of cash flows look like for an untrained laborer earning X sp per day?" and "if only there's only one Wizard capable of casting 6th level spells out of three cities' worth of people, where do all these high-level magic items come from?" and "how is daily life for a population affected by 1 person out of every [however many] having access to adventurer-style magic?" and you either end up with a pile of absurdity or the Tippyverse or both. D&D is a fun game, and it's a big and complex enough game to make it fun to think about and talk about traditional PC-style adventuring characters for however many years we've been doing this, but that doesn't mean that the game did a good job of writing out rules to follow to build internally consistent cities of non-adventuring NPCs. It has rules, but they're no good, and we really don't need to pretend that they're good.

If rolling on the tables in the DMG gives you a good starting point to answer questions you didn't think you needed to answer when you started the game, then I'm glad they exist. But don't try to use them to build an entire world and then expect that the world is going to be logically consistent, because the rules just plain aren't designed for that.