Adventurers conquer Westeros. (Warning Spoilers)

[Tainted_Scholar]

Hit points are the many times in a fight in a movie someone takes a hit that doesn't put them down. Watch any long fight scene between people in any movie and you will see hitpoints in action. What is actually a "hit" in a completely abstract combat is not necessarily a true "hit" in narrative combat. In a sword fight in a movie, when someone makes a massive swing which is blocked but sends the other person reeling back and obviously shaken, thats a hit in D&D. D&D characters are not taking multiple stabs straight through the chest and not dying.

Can you cite that?

Also, how does that work when I'm on fire?

Also also, blocking is AC.

[Mendicant]

1. Class level is how experienced you are, wisdom score is how wise you are.

Right, and "experience" in basket weaving comes from killing goblins, arrives all at once in tranches for some reason, and somehow affects a dozen unrelated things simultaneously.

Level is a meta measure of power, and power shows up in dozens of different forms via dozens of different resources. Similarly, HP is a meta measure of how hard you are to kill, and it is comfortably represented by all kinds of things.

Saying a wisdom score represents being wise is a tautology. Why does being "wise" make you good at hearing things? Just because we define being able to hear stuff real good as being wise but recalling the wisdom of your ancestors is intelligence?

While we're at it, HP as toughness is a tautology too, as far as I'm concerned, because "toughness" doesn't actually seem to describe anything but an arbitrary amount of damage you can take. You keep telling me it's more simple, but it really seems like the "simplicity" comes from a nondescription in drag. If I get stabbed in the face, how does my "toughness" actually function? Does my brain just fuse back together? Do I wander around unaffected as bits of it dribble out? Does the blade just glance off my super-hard forehead?

2. What exactly is that other thing? It can't be turning aside a blow, because then Dex would give you extra HP. It can't be divine favor, because then clerics would get extra HP.

Clerics and Fighters both have more hit points than an NPC commoner, so why the hell not? If you're a fighter your extra hit points come from skill in deflecting a blow. If you're a cleric it comes from divine favor. Honestly, it should come from a mixture of things, like destiny, luck, cussedness, the favor of Moradin, your ancestors, your cigarette case and the power of love.

And "it can't be turning aside a blow because then you'd get HP from Dex" is like saying all those ranks in profession: merchant don't represent any sales skills because you don't get a bonus to your profession check for having a high charisma.

[Elkad]

Isn't still summer at this point in the story?

It's fall. And north of the wall, summer still means cold below 0 at times, and possibly below -20.
If an Other gets involved with supernatural cold, it's even worse.
Lost fingers and ears and such to the cold happens even in the summer for the Watch, and they have the survival ranks and gear to deal with it.

In the prologue, it's unnaturally warm 9 days ride north of the wall. Above freezing by day, below at night.

[Hackulator]

Can you cite that?

Also, how does that work when I'm on fire?

Also also, blocking is AC.

I mean, not I can't cite it as there's no specific explanation for what hp is, clearly this is my belief.

When you're on fire it works the same way people are on fire in movies and then roll and put it out and are ok. "On fire" does not mean "completely engulfed in flames."

Yes, blocking is AC. When someone fails to hit, maybe you blocked, and it was a strong block and you stopped their swing cold or easily slid it around you. A hit might be that aforementioned block where yes, you got your sword in the way but you were put off balance/knocked reeling and clearly got the worst of it.

[ColorBlindNinja]

It's fall. And north of the wall, summer still means cold below 0 at times, and possibly below -20.
If an Other gets involved with supernatural cold, it's even worse.
Lost fingers and ears and such to the cold happens even in the summer for the Watch, and they have the survival ranks and gear to deal with it.

Ah, OK.

I mean, not I can't cite it as there's no specific explanation for what hp is, clearly this is my belief.

When you're on fire it works the same way people are on fire in movies and then roll and put it out and are ok. "On fire" does not mean "completely engulfed in flames."

Yes, blocking is AC. When someone fails to hit, maybe you blocked, and it was a strong block and you stopped their swing cold or easily slid it around you. A hit might be that aforementioned block where yes, you got your sword in the way but you were put off balance/knocked reeling and clearly got the worst of it.

Except RAW, HP is being able to turn a serious blow into a less serious one, and toughness.

The other two examples (divine favor and personal power) are preceded by the word "maybe".

Edit:

Right, and "experience" in basket weaving comes from killing goblins, arrives all at once in tranches for some reason, and somehow affects a dozen unrelated things simultaneously.

Level is a meta measure of power, and power shows up in dozens of different forms via dozens of different resources.

Levels represent experience, that's why you get better at basket weaving; it's an abstraction to a degree, but it's assumed that you're practicing your skills and fighting monsters.

Similarly

Saying a wisdom score represents being wise is a tautology. Why does being "wise" make you good at hearing things? Just because we define being able to hear stuff real good as being wise but recalling the wisdom of your ancestors is intelligence?

Sight and hearing being keyed to wisdom probably has to do with perception.

Recalling facts is intelligence.

Clerics and Fighters both have more hit points than an NPC commoner, so why the hell not? If you're a fighter your extra hit points come from skill in deflecting a blow. If you're a cleric it comes from divine favor. Honestly, it should come from a mixture of things, like destiny, luck, cussedness, the favor of Moradin, your ancestors, your cigarette case and the power of love.

There's no RAW support for virtually any of those things.

And "it can't be turning aside a blow because then you'd get HP from Dex" is like saying all those ranks in profession: merchant don't represent any sales skills because you don't get a bonus to your profession check for having a high charisma.

And? Dodging is represented by AC.

There are rules for haggling in 3.5.

[Hackulator]

Ah, OK.



Except RAW, HP is being able to turn a serious blow into a less serious one, and toughness.

The other two examples (divine favor and personal power) are preceded by the word "maybe".

Yes, the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one.

Like, maybe, just getting your sword in the way of a massive blow that might have cut you in two otherwise.

Taking D&D combat as a literal description of what happens if you were watching the fight is silly. For example, in a sword fight between two skilled fighters, if you think there wouldn't be kicks or punches thrown at times, you're clueless. However, because of the way D&D mechanics work, you would almost never make a random unarmed strike in the middle of a sword fight. That's one of the many examples of why trying to take D&D fight mechanics and use them to directly describe narrative combat is just dumb.

[Mendicant]

Except RAW, HP is being able to turn a serious blow into a less serious one, and toughness.

In other words, your assertion that it's just toughness is already not RAW compliant and you should stop demanding that other people adhere to RAW only while you don't have to.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Yes, the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one.

Like, maybe, just getting your sword in the way of a massive blow that might have cut you in two otherwise.

Taking D&D combat as a literal description of what happens if you were watching the fight is silly. For example, in a sword fight between two skilled fighters, if you think there wouldn't be kicks or punches thrown at times, you're clueless. However, because of the way D&D mechanics work, you would almost never make a random unarmed strike in the middle of a sword fight. That's one of the many examples of why trying to take D&D fight mechanics and use them to directly describe narrative combat is just dumb.

Do I need to mention falling from orbit into a volcano again?

Edit:

In other words, your assertion that it's just toughness is already no RAW compliant and you should stop demanding that other people adhere to RAW only while you don't have to.

I said turning aside blows doesn't make sense, and toughness is sufficient for explaining HP.

You can't turn aside a blow from being submerged in lava; toughness is the only explanation that makes sense there.

If you're tough enough to survive that, why would you need to turn aside blows?

[Tainted_Scholar]

Right, and "experience" in basket weaving comes from killing goblins, arrives all at once in tranches for some reason, and somehow affects a dozen unrelated things simultaneously.

Why does that matter? Yes, D&D characters can get better at non-combat activities through combat, so what.

Saying a wisdom score represents being wise is a tautology. Why does being "wise" make you good at hearing things? Just because we define being able to hear stuff real good as being wise but recalling the wisdom of your ancestors is intelligence?

Again, why does this matter? Being wise makes you good at seeing, so what?

Clerics and Fighters both have more hit points than an NPC commoner, so why the hell not? If you're a fighter your extra hit points come from skill in deflecting a blow. If you're a cleric it comes from divine favor. Honestly, it should come from a mixture of things, like destiny, luck, cussedness, the favor of Moradin, your ancestors, your cigarette case and the power of love.

A Cleric's HP don't change when they fall, and A Fighter doesn't lose HP when he's tied up. You say HP should come from a mixture of things but you haven't proven it.

And "it can't be turning aside a blow because then you'd get HP from Dex" is like saying all those ranks in profession: merchant don't represent any sales skills because you don't get a bonus to your profession check for having a high charisma.

If you were to use diplomacy to convince people to by stuff then that would be sales skill.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Also, being on fire can mean literally standing in a blazing inferno. It does 1D6 damage per round, which is trivial at higher levels.


Edit: It also can mean being on fire; there are rules for putting yourself out.

[Mechalich]

I don't know how I forgot Rogues. I could see modelling a lot of GoT aristocrats as Warrior//Experts--they're professionally trained fighters, but most of them have more skills than 2 + Int.

The aristocrat class gets Medium BaB, Martial Weapon Proficiency, and all Armor Proficiencies and 4+Int skills, it fits pretty good. A lot of the lesser lordlings in Westeros are better trained at combat than commoners, but not particularly skilled otherwise (and their armor is doing a lot of work for them in battle). This point is made in the books when some Lord gets egged on by Cersei into fighting a duel with Bronn and gets his head handed to him. Many of the various lords may start acquiring fighter levels once the War of the Five Kings breaks out - Rob Stark is probably the ideal example. Figure he begins the series as Aristocrat 1 and starts piling on Fighter levels until the Red Wedding - but they may not have any unless they actually went to war earlier in life. They also aren't necessarily that skilled - many of the lords read poorly and have trouble doing more than simple sums. That's why they have Maesters (who make sense as single-class experts). Aristocrat also fits the majority of the important female characters - Caitlyn and Sansa Stark, Cersei, and even Danaerys would all have Aristocrat levels.

I think you're underestimating the number of Fighters training at all the keeps and castles across Westeros. Although I just said I'd stat them up as Warrior//Experts. Maybe give that homebrewed class bonus feats at 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th levels.

I'd interpret all of the various men-at-arms, guardsmen, sell-swords, and so forth as having Warrior levels, not Fighter levels. Only named knights and lords would have fighter levels, and there really aren't that many knights. It's worth noting that the few primarily combatant knights we do see - like Jorah Mormont - are highly capable in combat.

Tap the brakes on "Surely." I could be persuaded on Tywin, but level-appropriate challenges are rather hard to come by in Westeros after the first few levels. My inclination is that the stars of the setting are 4th level. 60 100xp challenges is a lot.

Tywin's in his mid-sixties during the series and began his career in his teens. It's not even two challenges per year, and there have been several rebellions, wars, and other altercations for him to gain XP since. Obviously there's not a lot of ways to gain purely combat-based XP, but there's plenty of skill-based challenges to undertake. My interpretation of E6 is that level 6 characters will be rare, but there will still be a number of them, and there will be 6+ characters who are somewhere in the bonus feat zone as well - those are the true power players.

However, I agree most characters won't be level 6, especially not at the start of the series. Jon Snow surely hits level 6 by the time he gets killed, but he starts at level 1. Out of the 93 characters on this list, I count the following as hitting level 6 prior to dying/current show date: Jon Snow (Fig4/Aris2), Eddard Stark (Fig4/Aris2), Brienne of Tarth (Fig6), Daernerys (Aris6), Barristan Selmy (Fig6+), Brynden the Blackfish (Fig5/Aris1), Jorah Mormont (Fig6), Tormun Giantsbane (Bar6), Varys (Exp6+), Tyrion (Aris3/Exp3), Oberyn Martell (Fig4/Aris2), Three-Eyed Raven (Adep6+), Robert Baratheon (Fig5/Aris1), Olenna Tyrell (Aris6+), Bronn (Fig3/Rog3), Khal Drogo (Bar6), Jaqen H'ghar (Rog6), The Hound (Fig6), Jaime (Fig5/Aris1), Melisandre (Adep6), Stannis (Fig3/Aris3), Pycelle (Exp6), Littlefinger (Exp5/Aris1), Walder Frey (Aris6), Tywin (Aris6+), The Mountain (Fig3/Bar3).

So that's 26. In the whole setting. I waffled on a few (Roose Bolton, Qyburn, etc.), but let's be generous and more or less double that to 50 to allow for lesser known high level characters like Doran Martell and some unknowns. The population of Westeros is probably in the 75-100 million range. So level 6 characters are literally one in a million in Westeros, and many of those characters aren't able to operate to the fullness of their abilities because they are suffering from age-related stat adjustments, permanent diseases, drug addiction, or other issues.

Isn't still summer at this point in the story?

It is. The worldbuilding for north of the wall is a failure, but it is regularly stated that it is above freezing (actually significantly above freezing) for large points of summer since the wall is "weeping," meaning melting, during this period. Also the wildlings raise crops and livestock at least as far north as Craster's Keep, meaning there has to be a growing season even north of the wall capable of supporting grasses. Staging adventures north of the wall means making some real compromises with the environmental worldbuilding. Personally I'd treat the region north of the wall as like being north of the Arctic Circle - there are areas in Canada and Russia that are forested for a while before becoming tundra.

Summer's not necessarily less dangerous though. The environment is less hostile, but animal activity will be significantly greater (bears) and the wildlings will be spending more time out and about herding and hunting.

[Hackulator]

Do I need to mention falling from orbit into a volcano again?

Edit:



I said turning aside blows doesn't make sense, and toughness is sufficient for explaining HP.

You can turn aside a blow from being submerged in lava; toughness is the only explanation that makes sense there.

If you're tough enough to survive that, why would you need to turn aside blows?

The fact that there are mechanics that are either badly designed or limited for balance purposes does not change the game narrative. A person who fell into a volcano (the example given in the SRD for "immersion in lava") could actually land on a mostly hardened but of lava and get to safety without being fully incinerated. This is something that happens in more than one movie. Lets not forget lava can do up to 50d6 damage in that scenario, which WILL kill most people.

Also remember that high level characters also have magic protection most of the time.

A high level character is just that super movie badass, who's fought like 20 dudes, got some stab wounds and maybe a bullet hole or two but is still going. However, he hasn't taken a sword straight through the chest.

[Tainted_Scholar]

The fact that there are mechanics that are either badly designed or limited for balance purposes does not change the game narrative. A person who fell into a volcano (the example given in the SRD for "immersion in lava") could actually land on a mostly hardened but of lava and get to safety without being fully incinerated. This is something that happens in more than one movie. Lets not forget lava can do up to 50d6 damage in that scenario, which WILL kill most people.

Also remember that high level characters also have magic protection most of the time.

A high level character is just that super movie badass, who's fought like 20 dudes, got some stab wounds and maybe a bullet hole or two but is still going. However, he hasn't taken a sword straight through the chest.

1. No this is literally being submerged in lava.

2. He can survive being submerged without any magic.

3. Yes, he can take a sword through the gut, if he's tied up and somebody does coup da grace with a broad sword, then he just got stabbed through the chest.

[ColorBlindNinja]

The fact that there are mechanics that are either badly designed or limited for balance purposes does not change the game narrative. A person who fell into a volcano (the example given in the SRD for "immersion in lava") could actually land on a mostly hardened but of lava and get to safety without being fully incinerated. This is something that happens in more than one movie. Lets not forget lava can do up to 50d6 damage in that scenario, which WILL kill most people.

Also remember that high level characters also have magic protection most of the time.

A high level character is just that super movie badass, who's fought like 20 dudes, got some stab wounds and maybe a bullet hole or two but is still going. However, he hasn't taken a sword straight through the chest.

Why can an action move character survive falling into a volcano, but not survive being stabbed through the chest with a sword?

That makes zero sense.

[Mendicant]

Why does that matter? Yes, D&D characters can get better at non-combat activities through combat, so what.

Again, why does this matter? Being wise makes you good at seeing, so what?

I guess because I'm trying to parse exactly when "it makes sense" is the only acceptable way to explain or describe an abstraction? The goalposts are just shooting around at this point and I'm getting dizzy.

A Cleric's HP don't change when they fall, and A Fighter doesn't lose HP when he's tied up. You say HP should come from a mixture of things but you haven't proven it.

I guess "so what?" is the answer here, right? Or is it like RAW where it's only relevant if it favors your explanation somehow?

I mean, how does your character "turn aside blows"? Well, pretty much however once we've turned to HP, the 2nd most abstract resource in the entire game. Why wouldn't divine favor absorb falling damage or volcano damage? Why can't martial skill still apply when you're tied up? How does luck get taken out of the equation, like, ever?

If you were to use diplomacy to convince people to by stuff then that would be sales skill.

Yes, and if you use a profession:"Literally anything" check, you make money presumably from selling stuff, and your charisma is never seen.

And this is fine, because it's an abstraction. In a game.

[ColorBlindNinja]

I guess because I'm trying to parse exactly when "it makes sense" is the only acceptable way to explain or describe an abstraction? The goalposts are just shooting around at this point and I'm getting dizzy.

We have two explanations that are RAW; one doesn't make sense, one does. That's really I'll I've said.

That and point out how the other explanations people have provided don't make sense either.

I guess "so what?" is the answer here, right? Or is it like RAW where it's only relevant if it favors your explanation somehow?

None of your explanations are RAW, so why does it matter?

I mean, how does your character "turn aside blows"? Well, pretty much however once we've turned to HP, the 2nd most abstract resource in the entire game. Why wouldn't divine favor absorb falling damage or volcano damage? Why can't martial skill still apply when you're tied up? How does luck get taken out of the equation, like, ever?

Luck would let you avoid damage in the first place, Divine Favor makes doesn't work for Ur-Priests who literally steal divine magic.

Yes, and if you use a profession:"Literally anything" check, you make money presumably from selling stuff, and your charisma is never seen.

And this is fine, because it's an abstraction. In a game.

Fine, but that has no bearing on the HP debate.

[Tainted_Scholar]

I just realised something, the PHB states that HP is both physical toughness and turning a serious blow into a less serious one. It's obvious when the former applies (being on fire for example) but I just realised where the latter applies. It applies to damage rolls. When your opponent rolls low on their damage roll it's because you turned a serious blow into a less serious one. But when they roll high, you take the full brunt of the attack. This also explains what exactly damage rolls are. So, in other words both the turning aside a blow and the physical toughness explanations can exist side by side.

[ColorBlindNinja]

I just realised something, the PHB states that HP is both physical toughness and turning a serious blow into a less serious one. It's obvious when the former applies (being on fire for example) but I just realised where the latter applies. It applies to damage rolls. When your opponent rolls low on their damage roll it's because you turned a serious blow into a less serious one. But when they roll high, you take the full brunt of the attack. This also explains what exactly damage rolls are. So, in other words both the turning aside a blow and the physical toughness explanations can exist side by side.

This is good explanation and actually makes sense.

Congrats.

Edit: Can we stop the HP debates now?

Regardless of what HP actually is, D&D characters can survive ridiculous amounts of punishment, far more so than Song of Ice and Fire characters.

So can we finally get back on topic?

[Elkad]

It is. The worldbuilding for north of the wall is a failure, but it is regularly stated that it is above freezing (actually significantly above freezing) for large points of summer since the wall is "weeping," meaning melting, during this period. Also the wildlings raise crops and livestock at least as far north as Craster's Keep, meaning there has to be a growing season even north of the wall capable of supporting grasses. Staging adventures north of the wall means making some real compromises with the environmental worldbuilding. Personally I'd treat the region north of the wall as like being north of the Arctic Circle - there are areas in Canada and Russia that are forested for a while before becoming tundra.

Summer's not necessarily less dangerous though. The environment is less hostile, but animal activity will be significantly greater (bears) and the wildlings will be spending more time out and about herding and hunting.

The weeping wall puts it just above freezing+sun, since they mention frost and light snows at the same time (in the prologue). "Not cold enough to kill men in fur and leather, with fire and shelter at hand". And by their context, it's perhaps slightly out of the ordinary. In the warmest part of the day it might top the 40 degree limit to avoid saves.

In winter when the deep cold comes men die standing watch on the Wall. Which means in fairly short time periods, since they should be checked on by the sergeant every hour or two. And even in summer they have heated shelters atop the wall for the men on watch to visit from time to time.

Does Frostburn cover cold environment damage in more detail?

[Mechalich]

The weeping wall puts it just above freezing+sun, since they mention frost and light snows at the same time (in the prologue). "Not cold enough to kill men in fur and leather, with fire and shelter at hand". And by their context, it's perhaps slightly out of the ordinary. In the warmest part of the day it might top the 40 degree limit to avoid saves.

In winter when the deep cold comes men die standing watch on the Wall. Which means in fairly short time periods, since they should be checked on by the sergeant every hour or two. And even in summer they have heated shelters atop the wall for the men on watch to visit from time to time.

See, this is how the worldbuilding doesn't work. Summer snows that result in accumulation means the surface of the ground never gets above freezing. That means plants don't grow. So there can't be forests north of the wall - but there are. The only solution to allow for 100,000+ wildlings north of the wall is to make it less cold. You actually have to do this throughout the North. 'Summer snows' can't be allowed.

The bits about conditions on top of the wall can be finessed to some degree because the Wall is 700 feet high (Martin is on the record as not having any idea what size structure he had created when they went about making the show) and therefore presumably much colder and exposed to severe winds in a way that doesn't apply at ground level.

[Tainted_Scholar]

The bits about conditions on top of the wall can be finessed to some degree because the Wall is 700 feet high (Martin is on the record as not having any idea what size structure he had created when they went about making the show) and therefore presumably much colder and exposed to severe winds in a way that doesn't apply at ground level.

Wind chill would definitely be a big factor.

[ColorBlindNinja]

The weeping wall puts it just above freezing+sun, since they mention frost and light snows at the same time (in the prologue). "Not cold enough to kill men in fur and leather, with fire and shelter at hand". And by their context, it's perhaps slightly out of the ordinary. In the warmest part of the day it might top the 40 degree limit to avoid saves.

In winter when the deep cold comes men die standing watch on the Wall. Which means in fairly short time periods, since they should be checked on by the sergeant every hour or two. And even in summer they have heated shelters atop the wall for the men on watch to visit from time to time.

Does Frostburn cover cold environment damage in more detail?

Frostburn has rules for frostbite and hypothermia. DC 15 Heal check, fire helps lessen the check by -2 for the former and -5 for the latter.

Other than that, I couldn't find much else related to cold environment damage.

Worth noting that Endure Elements protects the user as long as it's above -50 degrees Fahrenheit.

[Coidzor]

Question: Is there anything to support Wildlings trying to kill other people on sight in all cases if they're not part of the same band or somehow co-opted by someone like Mance Rayder?

We know that they try to kill the men of the Nights Watch because they're traditional enemies, but how big is the typical group of Wildlings going around when they're not gathered up into an army or living in a settlement?

Are they really going around with enough numbers to feel comfortable engaging with 6 creatures, some of which may not even look human, as in the case of the Dragonborn Warforged?

Yes, they're dangerous and all, but are they really the endless zerg rush that people have treated them as in the thread so far? Somehow some level of trade happens and there was some kind of framework that allowed Mance Rayder to build up the forces that he did.

Point the First: Another way to look at this is that D&D lava isn't as dangerous as real-world lava.

Point the SEcond: A 6th level character, PC or NPC, is approaching superhero territory in a lot of ways. A 6th level character has somehow ground through 100 encounters yielding 100 xp each, or the equivalent. I'm not that surprised that this guy can survive being dipped in lava, or can ride out a nuclear blast inside a refrigerator, or can drive a car off of a ship into a helicopter and jump to safety. That's the kind of thing 6th level characters DO.

It isn't as dangerous, but it is as hot and will otherwise behave in accordance with our world's physics except where it intersects with D&D rules. Try not to think about it.

We're in agreement about superhero territory, yeah.

And you know that Reserve Feats are going to be the bread & butter of this group after they hit the level 6 cap.

That's a good point. Fiery Burst and decent things to prevent being swamped and grappled = bye-bye westerosi undead.

Refresh my memory, do the white walkers care about fire at all?

2. No they couldn't have, they wouldn't get enough XP from doing that.

You can, however, level up to level 6 and, IIRC, get a fair number of feats, just from killing rats. 38 XP for an individual rat, 75 for a pair.

You can certainly kill housecats and get up to level 6. 75 XP per cat. And at level 6, one can still get 75 XP per cat. It takes 5 additional feats to count as effectively 7th level for XP, and thus unable to get XP from rats or cats or anything below CR 1.

5K XP per additional feat. Each 5 additional feats = +1 effective level(or CR). After 20 additional feats, no more effective level increase, but no actual cap on number of feats that one can acquire. (Max effective level 10)

(to level from Rats fought individually)
27 to get from 1 to 2.
79 to get from 1 to 3. 52 from 2 to 3.
158 to get from 1 to 4. 79 to get from 3 to 4.
264 to get from 1 to 5. 106 to get from 4 to 5.
395 to get from 1 to 6. 131 to get from 5 to 6.

132 per feat for 5 feats.

658 to get 5 additional feats and count as 7th level and thus unable to get XP from rats.

1053 rats total to get from level 1 to level 6 and get those 5 additional feats.

After a character gets an effective level of 10, they can only get XP from CR 3 things or higher.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Question: Is there anything to support Wildlings trying to kill other people on sight in all cases if they're not part of the same band or somehow co-opted by someone like Mance Rayder?

We know that they try to kill the men of the Nights Watch because they're traditional enemies, but how big is the typical group of Wildlings going around when they're not gathered up into an army or living in a settlement?

Are they really going around with enough numbers to feel comfortable engaging with 6 creatures, some of which may not even look human, as in the case of the Dragonborn Warforged?

Yes, they're dangerous and all, but are they really the endless zerg rush that people have treated them as in the thread so far? Somehow some level of trade happens and there was some kind of framework that allowed Mance Rayder to build up the forces that he did.

This is good point, especially when Diplomacy and Bluff are involved.

[Mechalich]

Question: Is there anything to support Wildlings trying to kill other people on sight in all cases if they're not part of the same band or somehow co-opted by someone like Mance Rayder?

We know that they try to kill the men of the Nights Watch because they're traditional enemies, but how big is the typical group of Wildlings going around when they're not gathered up into an army or living in a settlement?

Are they really going around with enough numbers to feel comfortable engaging with 6 creatures, some of which may not even look human, as in the case of the Dragonborn Warforged?

Yes, they're dangerous and all, but are they really the endless zerg rush that people have treated them as in the thread so far? Somehow some level of trade happens and there was some kind of framework that allowed Mance Rayder to build up the forces that he did.

The wildlings represent a large group of small tribal populations living in an arctic environment. There are many ethnic groups in competition and in many cases unable to communicate because they do not share a language (Mance mentions unifying 100 clans and tribes). The situation is similar to the indigenous populations of Northern Canada or Siberia - with the settled populations of the North in the Gift representing something like the settled population around Lake Baikal. As such the Wildlings will have small communities spread across a vast geographic territory with extremely low population density. The area north of the Wall is pretty big, something like 600,000 sq km - or roughly the size of Ukraine. If there are 200,000 people living north of the Wall - meaning Mance Rayder convinced fully half the population to join his march/crusade - then there's only 1 person per 3 square kilometers. You could presumably march for weeks without encountering anyone (especially if you're using Create Water and don't need to stick to rivers that draw people and game).

Most wildling populations are probably semi-nomadic, moving about in tribal groups of a few dozen to a few hundred or so, plus animals. The numbers of fighting men (and occasional woman) would be small in a single group. In a given group of one hundred adults you probably add 30-40 children and 5-15 elders of limited combat capability. Wildlings are still going to be mostly commoners (80-90%) but their harsh lifestyle means many will have a few levels. Maybe 10% experts, and 9% warriors, with only maybe 1% being barbarians. They will generally lack any real armor and many won't have metal weapons, being stuck fighting with stone or bone (the Thenns after all, were notably advanced for forging bronze). Bottom Line: your average wildling is probably not much more dangerous than the average goblin.

Whether they'd be willing to attack a 4-6 person party though, that depends. The party is presumably carrying metal weapons and in the case of a cleric, armor, plus additional metal gear that all represents potentially vast wealth in the wildling economy, so there's a strong incentive to attack these foreigners who may not speak the language - I'm assuming the characters speak the common tongue of Westeros, not any bizarre Wildling languages - if they feel they have a good chance of winning.

Characters playing something obviously nonhuman (elves and lesser planetouched and some others can reasonably pass for funny humans) are going to have some different experiences. Wildlings are aware of the Others and fear them and are likely to associate something truly exotic with that enemy. So I doubt they would attack a dragonborn or warforged unless they had overwhelming force. On the other hand - there's no way the Night's Watch is letting any dragonborn through to Castle Black. They're just going to shoot arrows at you from the top of the wall without asking questions.

[Sapreaver]

Dragon robots... I like it!

Yup. They will definitely make it to the wall. And with the bard and paladin acting as party faces they should be able to diplomacy themselves through it. You know something something the old gods sent us something something we're here to help face whats to come something something

[Knaight]

"HP as plot armor" answers every single objection you've raised, doesn't create an endlessly nested series of new questions, and is dead simple as an explanation. It also actually lets you model ASoIaF with low-level DnD.

Plot-armor-HP-D&D makes a better model for ASoIaF than Meat-HP-D&D. It's still a terrible model.

Also also, blocking is AC.

This is pretty questionable - not least because blocking is a skill, and better combatants should thus be better at blocking. AC doesn't take weapon skill into account at all, you don't lose AC when unarmed, and it just generally doesn't hold up as representative of blocking. There's not really anything else that does either, with HP working terribly but still better than the other options.

[Tainted_Scholar]

This is pretty questionable - not least because blocking is a skill, and better combatants should thus be better at blocking. AC doesn't take weapon skill into account at all, you don't lose AC when unarmed, and it just generally doesn't hold up as representative of blocking. There's not really anything else that does either, with HP working terribly but still better than the other options.

I was getting the idea that blocking is represented by AC from shields.

[exelsisxax]

I was getting the idea that blocking is represented by AC from shields.

Correct. Parrying is (very poorly) represented by combat expertise and fighting defensively.

[johnbragg]

I was getting the idea that blocking is represented by AC from shields.

Then you'd expect AC-from-shield to scale with prowess in battle. (I've got a homebrewed feat for that, but I don't think WOTC does.)

HP-as-plot armor fits with the idea that the grizzled veteran has the stamina to parry and counter and block the first N well-aimed blows, but by N+1 (when he's down to his last hit points) he no longer has the stamina to block in time, and takes it on the chin (metaphorically.) Mix liberally with he-has-the-stamina-to-duck-and-move, so that the greataxe slices a nasty gash in his arm rather than taking off the top of his skull.

I think of character-power as like mass, and the mechanics as like gravity. In a fantasy universe, mind over matter is the order of the day. Caster do their mind-over-matter through spell formulas, everyone does it through saving throws, HP, SR, DR, etc.

So to my way of thinking, that Ser Barristan Selmy is regarded as the finest knight in the Seven Kingdoms slots him in at 6th level, and overrides book-text where he made 8 attacks in 6 seconds but got dropped by a single arrow. That didn't happen, but ASOIF is not as searchable as the SRD + illegally scanned PDFs so I'm confident that there is book-text that would contradict statting him at 6th level. As you said toward the beginning, GOT characters make way more than 1-2 attacks every 6-second round, but are much more fragile than D&D characters.

That tension gets resolved if you go with HP-as-narrative-mass, and say that HP damage is often stamina-damage rather than meat-wounds. That lets you slot in Westerosi soldiers as mid-level characters, rather than making them complete glass-cannons, mechanically.