Greetings!

I can get behind Macris's idea that Game Power usually translates into Political Power. That is definitely a natural kind of dynamic, but I also believe that there is room for different NPC's that, for whatever reason, just are not high-level adventurer classes, while at the same time wielding and possessing immense power, influence, and authority.

I often have some old, bearded preacher--well-versed in religion, and other things, but not necessarily being a high-level Cleric. Such prominent and popular preachers can be very powerful, as they have vast influence. Even killing them can easily bring down ruin against the perpetrators. Whether from local militia, Sheriffs, local knights--or groups of hardened templats and clerics on their trail, hungry for vengeance.

In a similar manner, younger Nobles. These figures, likewise, can have enormous power and influence, despite not being a high level in some Class.

This kind of dynamic holds true for many figures throughout a society or given settlement.

What do you think, my friends?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

My own approach is that 'levels' are unconnected to fighting ability.  So a twentith level scholar might still fight like the pencil necked geek he is.  D&D assumes an increase in resiliancy and fighting ability because all player characters are adventurers.  Their class assumes some level of combat experience is being accumulated.  So theoretically a non-player character could have substantial skills and abilities unrelated to a character class.  Sages in first edition come to mind.  I guess the difference in approaches is that D&D generally isn't too concerned with rating lore skills.  Where I personally think they make characters much more interesting.

I don't want to rag on people that enjoy D&D but this is why I don't play games with levels of experience or at least not ones that a Level 1 character is a scrappy farmer with a weapon and a level 20/Max level character is a God.


In games like Mythras or BRP, warriors and soldiers are very good at fighting and will most likely kill that well-off bourgeois banker or nose puffed noble Lord. But, at the same time, since those are skill based games, the banker will have wealth and resources and the skills to make the money he has into more money, enough to pay for hired muscle so as to not need to invest in combat skills at all.

That noble probably has skills that allow him to maneuver the political landscape of the game of houses, and he may or may not have the material wealth of the aforementioned banker, but what he does have is rank and pull as a noble. In his demesne his word is the law and depending on how willing the aforementioned warriors and soldiers are with killing people just following orders, they may find themselves exiled from that land. As well, the Lord may have banner men that amount to numbers far greater than the group of warriors can handle. His influence could be so big as to even have certain sorcerers as part of his retainers, if magic exists in the setting. Or, he could have a lot of pull with the church, if the clergy has a powerful social standing in that setting, as well.


As antagonists, individually the banker and the noble would not last a single round of combat against our protagonist warband of merry men. However, they have skills and in-setting benefits that make sense in the setting and are anchored in the story that make them movers and shakers the Player's may not want to upset until the time is right.

Quote from: David Johansen on January 16, 2024, 11:50:13 PM
My own approach is that 'levels' are unconnected to fighting ability.  So a twentith level scholar might still fight like the pencil necked geek he is.  D&D assumes an increase in resiliancy and fighting ability because all player characters are adventurers.  Their class assumes some level of combat experience is being accumulated.  So theoretically a non-player character could have substantial skills and abilities unrelated to a character class.  Sages in first edition come to mind.  I guess the difference in approaches is that D&D generally isn't too concerned with rating lore skills.  Where I personally think they make characters much more interesting.

This is the approach I take as well, using NPC classes and levels. Some classes improve at fighting as they level, some at magic, and others at linguistics or baking.

I tie HP to levels for everyone -- and this means that the culturally important townsfolk are a mite harder to kill than the average commoner, which I find serves to make the setting feel more verisimilar.

I always use "levels" though -- and this also allows me to distinguish between, say, the "good" baker in town and the "great" one, and provides a framework for non-adventuring skill contests.

I'd say this is one of the issues with level based games and like Cipher the reason I play Mythras.

If you played Birthright this was an issue where low level regents would be reamed by higher level ones. Cleverness wasn't a factor, you were just meat for the grinder.

Quote from: SHARK on January 16, 2024, 11:12:03 PM...I also believe that there is room for different NPC's that, for whatever reason, just are not high-level adventurer classes, while at the same time wielding and possessing immense power, influence, and authority.

...What do you think, my friends?

I think that's certainly true on one level, while at the same time I think it's a natural reaction for players not to perceive it that way.

A rather brute definition of "power" is simply "the ability to inflict pain and loss without being vulnerable to that infliction". And on this level, since the primary loss threat in all RPGs is ultimately loss of the ability to play your character -- either partially or wholly, indefinitely or permanently -- there's a level on which any in-game element which doesn't directly and immediately present that as a possible outcome of the game interaction isn't going to feel as powerful as something which does. Yes, a social or legal authority can deprive a PC without interference of many benefits of law, comfort or social place ... but a player who simply doesn't care about any of those things isn't going to perceive their potential loss as a threat, and therefore won't see the NPC threatening it as "powerful".

(For a literary example, consider Conan at the beginning of "Queen of the Black Coast", who quite cheerfully murders a judge ordering him to betray the location of a guardsman friend without caring two pins that this will turn him into a criminal and a fugitive. The judge had a great deal of social power and authority, but it didn't help him at all when he made the mistake of letting Conan the Cimmerian within a sword's length.)

So basically, to bring in other forms of effective power than direct mechanical combat force, you have to create a situation where your players will care about character aspects vulnerable to those modes of power. Not all players are going to be interested in investing in that.

  One thing I give 5e credit is talking about Humans and their propensity to create Institutions. It quickly solves the "just kill the wimpy king!" childish solution that can come from PC parties by communicating the larger conceptual nature of abstracted order. Institutions are comprised of lots of people, many of them very battle hardened, who subordinate themselves to a higher organization... and killing the higher ups in an institution often just ANGERS the institution than collapse it.  It explains so much of power, and its authority and reach and warning, in a word that it defeats simplistic "just kill 'em" solutions in the cradle with breathing world setting concepts.

Could be both, yes.

In D&D, HP is often plot armor... a king would have some of it.

Think of Viserys threatening his brother with a knife... of course he would be destroyed in an actual fight, but if you take D&D literally a knife wouldn't even be a credible threat against, say, a 5th level fighter.

Maybe there should be some way to give NPCs powerful skills AND still keep them frail. IIRC, in the DMG sages are measured in levels too, so an ancient sage with lots of knowledge has at least a few HD (they are d4s, but still tougher than a 1st level "veteran").

Usually, I give about 3 HD for nobles in general, as suggested in B/X.

Quote from: Opaopajr on January 17, 2024, 11:27:27 PM
One thing I give 5e credit is talking about Humans and their propensity to create Institutions. It quickly solves the "just kill the wimpy king!" childish solution that can come from PC parties by communicating the larger conceptual nature of abstracted order. Institutions are comprised of lots of people, many of them very battle hardened, who subordinate themselves to a higher organization... and killing the higher ups in an institution often just ANGERS the institution than collapse it.  It explains so much of power, and its authority and reach and warning, in a word that it defeats simplistic "just kill 'em" solutions in the cradle with breathing world setting concepts.

Yes. Just as it is in the real world, quite often killing someone, especially if they are influential and well regarded often creates many more problems than it solves. If you can defeat their ideas in court of public opinion then you can turn them into a nobody, but killing them turns them into a martyr that may prove impossible to defeat.

Greetings!

Indeed, I still use a modified *Expert* Class from back in 3E for any non-adventuring NPC's. They get more HP, modest combat abilities, but really shine in whatever they are specialized in, whether it is being a bureaucrat, aa blacksmith, a baker, or a farmer.

And, oh yes. I love it when there are more problems created from killing someone. *Laughing* The players usually *hate* that! Solutions or defeating problems--or opposing people--is not always best done with a battle axe.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK on January 18, 2024, 10:29:26 PMI love it when there are more problems created from killing someone. *Laughing* The players usually *hate* that! Solutions or defeating problems--or opposing people--is not always best done with a battle axe.

Out of curiosity, in your games, how do you enforce the consequences of PCs trying to use a battleaxe to solve their problems, and how well does it work? In my experience, part of the reason PCs tend to resort to force against low-level opponents is because they can, especially when the low-level noble hasn't got any protection except an even lower-level set of guards. To quote Vaarsuvius the power-mad elven mage from The Order of the Stick, "As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of solving approaches zero."

The immediately obvious solution, which is to ensure there are always opponents around capable of giving the PCs enough of a fight to make them think twice about it, makes sense from a game point of view but not always from a world-creating / narrative consistency point of view. Players eventually lose immersion when they realize that no matter where they go, the local barkeep is always a retired fighter several levels higher than what they are now.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on January 18, 2024, 11:06:17 PM

Quote from: SHARK on January 18, 2024, 10:29:26 PMI love it when there are more problems created from killing someone. *Laughing* The players usually *hate* that! Solutions or defeating problems--or opposing people--is not always best done with a battle axe.

Out of curiosity, in your games, how do you enforce the consequences of PCs trying to use a battleaxe to solve their problems, and how well does it work? In my experience, part of the reason PCs tend to resort to force against low-level opponents is because they can, especially when the low-level noble hasn't got any protection except an even lower-level set of guards. To quote Vaarsuvius the power-mad elven mage from The Order of the Stick, "As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of solving approaches zero."

The immediately obvious solution, which is to ensure there are always opponents around capable of giving the PCs enough of a fight to make them think twice about it, makes sense from a game point of view but not always from a world-creating / narrative consistency point of view. Players eventually lose immersion when they realize that no matter where they go, the local barkeep is always a retired fighter several levels higher than what they are now.

Greetings!

Good analysis, Stephen!

Well, I would say that the "Who" and the context matters, and determines a great deal. How prominent is the "Who" in question? The antagonist, lets say. What kind of family do they have? What kind of reputation do they have, either public, or otherwise political? What resources does their contacts possess? That is kind of the "Who". A young nobleman, say a younger son of a prominent Lord or Baron. Such an antagonist can be a major pain in the ass. Or some seemingly modest preacher or priest. Such a priest may come into opposition to the players for a variety of reasons. Such a priest--even the leader of a modest, town church, or neighborhood temple, could have considerable contacts. Not merely temple soldiers, but Templars or knights in his congregation. Blacksmiths that were healed or befriended by the old priest. A whole network of local women--who do you think those women might know? It is very easy to think of them telling the men of their families, "Preacher Johnson was murdered by those ruffians! What are YOU going to do about it? Must we submit to this outrage and tyranny?" Yeah. Lots of men soon lining up to go after the murderers. Who are those men? That can not only be a considerable number, but also power, skills, and talent. The scope is endless. What if the players murder a well-liked tavern wench? Yeah, maybe she's not a pillar of morality--but there may very well be a good number of people that take a dim view of her being brutally cut down by a group of strangers. A grizzled militia sergeant, a prominent farmer--all can have a web of family, contacts, and patrons that may be very willing to take extreme action to avenge their death.

All of that is actually apart from the wheels of justice. That operation might be weak--or it may be very strong and powerful. Platoons of hardened soldiers scouring the countryside, skilled hunters and trackers on the player's trail. Bounty hunters, promised fine gold by the magistrates or a prominent noble, set out to dog the players trail. That is just more mundane opposition. There could easily be more powerful knights, warriors, clerics, and wizards brought into it as well.

Such urban environments can be very dangerous for axe-happy player characters that believe they can take down anyone they don't like with a battle axe. *Laughing*

In a rural or wilderness environment, well, the situation can be much looser, and the player characters may be able to get away with such behavior more or less easily, or with very small chances of any kind of retribution. However, even in such circumstances, things can add up steadily if they continue in such behavior, or word can spread for even a single favored individual killed, with subsequent consequences. It might take longer, maybe even weeks, or months!--but a son, a daughter, a younger sister, perhaps with some friends also in tow--can show up from investigating and tracking the players down and introduce themselves at a favorable moment. Or maybe such an encounter is very subtle, with the players entirely oblivious to the person or people they just met. Or, the person tracks the party, and ambushes them at night, or strikes when they are engaged fighting monsters or someone else entirely. The possibilities are huge with potential.

Of course, not every person or seemingly minor character or minor-level antagonist is going to provoke such a lethal response. After all, people get killed all the time, and nothing happens to the killers. That has always been a reality. However, it is also a reality that whether by the strong hand of the law, or family and friends, retribution can come. Retribution can find them. Also in history, some of these instances, they too, are defeated. In many though, yeah. The retribution is fatal. Even adolescent girls can scheme and wait for a deadly moment to strike. Old grandfathers, you name it. Vengeance and righteous wrath can motivate people for *years* if need be.

I tend to provoke such, or randomly roll such on my various tables generally ass needed. Enough to make most groups consider their options carefully. Certainly, obviously threatening and violent antagonists can be dealt with by the favoured fireball or a battle axe--but when the antagonist has not directly attacked them, again depending on the "Who" factor, the players certainly need to be cautious! *Laughing*

The players might have to oppose such antagonists through business or economics, political networking, having meetings with other clergy members, holding public gatherings, lots of roleplaying. *Laughing* Court drama can also be an option, as well as seeking some kind of meeting and case before a powerful Lord or magistrate. Depending on the culture, maybe challenging such an antagonist to a formal duel or Holmgangr, can be appropriate. Investigations, hiring bounty hunters or investigators of their own, building evidence, being able to make a case, either to the town authorities, or even to a tribal council of elders. That too, can be a pathway to resolving the conflict, one way or another there.

Of course, especially in more barbaric or tribal environments, even when gaining some kind of officially sanctioned justice, there can always be blood feuds. Many relatives will not care about any law, or what anyone thinks, or judges. YOU killed their brother, so therefore, they are going to get vengeance. No matter what. Whatever evidence you may think you have--their family members or family friends may interpret the evidence or their motives very differently. Fuck what you think, or the law, or the elders, or anyone else. Right? That is a visceral, absolute response that seems hard-coded in people, everywhere. We even see that often today, even in our modern, "civilized" society. People get killed in courtrooms, or on the steps of courthouses rather frequently, after all. For people that are determined enough, there really is no safety or protection that is sufficient. People will find a way to get to you, and strike.

Oh, yes. As for bartenders being uber-powerful retired warriors--*Laughing* Yeah, I tend to keep that at a minimum. The Players are strong, and often times, yes, they can stomp whoever. HARD. But that doesn't mean that such an NPC antagonist--of whatever level or station in life--doesn't have friends and family members that love them. Hell, just fellow neighbors and citizens, tribal members, what have you--they too, can be motivated by vengeance. What the players did shall not stand. Such people may be very willing to come after them, even at considerable expense in energy, danger, and time. It can be provoked by religious convictions, feelings of honour, duty to a friend or relative--all kinds of things.

I remember reading about some Outlaw in the Old West that raped and killed an adolescent girl, I think in Mississippi. Her father was too old and frail to seek vengeance. Her older brother, however, was not. He had a group of friends and just neighbors--help him track the Outlaw hundreds of miles away--months later--before the Outlaw was swinging from a rope. Sometimes a Law man is also on the trail, but sometimes not. Retribution can come, though. Disputes over land, cattle, water rights, and such. People get raped, beaten, or murdered often in these rough environments where the Law may get justice, or sometimes may not, either because they "Don't have sufficient evidence" or resources. It doesn't mean that others however, are not willing to answer the call.

That's how I approach it. As I mentioned, rough justice can obviously be very appropriate, and thus suffer little in the form of consequences or retribution. People often also--even family members--can also recognize when their moron relative had it coming to them, and are not surprised. That, too, is a reality. I certainly unleash such dynamics at various times to reign in the whole "Murder Hobo" thing. Yeah, being "Murder Hobos" can be a very quick way to find oneself dancing from a rope and stretched from a local tree. *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Sometimes I throw in Farmer Apollyon.  He's an aging free farmer who's farm is on the borderlands.  He's in his early sixties, has campaigned under three kings and is held in high respect in all the realm.  The king would have given him a title if he didn't know Apollyon would kill him for it.  The good farmer is a twentieth level fighter who can bench press a war horse.  In Rolemaster terms he has 100 Strength with a +10 Special Bonus from the Exceptional Strength Talent for a total Strength Bonus of +20 at 20th level at two ranks per level in his favoured weapons give him about a +150. (honestly I'd have to double check the progression past 20).  In D&D 5e terms that would be about 30 Strength.  Though Rolemaster levels would put him around 12th level in earlier D&Ds, 5th edition actually spreads out the levels so a 20's really only around a 10 in earlier editions.  Compare the monsters you can fight at a given level if you don't believe me.  So he's basically back to 20.

Oh well, back to the good farmer, he's kind, he's helpfu, but he's not easily bullied and heaven help anyone who tries it.

Seriously though, think how many times a middle aged farmers will have been called up to march with the levy.  Don't count on them being 0 level normal men.  Now think about 10 of them, 20 of them, 50 of them, what's the population of the village?  What level's their priest?  The wise woman in the wood?  If player characters want to bully peasants hit them back hard enough they think twice.

Another approach is to consider feudal duties.  Those are the king's peasants not yours.  The local lord is their sworn protector, how many men at arms does he have?  What level is he?  What level is his champion?  Does he have a magician on hire?  What about his confessor?  His torturer?  Does he hire mercenaries and assassins for extra-judicial killings?

At the outside edge, who do those peasants worship?  How will your players feel when the priests can't heal them because their god has been offended?  How many tasks will it take to restore their good favor.

Quote from: David Johansen on January 19, 2024, 01:19:05 AM
Sometimes I throw in Farmer Apollyon.  He's an aging free farmer who's farm is on the borderlands.  He's in his early sixties, has campaigned under three kings and is held in high respect in all the realm.  The king would have given him a title if he didn't know Apollyon would kill him for it.  The good farmer is a twentieth level fighter who can bench press a war horse.  In Rolemaster terms he has 100 Strength with a +10 Special Bonus from the Exceptional Strength Talent for a total Strength Bonus of +20 at 20th level at two ranks per level in his favoured weapons give him about a +150. (honestly I'd have to double check the progression past 20).  In D&D 5e terms that would be about 30 Strength.  Though Rolemaster levels would put him around 12th level in earlier D&Ds, 5th edition actually spreads out the levels so a 20's really only around a 10 in earlier editions.  Compare the monsters you can fight at a given level if you don't believe me.  So he's basically back to 20.

Oh well, back to the good farmer, he's kind, he's helpfu, but he's not easily bullied and heaven help anyone who tries it.

Seriously though, think how many times a middle aged farmers will have been called up to march with the levy.  Don't count on them being 0 level normal men.  Now think about 10 of them, 20 of them, 50 of them, what's the population of the village?  What level's their priest?  The wise woman in the wood?  If player characters want to bully peasants hit them back hard enough they think twice.

Another approach is to consider feudal duties.  Those are the king's peasants not yours.  The local lord is their sworn protector, how many men at arms does he have?  What level is he?  What level is his champion?  Does he have a magician on hire?  What about his confessor?  His torturer?  Does he hire mercenaries and assassins for extra-judicial killings?

At the outside edge, who do those peasants worship?  How will your players feel when the priests can't heal them because their god has been offended?  How many tasks will it take to restore their good favor.

Greetings!

Yep! Good stuff! I agree. Feudal duties indeed! Peasants can be very loyal to each other. Terrorizing peasants or killing old priests can have very bad results for Players characters playing the game of "Murder Hobo."

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I should preface this with I generally don't have players that kill because they can, when it comes to low-level NPCs.  So my methods might be inadequate for others. Nonetheless, I do enjoy having a world that reinforces this behavior.  I don't want the players sighing and doing the right thing when it would be so much easier on them to just kill the NPC and be done with it.  At least not very often.   

I think any kind of system where PCs can and do die helps indirectly. Because then the players know they might not be this powerful forever, and their replacement low-powered replacement has to live in the world their previous PCs affected. It doesn't take much enforcing of the consequences of power vacuums to help here, if your players are wired to want things to improve generally, not just for themselves.

Likewise, I typically run the kind of game where there is a stark difference between civilization, the border, and the wilderness, so that this lesson is reinforced. You can't go back to civilization to get rest, resources, allies, etc. if the only bastions of civilization left have been trashed by you.

However,  mainly I use rumor and reputation, so that the actions in each locale eventually spread the word.  In fact, the last couple of campaigns, I've even been explicit that there is an almost mystical aspect to this.  No one knows whether the relatively hands off gods watch and let their followers know, or it's the aura of the characters, or something else, but fact remains that doing something dastardly eventually shows up as lack of trust in others.  Not everyone is so attuned.  If you can do something like that in secret it takes longer for it to get out, but it still eventually gets to the point where someone that could help you won't trust you.

Sometimes, a low-level NPC that is powerful needs killing.  I don't want to squash that, either.  Just not make it automatic.