PDA

View Full Version : Level 1 characters not wet behind the ears now?



Akisa
2008-01-10, 06:15 PM
After posting that I was looking for a group message on an OpenRPG game classifieds forums. My reason behind ignoring all level 1 campaign was because I didn't want to make a wet behind the ears character. But now people are saying that you could be level one w/o being wet behind the ears character.

This doesn't make sense because level there is a reason campaign guides have the captain or sergeant on average higher level then rest of the group. It's usually the one with the more experience that get put in that position. I know that's not always the case where you can have one subordinate better then the captain but that could also mean he's have better training (better selection of feats skill etc).

Level 1 represent lack of knowledge and experience. Not all your experience comes from (it shouldn't unless hack nd slash) combat but instead also from training, social interactions, research etc. Do you think that level 4 expert who are very good at weapon crafting or mayor would have went adventuring?

Rutee
2008-01-10, 06:22 PM
I would say that level 1 is in fact, not necessarily wet behind the ears. It /can/ be, but I would also cheerfully make a level 1 who simply has not actively gone adventuring yet, but is still rather experienced.

But I consider it an enormous limit to have to make some sort of callow newbie of a character if I'm starting at level 1, so.

Karsh
2008-01-10, 06:25 PM
I think the argument that they're making is that by having even only one level in a PC class, you're a cut above most NPCs. A first level Fighter would be a bit hard pressed, but they could probably defeat a 2nd or maybe even 3rd level Warrior due to their bonus feat and max HP from their first hit dice.

Wizards are assumed to have spent years studying magic even at level 1, Clerics are fairly accomplished, etc. First level characters are certainly still low on the totem pole, but they're a cut above all the level 1 NPC classes, regardless.

Ascension
2008-01-10, 07:13 PM
I can't remember where it was now, but I remember reading a fascinating article somewhere once that opined that pretty much all of the great figures from history topped out around levels 3-5, and even mythical characters only went up to around ten or so. If you think about it, the whole class system is actually a very poor generalization of experience. First off, no one is born with level one abilities. D&D can't accurately model children in the slightest. On top of that, few people would enter player class professions from childhood, so virtually all PCs should have at least one NPC level. On the other hand, some people progress very rapidly in a limited number of skills to the exclusion of all else. Due to the cap on skills, even a very intelligent character is limited to their level +3 ranks in the any skill. I know that's probably meant to encourage characters in classes with a lot of skill points to diversify, but it can't ever hope to model an idiot savant or your typical single-specialization genius or heck, even anyone with a college degree. Most highly-intelligent people specialize to an extreme. People love to use Einstein as an example of genius, but face it, every skill other than Knowledge (Physics) would probably be cross-class for him.

This isn't to say I don't enjoy the D&D character creation system. It works very well for a game. It just can't ever hope to accurately model anything vaguely approaching real life.

Project_Mayhem
2008-01-10, 07:22 PM
People love to use Einstein as an example of genius, but face it, every skill other than Knowledge (Physics) would probably be cross-class for him

and, of course, perform (violin)

marjan
2008-01-10, 07:26 PM
I can't remember where it was now, but I remember reading a fascinating article somewhere once that opined that pretty much all of the great figures from history topped out around levels 3-5, and even mythical characters only went up to around ten or so. If you think about it, the whole class system is actually a very poor generalization of experience. First off, no one is born with level one abilities. D&D can't accurately model children in the slightest. On top of that, few people would enter player class professions from childhood, so virtually all PCs should have at least one NPC level. On the other hand, some people progress very rapidly in a limited number of skills to the exclusion of all else. Due to the cap on skills, even a very intelligent character is limited to their level +3 ranks in the any skill. I know that's probably meant to encourage characters in classes with a lot of skill points to diversify, but it can't ever hope to model an idiot savant or your typical single-specialization genius or heck, even anyone with a college degree. Most highly-intelligent people specialize to an extreme. People love to use Einstein as an example of genius, but face it, every skill other than Knowledge (Physics) would probably be cross-class for him.

This isn't to say I don't enjoy the D&D character creation system. It works very well for a game. It just can't ever hope to accurately model anything vaguely approaching real life.

This (http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html) is probably what you're thinking of.

Lord_Asmodeus
2008-01-10, 07:28 PM
and, of course, perform (violin)
so... Einstein was a Bard? :smallbiggrin:

For me level one just means that they're experience is more limited than upper levels, but usually more experienced than the "average" person, for me an average level one will have, like for a fighter, maybe tussled with some bandits and fought some orcs or goblins or something around their town/city/village, but have never really done much alot of people hadn't done.

Saph
2008-01-10, 07:41 PM
Here's a idea for a way to do it:

All characters start off as NPC classes. Then, for PCs, after a certain point, they retrain as PC classes, resetting their XP total to zero.

So your fighter starts out as a 1st-level warrior. Once he's gotten enough XP, he retrains and now he's a 1st-level fighter, gaining the extra HP and feat but going down to zero XP.

I'm actually doing something similar with my current character now. He's done a few things in his background during which he was supposed to be a ranger. After a few experiences, he had a change of focus, retrained, and started the campaign as a 1st-level warblade.

- Saph

Citizen Joe
2008-01-10, 07:43 PM
Even level 1 characters are not wet behind the ears. They've gone through some training and the simple fact that they have achieved 1st level means something. Going beyond that, if you want someone that is a grizzled old warrior, but restricted to level 1, you could add the fluff that you fought undead a great deal, resulting in massive level loss and then combine that with having recently been resurrected, resulting in even more level loss.

Matthew
2008-01-10, 08:05 PM
It's just a result of the D20 'everybody has a class and level approach'. In prior editions only a very few characters had a level and class, with the overwhelming majority of the NPC population being Unclassed 0 Experience Level Characters. The D20 approach has undermined that idea pretty completely, but it still remains in people's minds and here and there in the rulebooks. If you go by certain parts of the 3e DMG, the overwhelming majority of NPCs are levels 1-3 with the majority being level 1. In that scenario, Level 1 PCs are indeed not 'wet behind the ears'. However, if you go with the demography distribution from the 3e DMG you might come to an entirely different conclusion.

Renx
2008-01-10, 08:42 PM
While not d20, Warhammer Fantasy RPG has a very interesting way of handling experience. You start off with a random profession. Yes, random. You get certain talents and chances for advancement from it. You advance as much as you want and then change the class (if you want to get into a more advanced class, you need to learn everything a basic class has to offer to get into an 'exit' class). While everyone starts at the same page you can already have meaningful adventures (without having at least a 50% fail chance at everything).

Some day I might start a campaign where everyone starts off with their stats at 18, no cross-class skills if you can spin it into your character, everyone gets double skill points. Play as you like, but your dice rolls act with those. You don't gain stats from levels and any you lose are gone permanently. Poison and disease have 33% chance of doing permanent damage.

Play for a few levels, then see how they run from a pack of scorpions.

Devils_Advocate
2008-01-10, 08:50 PM
"Inexperienced" is pretty much a relative term. 1st-level characters with PC classes have had more/better experience/training than the average person, but not enough experience to earn a promotion to a high-level management position. Does that make sense?

As to whether this makes them "wet behind the ears", I really can't say. I'm not really familiar with the term. I can't see how that would relate to a lack of experience... :smallconfused:

("There are more grains of sand on this beach than there are stars in the sky. They're the most there is of anything I could find! And yet, I'm having NO DIFFICULTY WHATSOEVER shaking a stick in their direction!!! How can there be more of something than you can shake a stick at?!!")

Demented
2008-01-10, 09:16 PM
It just means they haven't succeeded in all that many encounters.
Going into battle and turning tail the moment you see the first possessed owlbear is a recipe for not gaining your just measure of exp. =P

snoopy13a
2008-01-10, 10:01 PM
I suppose it all depends on the DM's viewpoint. A level 1 NPC guard could be the ex-farmhand who just joined the city guard. On the other hand, the level 1 NPC could be an average guard with a couple of years service.

If the higher rank NPCs are going to be of low levels such as level 2 sergeants and the captain of the guard being at level 3 then your average guard is going to be around level 1. If the sergeants and captain are more like level 5 or 6 then your average guard is going to be from 2-4 with the level 1 guards being raw recruits.

thorgrim29
2008-01-10, 10:04 PM
It just means they haven't succeeded in all that many encounters.
Going into battle and turning tail the moment you see the first possessed owlbear is a recipe for not gaining your just measure of exp. =P

On the other hand, its a very good recipe for staying alive.....

Voyager_I
2008-01-10, 10:33 PM
I suppose it all depends on the DM's viewpoint. A level 1 NPC guard could be the ex-farmhand who just joined the city guard. On the other hand, the level 1 NPC could be an average guard with a couple of years service.

If the higher rank NPCs are going to be of low levels such as level 2 sergeants and the captain of the guard being at level 3 then your average guard is going to be around level 1. If the sergeants and captain are more like level 5 or 6 then your average guard is going to be from 2-4 with the level 1 guards being raw recruits.

I might argue that raw militia would be more accurately represented as Commoners, rather than Warriors. I always thought it was assumed that (in most worlds), a first level NPC Warrior was a competent, if unremarkable, soldier.

Ascension
2008-01-10, 10:49 PM
This (http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html) is probably what you're thinking of.

Hey, thanks. This time I'm bookmarking it. Last time I found it I was on someone else's computer and didn't have the chance.

BardicDuelist
2008-01-11, 12:48 AM
Wow it's been a while since I posted...

Anyway, level one is supposed to be the majority of the population. A level in a PC class is supposed to be an elite part of the population (captains are actually reccomended to be lv 1 fighters while their underlings are lv 1 warriors).

I agree with Matthew that it is a silly concept that everything must have a level, but that comes from the current distaste for abstraction, both on the part of the designers and a large base of players.

TheOOB
2008-01-11, 12:59 AM
Wow it's been a while since I posted...

Anyway, level one is supposed to be the majority of the population. A level in a PC class is supposed to be an elite part of the population (captains are actually reccomended to be lv 1 fighters while their underlings are lv 1 warriors).

I agree with Matthew that it is a silly concept that everything must have a level, but that comes from the current distaste for abstraction, both on the part of the designers and a large base of players.

Level a largely a question of setting, not only the campaign as a whole, but areas within the campaign. The commoners in the friged northlands are likely to be higher level because hey, it's tougher to live there, you level up or you die. In some campaigns most people will be level 1, then a level 1 PC is something special, but in some games a basic town guard may be 4-5, in which case a level 1 character is a total newbie. It's all a matter of relativity.

horseboy
2008-01-11, 01:26 AM
There's also the fun paradox of "most people are level 1" but "those in rural or frontier areas average around 2nd or 3rd". So....... unless it's a heavily urbanized world, wouldn't the average level actually be 2nd? I really do hate the power ramp in D&D that even makes this a problem.

Yeah, your average modern suburbanite would be 1st level. They just kinda go through life, maybe buy a piece of paper saying they're smart. Get a job, punch a clock, but never actually "do" anything with their lives. The biggest challenge they faced was what computer to buy. (I actually had a lady have an anxiety attack deciding once. :elan:)

Compare that someone to someone who actually earned their piece of paper and put effort into their lives. The second person wouldn't be as wet as the other person, but would still be a "newb", just not a "n00b".

Artanis
2008-01-11, 01:43 AM
I might argue that raw militia would be more accurately represented as Commoners, rather than Warriors. I always thought it was assumed that (in most worlds), a first level NPC Warrior was a competent, if unremarkable, soldier.
FWIW, IIRC this is even officially the case in Eberron. They describe most armies as being made up of level 1 Commoner conscripts, with the best units being made up of level 1 Warriors, and maybe a few level 2 Warriors. The really badass soldiers - which were VERY rare even in the most militaristic of the Five Nations - were Warrior 1 / Fighter 1.

Rumpus
2008-01-11, 03:40 AM
Depends on your world. In a world like the Forgotten Realms, with a huge adventuring tradition, where adventurers become kings and every hamlet has its own archmage, then yes, 1st level characters are rookies, apprentices, and wannabes.

In a world that is much more stable, where people hardly ever have to fight for their own survival, and adventurers are dangerous lunatics, a first level character may be a real badass who's just young. First level casters tell the laws of physics to shut up and sit down, and a couple of level 1 fighters can clear out a local biker bar.

Think for a minute about who chooses to become an adventurer. The vast majority of people become apprentice weavers, potters, or take over the family farm. It takes a special kind of drive (or insanity) to dedicate your life to crawling into dark holes and risking your life in combat to pull treasure out of the ground.

Level 1 probably represents 3-5 years of training for an average person, possibly one year of really intense training for a prodigy. Enough that they are significantly better than an average person, but not amazing.

Demented
2008-01-11, 04:12 AM
Think for a minute about who chooses to become an adventurer. The vast majority of people become apprentice weavers, potters, or take over the family farm. It takes a special kind of drive (or insanity) to dedicate your life to crawling into dark holes and risking your life in combat to pull treasure out of the ground.

Your very short life, once that gelatinous cube lands on your head.

Which brings up something else:
How much more dangerous is a CR 3 encounter, when most villages can expect to have a rabble of level 1 commoners for defense? From that perspective, a rakshasa is a nigh-unstoppable monster; how many people have a good-aligned spear? What damage could a band of ogres do, or a gang of trolls? Whose regiment gets to be eaten by the purple worm?

Demented
2008-01-11, 04:13 AM
Think for a minute about who chooses to become an adventurer. The vast majority of people become apprentice weavers, potters, or take over the family farm. It takes a special kind of drive (or insanity) to dedicate your life to crawling into dark holes and risking your life in combat to pull treasure out of the ground.

Your very short life, once that gelatinous cube lands on your head.

Which brings up something else:
How much more dangerous is a CR 3 encounter, when most villages can expect to have a rabble of level 1 commoners for defense? From that perspective, a rakshasa is a nigh-unstoppable monster; how many people have a good-aligned spear? What damage could a band of ogres do, or a gang of trolls? Whose regiment gets to be eaten by the purple worm?

hewhosaysfish
2008-01-11, 06:54 AM
How much more dangerous is a CR 3 encounter, when most villages can expect to have a rabble of level 1 commoners for defense? From that perspective, a rakshasa is a nigh-unstoppable monster; how many people have a good-aligned spear? What damage could a band of ogres do, or a gang of trolls? Whose regiment gets to be eaten by the purple worm?

That's why they have to hire wandering vagabonds to defend them, offering a huge pile of gold (that must be equal to the income of the whole town for a year) or possibly the local lord's daughter as a reward.


FWIW, IIRC this is even officially the case in Eberron. They describe most armies as being made up of level 1 Commoner conscripts, with the best units being made up of level 1 Warriors, and maybe a few level 2 Warriors. The really badass soldiers - which were VERY rare even in the most militaristic of the Five Nations - were Warrior 1 / Fighter 1.

I believe it's officially the case in the DMG. I'm away from my books atm so I can't check but I'm sure thee was a bit about war and armies...


"There are more grains of sand on this beach than there are stars in the sky. They're the most there is of anything I could find! And yet, I'm having NO DIFFICULTY WHATSOEVER shaking a stick in their direction!!! How can there be more of something than you can shake a stick at?!!"

*Dumps 3 tons of sand on Devils_Advocate*
"Hah! Try shaking your stick now!"
It's not just that there's a lot of them; it's that they're all ganging up on you.

Telonius
2008-01-11, 08:47 AM
so... Einstein was a Bard? :smallbiggrin:



Certainly explains the charisma.

Pilum
2008-01-11, 12:53 PM
May also be worth mentioning the old saw about the old D&D set, way back when levels had titles too... The title for a level 1 Fighter? Veteran, if I remember correctly. Plus the evil Black Eagle Baron was kept in power and greatly feared thanks to his elite Black Eagle Guard, who were (drum roll) 20 2nd level fighters, possibly with a 3rd level captain... And they kept the surrounding nations at bay. Have a Big Bad Evil Guy with only 2nd level bodyguards as a campaign enemy lately and you're more likely to be sniggered at than feared.

Of course, that's back when you needed what was it? 2/3000 xp to level, and your average orc was only worth 5 I think... I rather liked that take on things. But there's certainly no need for a 1st level character to be a total novice, as others have detailed above.

Indon
2008-01-11, 01:13 PM
("There are more grains of sand on this beach than there are stars in the sky. They're the most there is of anything I could find! And yet, I'm having NO DIFFICULTY WHATSOEVER shaking a stick in their direction!!! How can there be more of something than you can shake a stick at?!!")

That's always a funny webcomic.

I'm pretty sure the term has something to do with childhood, or something. Kind of like calling someone "kid".

spotmarkedx
2008-01-11, 01:33 PM
From what I hear, 4th Edition will have a higher "competence" level for level 1 PCs. The main thing that seems to be floated around a lot is a higher hit point total for that 1st level. Even if everything else is the same, that survivability is a big step up (and reflects a better ability to dodge or twist away from weapon blows).

It will be interesting to see if guards or commoners in 4e get a similar boost, or if they stay at the "single hit die = likely single hit" level that we have now...

With regard to the current editions, while the official works may be that most NPCs are of low level (Say, Level 3 or lower), I think that a lot of DMs are almost forced to bypass it, or at least have the people the PCs meet be of higher level, else bandit attacks (for good parties) or guards in the town (for evil) tend to be extreme walk-overs. So, to steal an idea from the late Robert Jorden, perhaps PCs have a fate that draws higher power and more interesting NPCs to aid or to hinder them...

Jothki
2008-01-11, 06:11 PM
The big problem with assuming that most NPCs are level 1 is that going from level 1 to level 2 is a fairly massive jump, more so than the amount of training or actual experience expected to gain that level would justify. Setting the base level higher smoothes out the curve a bit.

On the other hand, if 4th edition is making 1st level characters inherently stronger, then this will become much less of an issue, since 2nd level won't be as big of a jump.

Necromas
2008-01-11, 06:38 PM
Wet behind the ears = mainly roleplay

The cardinal rule of roleplaying is that statistics, levels, even classes and races, pretty much everything like that doesn't mean a damn as long as you're still making the same rolls, and having fun.

I see no reason why, because I have 10 hp and can only swing my sword once per round for a meager +3 to attack and 1d8+2 damage, I can't roleplay as someone who is experienced.

Jarawara
2008-01-11, 07:02 PM
One way to look at it is to look to that army of Orcs about to attack the country. That horde of slavering, merciless Orcs is mounting a coordinated, efficient campaign to decimate your entire way of life. They will not rest until they've slain your warriors, burned your cities, enslaved the young and old alike, stole your lifestock and torched your fields, burned your dog down and shot your house.

The vast majority of them are level 1 NPC warriors, with 4 hp each. Are they a horde of brutally efficient killers with one focused goal of ending your life? Or are they a bunch of newbie, wet behind the ears, 'which way do I point this sword' types, put there only for comic relief?

If it is the former, then you have a perfect example of how you can play an 'experienced' 1st level character. If it's the latter, then yes, 1st level characters are wet behind the ears, and Orcs would have to be given an extra level to be portrayed as veteran killers as well. And so would the defending soldiers, lest they be newbie untrained idiots, put there only as the hapless victims of the impending Orc attack, (perfect fodder for PC heroes to save the day!).

Myself, I like menacing, brutally efficient horde of Orcs without needing to up them to 2nd or 3rd level. Though I do admit that 4 hp does seem a little thin for them.

Frosty
2008-01-11, 07:08 PM
at 4 HP, it's possible for Scruffy the house-cat to kill an orc.

marjan
2008-01-11, 07:19 PM
at 4 HP, it's possible for Scruffy the house-cat to kill an orc.

And what's so unusual with house-cat killing orc.:smallconfused: Like we haven't seen it already.:smallbiggrin:

Frosty
2008-01-11, 07:21 PM
I haven't really. Now, Mystic Theurges are a different story... :smalltongue:

Matthew
2008-01-11, 07:31 PM
at 4 HP, it's possible for Scruffy the house-cat to kill an orc.

But does that mean the Warrior/Orc is too weak or the House Cat is too strong? Given that a Level 20 Fighter already reduced to 1 Hit Point can be killed by a House Cat, I would be likely to say the latter.

Devils_Advocate
2008-01-11, 07:52 PM
Or are they a bunch of newbie, wet behind the ears, 'which way do I point this sword' types, put there only for comic relief?
Actually, if you think through the implications, it's sort of disturbing. Because what that means is that the tribe of orcs you're fighting is primarily concerned with producing as many children as it can, raising them, training them, and tossing them at their enemies, all as quickly and efficiently as possible, so that they can pillage a ton of stuff to use as supplies to bring up the next generation and zerg rush everybody all over again. This endless cycle of violence defines their lives, and is ultimately harder on orcs than it is on anyone else, but they keep on doing it because the veterans who survived the last raid just don't care about the younger generation that they'll be using as cannon fodder, and the noob warriors don't know how hopelessly outclassed they are by the people they'll be going up against until it's too late.

Oh, and Gruumsh deliberately keeps them at this because he doesn't care about the younger orcs either (Why would he place any value in someone who hadn't yet proven himself in battle?) and really hates the demihumans that the orcs are fighting.

Felius
2008-01-11, 08:27 PM
I plan when and if I DM to give an army example:

Level 1 would be the green basic soldier. Never saw combat just got a few weeks at the boot camp

Level 2 Would be the basic soldier after a few battles or a more intense training. Let's say the nation is in peace so he got a a a few month in the boot camp instead of a few weeks.

Level 3 Would be the veterans, or the guys that had a couple years training.

The kind of training would define the class:

No training whatsoever: Commoner levies (level 1 unless survive a few battles. You can't get a few months at "no training" and expect they level up. :P)

Crash course: Commoner with weapon profiency. Would represent the ones who get a couple days where they are told with what side of the weapon to strike.

Basic training: Warrior.

Fighter academy (or whatever you wish to call the place where you train the elite guys, who are really taught how to fight. Can also be a apprenticeship scheme, like the knights, where the veterans would train these who aren't.): Fighters (or Knights depending on the focus, etc.)

Scout academy(not always applicable. Only where the scouts are really that good.): Scouts (Duh!)

Warmage Academy: Do I need to tell?

Special Forces academy: Mostly Fighters, Rogues and/or Scouts. Expect their level to be higher, as it gets the perk training from hell much more frequently the the rest

Culture specific Academy: Any class that can be produced in good amounts, and is fit for the culture. Maybe some "Stereotype-Asia" realm may have a academy who trains monks for their armies. Maybe one may have a pact with a powerful entity who empowers warlocks by the dozen for them. Other might get a place where they train warblades at 24/7. A more religious kingdom might have a sect of war priests and paladins (if good). Also, it get the training from hell perk more frenquently, while not as much as the Special Forces. After All if you're going out of your way to have a pact with a demon, or to train them as warblades why not train them heavily as well)
Does not apply in certain cases, like for example: A Japan-like kingdom would get samurai out of the fighter academy and ninjas out the special forces.

Training from Hell: Not a specific training, but more like a "perk" other kinds of training can get. Basically means you're going to train your soldiers 'till exhaustion and then more.

Remeber that the more "elite" your soldiers are, the less soldiers you get, as less persons are deem fit for it, survive the training, etc. I mean, for what you can get 100 warriors trained and equipped, you probably will only get one warblade.

Now how the armies are composed depends on the country. One might have a absolute huge number of level 1 commoners levies that they thrown away at the enemy. Other might have a handful of the most elite soldiers ever trained and depend entirely on them to survive. Most will strike a balance at some point.

P.S. Sorry for the long post.
P.S.S. If there is any typo or errors of the English language in general, tell me please.

Jarawara
2008-01-11, 11:11 PM
So what this really boils down to is...

(Quote by Felius: "Level 1 would be the green basic soldier. Never saw combat just got a few weeks at the boot camp.")

You have a level 1 guy who was trained at a military camp, taught basic combat tactics and unit-formation discipline, as well as the basics on how to use weaponry - is he then considered 'green, wet behind the ears, a total newb', or is he a professional, if inexperienced, soldier?

Myself, I'd call him a soldier. Yes, I can probably outwit him with a fairly simple tactic - after all, he was trained to expect enemies to just stand there and fight, just like he's doing. A handful of dirt in his eyes is going to do wonders, just as the first guy who trys to fast-talk him into believing (insert outrageous lie here).

But 'wet behind the ears'? That implies more than that. That implies to me that he wouldn't know what end of the sword to handle, or what an Orc was, or that the new currency of the realm is, well, currency. (Had a newbie character who came from the outer farmlands - didn't know what 'coinage' was for. He'd always simply worked for food and lodging before.)

Now, the guy who *enters* boot camp, to be trained as a soldier - total beginner. Doesn't know his hind end from a trebuchet. Thinks "Orc" is something off the lunch truck. (Depending on what culture he's in, he might be right on that one.) But once he's gone through boot camp, he's learned a thing or two, and earned a bit of bragging rights. He's no longer a newb.

As a way of testing this hypothesis: Go to that friend of yours that just joined the Marines, and as soon as he gets out of boot camp, totally let loose with the insults on how much a newbie he is, how he's a total idiot when it comes to weaponry, and how he don't know nothing at all about combat. It also works well to try to impress him with your kung-fu. Then, if you still live, report the results back to the boards. Have someone type for you, if your arms are still broken (or removed).

horseboy
2008-01-11, 11:33 PM
As a way of testing this hypothesis: Go to that friend of yours that just joined the Marines, and as soon as he gets out of boot camp, totally let loose with the insults on how much a newbie he is, how he's a total idiot when it comes to weaponry, and how he don't know nothing at all about combat. It also works well to try to impress him with your kung-fu. Then, if you still live, report the results back to the boards. Have someone type for you, if your arms are still broken (or removed).

Of course, compare him to someone who's been through Normandy, he's still a newb. It's all a matter of prospective. Sure, he may be better than Ed the Baker, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he's good, just that Ed is that bad. :smallamused:

Felius
2008-01-11, 11:42 PM
So what this really boils down to is...

(Quote by Felius: "Level 1 would be the green basic soldier. Never saw combat just got a few weeks at the boot camp.")

You have a level 1 guy who was trained at a military camp, taught basic combat tactics and unit-formation discipline, as well as the basics on how to use weaponry - is he then considered 'green, wet behind the ears, a total newb', or is he a professional, if inexperienced, soldier?

Myself, I'd call him a soldier. Yes, I can probably outwit him with a fairly simple tactic - after all, he was trained to expect enemies to just stand there and fight, just like he's doing. A handful of dirt in his eyes is going to do wonders, just as the first guy who trys to fast-talk him into believing (insert outrageous lie here).

But 'wet behind the ears'? That implies more than that. That implies to me that he wouldn't know what end of the sword to handle, or what an Orc was, or that the new currency of the realm is, well, currency. (Had a newbie character who came from the outer farmlands - didn't know what 'coinage' was for. He'd always simply worked for food and lodging before.)

Now, the guy who *enters* boot camp, to be trained as a soldier - total beginner. Doesn't know his hind end from a trebuchet. Thinks "Orc" is something off the lunch truck. (Depending on what culture he's in, he might be right on that one.) But once he's gone through boot camp, he's learned a thing or two, and earned a bit of bragging rights. He's no longer a newb.

As a way of testing this hypothesis: Go to that friend of yours that just joined the Marines, and as soon as he gets out of boot camp, totally let loose with the insults on how much a newbie he is, how he's a total idiot when it comes to weaponry, and how he don't know nothing at all about combat. It also works well to try to impress him with your kung-fu. Then, if you still live, report the results back to the boards. Have someone type for you, if your arms are still broken (or removed).

First: The level one green soldier would not be the equivalent of a marine. A marine goes into a really heavy regime of training and would be the equivalent of a training from hell. He would be probably at level 2 or even 3 right after training. The level 1 soldier would be your standard infantry. At the boot camp they got him fit, and taught how to shoot a rifle.

Second: Where I said that a level 1 was wet behind the ears? I said he was green and never saw combat. Different things here.

Third: A complete newbie would be basically the equivalent of a commoner. Only after he went through the boot camp, he picks up a level of warrior.

Fourth: Well it's pretty hard for me to go talk with a friend who just got out of boot camp of the marines, because I don't even LIVE in the States.

Fifth: Why so much aggressiveness? What have I done to you? Have I kicked your knees?:smallbiggrin:

Jarawara
2008-01-12, 01:36 AM
Sorry, Felius, didn't mean to be aggressive. (I thought I was being funny. Maybe it's best I didn't choose a career as a comedian.)

As for your second point, yes, I know you never said level 1 was wet behind the ears. The original thread creator said it, when he said 1st level characters would be. I then compared 1st level characters to 1st level warriors (like Orcs or the common soldier), and voila, we end up here. So in essence, I quoted you, but I was directing the post more at the original poster.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. No hurt feelings?

And for the record, I think we agree - 'wet behind the ears' is what commoners are *before* they become 1st level warriors, not after they went through boot camp. And as 1st level characters are generally more powerful than 1st level NPC warriors, the logic would say that 1st level characters need not be played as newbies either, though one could choose to. (Again, that's directed towards the original poster, who was avoiding playing level 1 because he didn't want to play 'wet behind the ears' types).

*~*

Hey, where'd these bruises come from on my knees? :smallbiggrin:

Kioran
2008-01-12, 05:10 AM
First: The level one green soldier would not be the equivalent of a marine. A marine goes into a really heavy regime of training and would be the equivalent of a training from hell. He would be probably at level 2 or even 3 right after training. The level 1 soldier would be your standard infantry. At the boot camp they got him fit, and taught how to shoot a rifle.

Second: Where I said that a level 1 was wet behind the ears? I said he was green and never saw combat. Different things here.

Third: A complete newbie would be basically the equivalent of a commoner. Only after he went through the boot camp, he picks up a level of warrior.

Fourth: Well it's pretty hard for me to go talk with a friend who just got out of boot camp of the marines, because I don't even LIVE in the States.

Fifth: Why so much aggressiveness? What have I done to you? Have I kicked your knees?:smallbiggrin:

I disagree. Marines get basic training that Focuses on obeying orders and physical fitness, as well as some close quarters fighting. Doesn´t make them killing machines from hell, or even lvl 2. That does mean they get a PC-class (perhaps one with a D12) instead of NPC, but that´s about the size of it.
Conversely, most soldiers who get through their respective basic training gain their PC-class (mine didn´t have full BAB, but hey).....Being trained into a meat robot does not mean you rock the show or even level. You´re not wet behind the ears anymore, but that just means you´re better than a commoner and different than a "Jäger" or "Panzergrenadier", virtue of your distinct PC-class.

Oh, and 3 Years Kung-fu or any martial art against USMC basic training? It´s a good thing military personnel have a good medical plan.........

Dhavaer
2008-01-12, 06:21 AM
But does that mean the Warrior/Orc is too weak or the House Cat is too strong? Given that a Level 20 Fighter already reduced to 1 Hit Point can be killed by a House Cat, I would be likely to say the latter.

For nerfing housecats, I recommend removing weapon finesse as a bonus feat. Just because they hit you with the teeny-tiny claws doesn't mean you're actually damaged.

GolemsVoice
2008-01-12, 07:37 AM
Another way to see this is that the amount of expertise you have at whatever you are doing is also represented by his stats. So, a person who trains to be a warrior steels his body, strengthens his mind, and trains his dexterity. So what makes him superior to the warrior on level one is that he maybe has the same level of experience in life, but he has, say, the "mindset" of a true fighter. A person who not only awaits to fight a few goblins, maybe a bandit or two, but who goes out to slay dragons and liches and housecats of doom.

Zenos
2008-01-12, 08:43 AM
I would simply say 1t level is before you've been in any real combat, but if you're a fighter or warrior you've probably had some martial training of the "wooden swords" type. Or if you're a wizard, maybe you've just been alllwoed out of the academy to do some "field research". OIn the wizard case, the wizard will have had time to train his magic, maybe knows a little about combat, but hasn't been inside of one.

Fiery Diamond
2008-01-12, 10:43 AM
Basically, you have to decide whether your D&D world relates to real life or not. If it does, the comments on training and the marines make sense; read that essay someone posted a link to. However, the truth is that most D&D settings are not like the real world. Therefore, people are usually significantly more powerful. I consider my campaign setting (I DM) to be a moderate(not high) powered word. Here's how I do stuff.
Level - what it means
1- had some training
2- average for that profession
3- slightly above average
4- very good, town or noble's guard leutenent.
5- excels, town or noble's captain of the guard
6- special
7- captain in an army
8- well known
9- famous
10- woohoo, everybody everwhere knows you, you near legend!

Not exactly linear, but that's the average way for my world.
(I started my PCs at level 3)

- Fiery Diamond

Voyager_I
2008-01-12, 11:57 AM
As I see it, an ordinary soldier is represented by a 1st Level Warrior, probably with the nonelite array. This means that a 1st Level Fighter, with his full hit die, extra combat feat, and higher physical scores, can take down two or three competent soldiers with decent reliability,. He still has higher numbers all around than a 2nd Level Warrior, although it's not as one sided. At 3rd Level, a Warrior's extra hit die finally start catching up to give him a small edge in health.

A 1st Level fighter probably has an attack bonus of +4 or higher, 12+ hit points, and a dexterity bonus of +1 or higher. He also has a fighter bonus feat. A 3rd Level Warrior has the same attack bonus and about 17 hit points, and has finally gotten that extra feat from character levels, though he still lags behind thanks to the PC's overwhelming ability bonuses (most importantly, in this case, the extra damage they do thanks to their strength). Naturally, a 2nd Level Fighter messes up everything all over again.

So, here's a little ranking of butt-kicking.

Commoners: With an average of 2-3 hit points, no attack bonus, proficiency with one whole simple weapon, and the inability to wear any form of protection heavier than leather, these guys basically live to die on the battlefield. They make a decent representation of militia, in the sense that they can slow down more professional soldiers without really standing much of a chance against them, and shouldn't be expected to do much more than stand in a huddled mob and hide behind their spears. Militia crossbowmen are also a viable (and historic) option. Especially hardy folk might be represented as Level 2 commoners, with a bit more health and a point of BAB.

1st Level Warriors: The typical soldier, able to cut through commoner militias with decent reliability. They know what they're doing on the battlefield, and can generally take a bite out of whatever gets sent at them. They can wear armor, wield decent weapons, and almost certainly have their one feat put into combat for that extra edge, as opposed to the more agrarian farmers. Though competent, they're by no means elite.

2nd Level Warriors: These are above average, veteran soldiers. Although still not necessarily the best, they have a marked edge over their less experienced peers.

3rd Level Warriors: Hardy veteran troops, able to overcome even other experienced soldiers. They still can't quite match up with PC Fighters, although good equipment could even the odds.

1st Level Fighters: Benefiting from a full d10 Hit Die and high ability scorers, even a 1st Level PC Fighter can overcome elite opponents.

4th Level Warriors: With a +4 BAB and an extra ability point to raise their Strength bonus to +2, these magnificent warriors have enough extra attack bonus to overcome the PC's dexterity. They no longer lag substantially in damage (especially with Power Attack) and they more than make up for it in raw Hit Die, having about 10 hit points over the fighter. Real elites, they can make short work ordinary soldiers.

5th Level Warriors: At this point, it's just getting intimidating for the average soldier.

2nd Level Fighters: Almighty ability scores and another bonus feat put the Fighter back on top, although not by much.

6th Level Warriors: Another feat and another Hit Die give the edge back to the Warrior. Note that by now, they are people even experienced soldiers have absolutely no interest in meeting on the battlefield. Don't forget , both the Fighters and the Warriors should definitely be equipped as befits the best troops available to a nation.


As an aside: read this (http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html).

Solmage
2008-01-12, 05:03 PM
Wet behind the ears = mainly roleplay

The cardinal rule of roleplaying is that statistics, levels, even classes and races, pretty much everything like that doesn't mean a damn as long as you're still making the same rolls, and having fun.

I see no reason why, because I have 10 hp and can only swing my sword once per round for a meager +3 to attack and 1d8+2 damage, I can't roleplay as someone who is experienced.

You can roleplay as someone who is EXPERIENCED at lvl 1, but not someone who is HIGHLY SKILLED or I would call you on it, by simply pointing to the guy standing in front of us swinging his sword twice as fast, 6 times as accurate, and killing multiple enemies in one swing. (Unless the world is defined as level 6 being 'unheard of quasi mystical prowess' and such a person could not be easily found by turning your head, as opposed to standard Forgotten Realms stuff where every hamlet has an archmage)

Consequently, I'm completely against someone wanting to "roleplay" being intelligent (because they're intelligent in real life and can in real life meta solve most puzzles), charming and attractive, and then put an 8 in int and cha, and as skills they choose something irrelevant to being charming. Again, I would not only call you on it, but I would love to award negative roleplay exp if I thought I could get away with it. (people react ...strongly.. to this). In the same vein, no you don't have a well defined body with a str of 8, nor are you athletic with a con of 8, nor agile with a dex of 8.

====

As for the wet behind the ears qualifier, it's a relative term, not an absolute one. A wet behind the ears special forces unit may simply be a somewhat naive (in regards to special forces) guy who nontheless has seen dozens of regular battles, but is totally inexperienced in covert ops.

Beleriphon
2008-01-12, 05:52 PM
For an interesting paradigm shift why can't a first level fighter can't be a veteran of many campaigns but after years of disuses his skills have fallen into a state of of what amounts to being first level. So after a while he gets some practice and his old skills start to come back, he might even get to be better than he was before.

Voyager_I
2008-01-12, 09:29 PM
A 1st Level Fighter is already a match for veteran soldiers.

FlyMolo
2008-01-13, 12:33 AM
Level 1 PC characters are strong. Really strong. A level 1 fighter, in real world terms, would be the fastest, toughest guy in your class, who joined the Marines, and is captain of a squad of maybe 10 people. This guy is pretty badass. He could take you out easily. Your average soldier is pretty buff and could take you out, but it would take longer. (assuming "you" is your average commoner/nerd). He's a warrior 1. A second level expert is a pretty legendary guy. He's that bartender who's been everywhere and done everything. He's pretty rare. People with multiple levels in PC classes are rarely encountered. Let's face it, the attrition rate at 1st level is pretty steep.

That calibration article was actually pretty accurate. 5th level is the absolute limits of the human body, while 3-4 is Olympic level, or equivalent. So a 3-4 level expert craftsman is going to have won prizes and competed on the international stage in competitions about whatever he makes. The best smith in the county, or the best smith in the state is probably a 2nd level expert, and a 2-3 level expert, respectively.

This even makes sense when you're talking about adventuring. If you delve into creepy caverns and do battle with animals far larger than they should be, dodging ancient traps and such, you are going to be much more badass than some guy who's just done boot camp. You have combat experience, and at least 1 level in a PC class.

Mando Knight
2008-01-13, 12:40 AM
at 4 HP, it's possible for Scruffy the house-cat to kill an orc.

Mr. Scruffy has more than 4 HP. He's the lord of Azure City, after all.:smalltongue:

Felius
2008-01-13, 11:52 AM
Basically, you have to decide whether your D&D world relates to real life or not. If it does, the comments on training and the marines make sense; read that essay someone posted a link to. However, the truth is that most D&D settings are not like the real world. Therefore, people are usually significantly more powerful. I consider my campaign setting (I DM) to be a moderate(not high) powered word. Here's how I do stuff.
Level - what it means
1- had some training
2- average for that profession
3- slightly above average
4- very good, town or noble's guard leutenent.
5- excels, town or noble's captain of the guard
6- special
7- captain in an army
8- well known
9- famous
10- woohoo, everybody everwhere knows you, you near legend!

Not exactly linear, but that's the average way for my world.
(I started my PCs at level 3)

- Fiery Diamond

Mind if I steal borrow for any game I DM?

Also FlyMolo, I would disagree that it's the only way. You could of course rule that it works like that with the top of the top being level 5. But you could also rule that the top of the top are level 20 and just meddle a little bit with the DCs. It's pretty arbitrary at this point.

This is why I prefer GURPS

horseboy
2008-01-13, 12:14 PM
That calibration article was actually pretty accurate. 5th level is the absolute limits of the human body, while 3-4 is Olympic level, or equivalent. So a 3-4 level expert craftsman is going to have won prizes and competed on the international stage in competitions about whatever he makes. The best smith in the county, or the best smith in the state is probably a 2nd level expert, and a 2-3 level expert, respectively.

This even makes sense when you're talking about adventuring. If you delve into creepy caverns and do battle with animals far larger than they should be, dodging ancient traps and such, you are going to be much more badass than some guy who's just done boot camp. You have combat experience, and at least 1 level in a PC class.
That calibration article only makes sense mechanically. The only way it can make any sense on the verisimilitude level is if the majority population of your world are suburbanites who never have to want for anything. "Real" worlds, especially those that are as low-technology and high a threat as a "typical" D&D world, just don't work like that.

Emperor Demonking
2008-01-13, 12:28 PM
Mr. Scruffy has more than 4 HP. He's the lord of Azure City, after all.:smalltongue:

Mr.Scruffy isn't the one with 4hp.