Topic: How many XP will an average NPC earn per year?

[Thot]

A few issue here:

First is the question of life expectancy - how many live long enough to head into higher levels?
[...]
Third the period of no longer being active due to age and decrepitude. What age does some one stop practising there trade and while having a lot of knowledge can't do much more than that.
[...]

Hm... Elves can get a few thousand years old...

[Aspire2Hope]

[...]
there is also a natural limit to the learning based on access to the next level of skill knowledge. In teaching, they call it the zone of proximal development (ZPD) where you need something or someone to build the next bit of skill/knowledge. You could eventually work it out for yourself (convergent invention happens a lot) but it takes more time and dedication because of it being a bit trial and error; and serendipity.

So you'd rather say most NPC's will have an upper limit of skill ranks?

I would say that each rank requires more time (resources) to acquire. A level 20 spell takes longer to learn than a level 1 spell so a non-adventurer spell user is less likely to achieve this without many years of specific study. I'm assuming here that you are thinking about believable NPC ages and level rather than an absolute mechanic for moving NPCs along as the adventurers grow.

[gog]

A few issue here:

First is the question of life expectancy - how many live long enough to head into higher levels?
[...]
Third the period of no longer being active due to age and decrepitude. What age does some one stop practising there trade and while having a lot of knowledge can't do much more than that.
[...]

Hm... Elves can get a few thousand years old...

Yes Elves can do so, but they find concentrating on something for a long time difficult (as laid out in MERP and RMFRP notes on the races). So apart from the technically immortal races these would still be valid questions to ask.

[Aspire2Hope]

A few issue here:

First is the question of life expectancy - how many live long enough to head into higher levels?
[...]
Third the period of no longer being active due to age and decrepitude. What age does some one stop practising there trade and while having a lot of knowledge can't do much more than that.
[...]

Hm... Elves can get a few thousand years old...

Yes Elves can do so, but they find concentrating on something for a long time difficult (as laid out in MERP and RMFRP notes on the races). So apart from the technically immortal races these would still be valid questions to ask.

But also according to Tolkein the wisest (Noldo) and mirthful (Wood-elves) which never really fits with the descriptions. I suspect that they actually could concentrate very effectively at need, but when you have eternity to learn and appreciate the wonders of the world, your need to accomplish a short-term aim is greatly reduced.

[Thot]

Hm... there is also the notion of making explicitly different learning rules for "regular people NPC's", where they remain level 1, but gain a number of ranks (or even just special skill bonuses) for their regular life, capping them out at something like +50 or so. What do people here think of that?

[Majyk]

This must be where I get my RP ideas for using stats to tell a character’s flightiness as an Elf.


Rolling SD checks when something interesting comes up a la an “oooOooOo, Butterfly/Puppy/Kitty” moments, despite the Player *not* wanting to wander off is the stuff of further adventure!


...more often it is just straight Death and Destruction, but boy does it make great hilarity when the Elf in the party declares quietly to herself:
“Leeroyyyyyy mmm-Jennnkinnns!”, but comes out, “It’s just so...Beautiful...BBBZZZZTTT!”


For Elven skill/bonus adoption, add the Total negative SD modifier elves(and even Halflings?) have as a % of extra time/XP it takes them to gain such increases due to this racial flightiness.

A few issue here:

First is the question of life expectancy - how many live long enough to head into higher levels?
[...]
Third the period of no longer being active due to age and decrepitude. What age does some one stop practising there trade and while having a lot of knowledge can't do much more than that.
[...]

Hm... Elves can get a few thousand years old...

Yes Elves can do so, but they find concentrating on something for a long time difficult (as laid out in MERP and RMFRP notes on the races). So apart from the technically immortal races these would still be valid questions to ask.

[jdale]

If you suppose each level takes longer to achieve than previous levels (which is the same as saying the rate at which you earn experience is dropping as your level increases), by some function, it could address the elven lifespan issue. For example if the number of years required to earn your next level is the square of your current level, then:

Age   Level
15   1
16   2
20   3
29   4
45   5
70   6
106   7
155   8
219   9
300   10
400   11
521   12
665   13
834   14
1030   15

So that puts your ordinary human at a maximum level of 6-7, while a thousand year old elf has only reached 14th (and a 2000 year old elf is only up to 18th). This kind of exponential curve gets you the early levels pretty quick but then it slows down a lot.

You can tweak that formula, for example if years to next level is level^2.2 it's just a little slower:

Age   Level
15   1
16   2
21   3
32   4
53   5
87   6
139   7
211   8
308   9
434   10
592   11
788   12
1025   13

Of course there has to be some variability added in here too.

[Ginger McMurray]

Companion II in RM2 covered this well enough in my opinion. You don't bother with tracking XP. Everyone has a percentage chance of gaining a level if they're actively focused on trying. Also, your training is focused on a couple areas only, so you're not nuilding up your stealth, magic, combat, and athletics all at once.

[Aspire2Hope]

Nice JDale -
Thot - you need to ask yourself why are you doing this? Only if you intend to "kill" an NPC or have them cast a spell do you need to worry about levels. Everything else boils down to skill levels so knocking up an NPC is really about what skills you need them to have and how long it would take to acquire in a certain setting. Our master mystic Elf (nominal level 20) would have a number of lores all to rank 50 without even burning through a large portion of his/her life. In contrast, a human might only have a couple at 50 for a nominal level of 20 by the age of 40+. These aren't handled well by the XP/level system and really in your NPC levels/xp are irrelevant to the game. They are, as mentioned above, not the stars of the show.

[Thot]

[...]
Thot - you need to ask yourself why are you doing this?

No, I don't. I know the answer already, and knew it before I started.

Only if you intend to "kill" an NPC or have them cast a spell do you need to worry about levels.[...]

I am sorry, but, with that attitude, how do you find out what the relative position of the PC's in the game world is? How do you know how common certain types of artifacts are?

Without having a clear idea what the level distribution in the game world is, you don't know these things. Without knowing the level distribution, you don't have a clear understanding of your game world's dynamics, in fact. That may work for some styles of play, but most certainly not for mine. I need to know what options the NPC's have, and for that, their competence and available magic are highly, HIGHLY relevant even if they never see combat happening, in fact even if they are dead for a thousand years - because it affects their legacy.

A world where the average 50-year-old soldier is 15th level does PROFOUNDLY differ from one where the average 50-year old soldier is 4th level. Even more so with alchemists: Knowing whether those 1000-year old bachelors are 10th or 100th level is crucial to understanding what the artifacts they forge will look like.

I seriously don't understand how people play without at least having a rough feeling about what kind of level distribution their game world has, and I am not even sure I want to.


As I asked in my previous post, I am curious about people's thoughts about differing approaches to learning of NPC's and PC's. I personally don't like them, but knowing how other people feel about it here helps me understand their positions.

[Thot]

If you suppose each level takes longer to achieve than previous levels (which is the same as saying the rate at which you earn experience is dropping as your level increases), by some function, it could address the elven lifespan issue.[...]

IF you believe it to be an "issue" in the first place. Why being adverse to high level NPC's? What does this add to the game, other than making the PCs' relatively quick progression a little goofy?

[Aspire2Hope]

I am sorry, but, with that attitude, how do you find out what the relative position of the PC's in the game world is? How do you know how common certain types of artefacts are?

Without having a clear idea what the level distribution in the game world is, you don't know these things. Without knowing the level distribution, you don't have a clear understanding of your game world's dynamics, in fact. That may work for some styles of play, but most certainly not for mine. I need to know what options the NPC's have, and for that, their competence and available magic are highly, HIGHLY relevant even if they never see combat happening, in fact even if they are dead for a thousand years - because it affects their legacy.

A world where the average 50-year-old soldier is 15th level does PROFOUNDLY differ from one where the average 50-year old soldier is 4th level. Even more so with alchemists: Knowing whether those 1000-year old bachelors are 10th or 100th level is crucial to understanding what the artifacts they forge will look like.

I seriously don't understand how people play without at least having a rough feeling about what kind of level distribution their game world has, and I am not even sure I want to.


As I asked in my previous post, I am curious about people's thoughts about differing approaches to learning of NPC's and PC's. I personally don't like them, but knowing how other people feel about it here helps me understand their positions.

Perhaps because as many have pointed out its the levels of skill that are more important than the actual level of the character in the game-play.  For that reason, I pitch for my player's level the adventure, the items of treasure, the difficulty of the enemy/NPC at that moment. Time to develop to level 5 is immaterial as far as the players are concerned. If I tell them that Bob is a 15-year-old boy who is super-keen and will act as a guide then they play to that until they discover "he" is a 25-year-old noble lady who is handy with a rapier. They don't actually ask me what level is Bob and I don't tell them until we are totalling up XP at the end of a session if it is relevant.

[jdale]

If you suppose each level takes longer to achieve than previous levels (which is the same as saying the rate at which you earn experience is dropping as your level increases), by some function, it could address the elven lifespan issue.[...]

IF you believe it to be an "issue" in the first place. Why being adverse to high level NPC's? What does this add to the game, other than making the PCs' relatively quick progression a little goofy?

I'm not averse to high level NPCs, but they are exceptions, just like the PCs. It's the average person who should be low level.

If ordinary people are, say, 10th level, that changes everything about the world. The quality of all the products is improved (everything gives a bonus), all the guards are hyper-aware, wild animals are not a threat, etc. And, the players are usually not needed because there are plenty of ordinary people around who can handle whatever the problem is. If magic isn't incredibly rare, miracles like teleportation and lifegiving are not just possible but routine, since the average caster is capable of them.

If ordinary people are, say, 4th level, they really have to look to elites such as the players to help them. The players don't have to be the only elite individuals, but people will look to those individuals and they will tend to be leaders and influencers. Ordinary magic will be lower powered while miraculous effects are actually miraculous and rare.

[Thot]

[...]
Perhaps because as many have pointed out its the levels of skill that are more important than the actual level of the character in the game-play.

If NPC's follow the same rules as PC's in levelling, NPC level and skill ranks will be related, and moreover, it is highly relevant for spellcasting.

They don't actually ask me what level is Bob and I don't tell them

That is entirely different than not knowing it in the first place.

[Thot]

[...]
I'm not averse to high level NPCs, but they are exceptions, just like the PCs. It's the average person who should be low level.

In each and every campaign, on each and every game world?

Anyway, even if that is the case, you must have some idea of what the actual level distribution will be, even if it is just "everybody except a very few are level 5 or less". You could answer the original question backwards, like " I don't want ordinary people to be higher than 5th level even if they are experienced, so I assume something like 1 XP per day at most, if not less".

If ordinary people are, say, 10th level, that changes everything about the world.
[...] If magic isn't incredibly rare, miracles like teleportation and lifegiving are not just possible but routine, since the average caster is capable of them.

But there are game worlds, such as Kulthea, where exactly this is the case. How else could the Navigators Guild exist without a LOT of high-level spellcasters?

[Ginger McMurray]

I don't want ordinary people to be higher than 5th level even if they are experienced, so I assume something like 1 XP per day at most, if not less

[jdale]

In each and every campaign, on each and every game world?

No, but for the campaigns I run. This is a matter of personal preference, not a statement of what kind of campaigns YOU should run.

But there are game worlds, such as Kulthea, where exactly this is the case. How else could the Navigators Guild exist without a LOT of high-level spellcasters?

But those high level spellcasters aren't necessarily "average people."

As we were discussing in another thread, a historically appropriate average level of income can be counted in a handful of silver. But that doesn't mean you won't encounter any rich nobles, or even that you'll never encounter a group or household or organization filled with them.

[Thot]

[...]
But those high level spellcasters aren't necessarily "average people."

If they are numerous enough to build a lot of skyships, and a lot of portals, and a lot of Navigator Compasses... well, by definition, that greatly raises the average, doesn't it?

[gog]

[...]
But those high level spellcasters aren't necessarily "average people."

If they are numerous enough to build a lot of skyships, and a lot of portals, and a lot of Navigator Compasses... well, by definition, that greatly raises the average, doesn't it?

Depends on which average you are using:

• it increases the mean average as there are a few more outliers at the higher level
• the median average will be a little higher, as the midpoint in the level range is raised, however what may really be happening is that only the upper quartile is been raised and extended with the others remaining about the same
• the mode average may not be effected at all as the majority of the individuals levels are not effected

All depends again on what you are looking for, is it the exceptional few who can do great things, or the general level of those who toil the fields every day. (all of this also working on the bases of a quasi-medieval fantasy setting)

[Thot]

Does Kulthea qualify as "quasi-medieval"? I wouldn't say so.

I do believe it would be wise to offer such a setting for RoleMaster, though.