|
|
Post by hengest on Jul 30, 2021 20:30:04 GMT -5
This is more a worldbuilding topic than a PC topic, but we'll see where it goes. A reasonably educated person in the colonial era probably could read, write, and do arithmetic. That was pretty solid for the time. But of course, such a person took for granted a wealth of knowledge that few people possess today: herbs, signs of the seasons, agricultural topics, maintenance of hand tools and countless other technologies of the time, probably linguistic skills that most people now lack, ability to travel and subsist on very little, the list would go on if I were more aware of these things myself. On a similar note, I have read that musicians in the 18th century had skills, such as refelting hammers on keyboard instruments, that few even super-pros now have or would ever expect to need. So it applies to more than genera knowledge, but specialized areas as well. Do you ever think about this when worldbuilding? I know that at least some people on this board are not too worried about meta-knowledge and the exact things that a PC should know, and so on. But even with such an approach, it seems this kind of thing might be worth thinking about. Not to try to imitate some real-world past perfectly but simply for inspiration. What knowledge is truly common in a setting, common like "red means stop, green means go"? Knowledge that everyone can be relied on to have, but that's different from what we can be relied on to have? Do you think about this or not worry about it? The Perilous Dreamer mao tetramorph robkuntzrestless ripx187 The Semi-Retired Gamer |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 30, 2021 21:15:35 GMT -5
This is more a worldbuilding topic than a PC topic, but we'll see where it goes. A reasonably educated person in the colonial era probably could read, write, and do arithmetic. That was pretty solid for the time. But of course, such a person took for granted a wealth of knowledge that few people possess today: herbs, signs of the seasons, agricultural topics, maintenance of hand tools and countless other technologies of the time, probably linguistic skills that most people now lack, ability to travel and subsist on very little, the list would go on if I were more aware of these things myself. On a similar note, I have read that musicians in the 18th century had skills, such as refelting hammers on keyboard instruments, that few even super-pros now have or would ever expect to need. So it applies to more than genera knowledge, but specialized areas as well. Do you ever think about this when worldbuilding? I know that at least some people on this board are not too worried about meta-knowledge and the exact things that a PC should know, and so on. But even with such an approach, it seems this kind of thing might be worth thinking about. Not to try to imitate some real-world past perfectly but simply for inspiration. What knowledge is truly common in a setting, common like "red means stop, green means go"? Knowledge that everyone can be relied on to have, but that's different from what we can be relied on to have? Do you think about this or not worry about it? The Perilous Dreamer mao tetramorph robkuntz restless ripx187 The Semi-Retired Gamer I think about it. I operate that in a medieval type culture that it would be a really odd thing not to know how to fish or hunt, if you were anything other than town raised. And that even the town raised may know how to fish. So as the ref and world builder I assume that normal people in my world have a certain ability to live off the land, if they were not too pampered growing up. I apply this to a lot of things, that I think most people should know in the culture. I grew up on a farm in the 1960s. I use that as a baseline for what I assume people know that work for a living. It is much different now, but my childhood was much more practical, my parents childhood was even more practical than mine was. In their childhood all game was hunted to eat and supplement the diet and the same for all previous generations. |
|
|
|
Post by restless on Jul 30, 2021 21:57:27 GMT -5
I've always used what I read in the Foxfire Books as a child as a good baseline for what your average person would know. There's a lot of practical knowledge described there that probably really hasn't changed since time immemorable, until it started to get added to around the Industrial Revolution or perhaps the mid-Enlightenment. Also, it's not unusual for someone who does a specialized task or craft (like the aforementioned musicians) to be immersed in the care and maintenance of their tools. For instance, early automobile owners and airplane pilots had to learn to be mechanics and engineers out of necessity, and even though my education is in a different discipline I just sort of fell into being a software developer because I learned so much over the decades through necessity and accretion of experience. I know that warriors also often learned to perform simple maintenance and repair of their weapons and armor, largely out of necessity. The modern world is so awash in specialized information, knowledge and technique that is broad and deep that I can't even really compare, because there's far too much to know and the specialties get so distant from other things that seem to a layperson that they should be close (I might know a lot about operating systems internals, but writing user-facing interface code just isn't my thing; I wouldn't even really know where to begin building out stuff to handle CFD, say). Insofar as worldbuilding with this in mind, though, it may get a passing thought when I work on a settlement but not as much as far as characters are concerned. I figure this is a game about going on adventures, not how the shopkeeper keeps things going or is the hunt going well enough so the village has enough protein over the winter. For the story, the shop can do well or be imperiled, the hunt is a success or not. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 30, 2021 22:36:39 GMT -5
I've always used what I read in the Foxfire Books as a child as a good baseline for what your average person would know. There's a lot of practical knowledge described there that probably really hasn't changed since time immemorable, until it started to get added to around the Industrial Revolution or perhaps the mid-Enlightenment. Also, it's not unusual for someone who does a specialized task or craft (like the aforementioned musicians) to be immersed in the care and maintenance of their tools. For instance, early automobile owners and airplane pilots had to learn to be mechanics and engineers out of necessity, and even though my education is in a different discipline I just sort of fell into being a software developer because I learned so much over the decades through necessity and accretion of experience. I know that warriors also often learned to perform simple maintenance and repair of their weapons and armor, largely out of necessity. The modern world is so awash in specialized information, knowledge and technique that is broad and deep that I can't even really compare, because there's far too much to know and the specialties get so distant from other things that seem to a layperson that they should be close (I might know a lot about operating systems internals, but writing user-facing interface code just isn't my thing; I wouldn't even really know where to begin building out stuff to handle CFD, say). Insofar as worldbuilding with this in mind, though, it may get a passing thought when I work on a settlement but not as much as far as characters are concerned. I figure this is a game about going on adventures, not how the shopkeeper keeps things going or is the hunt going well enough so the village has enough protein over the winter. For the story, the shop can do well or be imperiled, the hunt is a success or not. My parents bought several Foxfire books when they first came out and used them as a teaching aid to tell us about their childhood and how they helped do everything in them. I am old enough and through growing up on a farm in a rural area, I know things that I have not used in over 40 years. I could still butcher a steer or a hog if I needed to and many other low tech things. My new neighbor was planting a tree where the remains of an old stump was and having trouble and I got my mattock and used it to chop off a couple of partially decomposed roots so they could plant the new tree. As world building, I don't worry about most NPCs for things that are not directly relevant. But if the PCs are trying to live on the land and stay out in the wilderness for months, they have to be able to live off the land and I assume that it is reasonable that they know how. So the hunt is important in that context. |
|
|
|
Post by restless on Jul 30, 2021 23:11:27 GMT -5
As world building, I don't worry about most NPCs for things that are not directly relevant. But if the PCs are trying to live on the land and stay out in the wilderness for months, they have to be able to live off the land and I assume that it is reasonable that they know how. So the hunt is important in that context. I don't give it a whole lot of thought, either, although a character's background can inform the choice. If someone is the child of a farmer or serf then they likely know how to go out and trap or hunt small game. If the character's background is nobility their sense of hunting may be with a large party to thrash the woods and drive huge amounts of game out to be chased and killed with dogs and mounts. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 31, 2021 4:16:20 GMT -5
hengestI cling to the concept oft the char classes. As such I tend to think of pc knowledge as a monolith not a road. The roles are clearly defined by the class picked, that leads to assumption of pc knowledge. So for example a fighter knows how to fish, while a mage knows history. I also have the whole Idea of the kharmic line but that is for another thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Semi-Retired Gamer on Jul 31, 2021 8:13:43 GMT -5
Pretty interesting question. I don't really think about it in great detail but I do associate certain "skills" to certain classes like the secondary skills from AD&D. Fighters would most likely have some fishing, hunting, horsemanship, etc. experience while clerics would be more than "just literate", have some knowledge on legends & other religions, et. and Magic Users would know several different areas of arcana and Lore.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 31, 2021 10:16:35 GMT -5
Pretty interesting question. I don't really think about it in great detail but I do associate certain "skills" to certain classes like the secondary skills from AD&D. Fighters would most likely have some fishing, hunting, horsemanship, etc. experience while clerics would be more than "just literate", have some knowledge on legends & other religions, et. and Magic Users would know several different areas of arcana and Lore. I view clerics as the most educated of the classes, with the broadest range of knowledge. They are the generalist. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 31, 2021 11:20:01 GMT -5
Pretty interesting question. I don't really think about it in great detail but I do associate certain "skills" to certain classes like the secondary skills from AD&D. Fighters would most likely have some fishing, hunting, horsemanship, etc. experience while clerics would be more than "just literate", have some knowledge on legends & other religions, et. and Magic Users would know several different areas of arcana and Lore. I view clerics as the most educated of the classes, with the broadest range of knowledge. They are the generalist. couldn't disagree more. I know this is from a slightly later ed but In 1e mages were much older in the dmg. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 31, 2021 11:28:54 GMT -5
I view clerics as the most educated of the classes, with the broadest range of knowledge. They are the generalist. couldn't disagree more. I know this is from a slightly later ed but In 1e mages were much older in the dmg. What do you mean mages were much older. I don't recall any rule that specified that mages were older than the other classes. Did I miss that? |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 31, 2021 11:31:39 GMT -5
There was a chart in The DMG that had random starting ages for all the classes, they were all dif and I seem to remember is that MUs could be as old as 40? The Perilous Dreamer |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 31, 2021 11:33:31 GMT -5
There was a chart in The DMG that had random starting ages for all the classes, they were all dif and I seem to remember is that MUs could be as old as 40? The Perilous Dreamer Yeah, I would have read that over 20 years ago and never looked at it again. I don't play AD&D after all.  So it does not factor into my OD&D. |
|
|
|
Post by restless on Jul 31, 2021 11:51:39 GMT -5
General clergy I could see as scholars. Clerics seem more like the crusading templar sort.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Semi-Retired Gamer on Jul 31, 2021 12:41:58 GMT -5
Pretty interesting question. I don't really think about it in great detail but I do associate certain "skills" to certain classes like the secondary skills from AD&D. Fighters would most likely have some fishing, hunting, horsemanship, etc. experience while clerics would be more than "just literate", have some knowledge on legends & other religions, et. and Magic Users would know several different areas of arcana and Lore. I view clerics as the most educated of the classes, with the broadest range of knowledge. They are the generalist. Agreed. My brain was vapor-locked this morning and I could not articulate properly. The cleric would definitely be the general knowledge expert while the magic user would be focused on well, uh...magical stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 31, 2021 13:21:04 GMT -5
General clergy I could see as scholars. Clerics seem more like the crusading templar sort. I think of clerics as having had a rigorous upbringing and training before they are allowed to adventure which is part of their path (they bring back resources a huge chunk goes to their church and to the poor. I don't because the interest for it is not there, but I think clerics should be played a lot like a properly played paladin. But with some of the paladin powers not showing up until they reach name level. |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Jul 31, 2021 14:42:01 GMT -5
I started play with 2nd Editions Non-Weapon Proficiency (NWP) system, so to me this is just a given and built right into the game. I wasn't happy with it, it wasn't perfect but it formed a base of how my game developed. Using a point towards a NWP proved mastery and the player could depend upon that skill if it ever came up, either outright or with a skill-check. Anyone can try to use a skill, not being proficient doesn't necessarily mean that you are totally ignorant on the subject. Also, I figure that things will come up during the game, such as learning a specific skillset through practice, such as seamanship or mountain climbing. Spending long periods of time in a different culture grants you a bonus in comprehending a foreign tongue. To make things easier we just lean on making ability checks to see how things go. No mechanics are written in stone.
In my world the most common class is Tradesman (based on the Thief's class), and most adventurers know a trade as well, something to fall back on if the whole getting rich thing doesn't pan out. There is a table in the 2e PHB that generated what trade, if any, your family practiced which I've always liked and enjoyed. You were supposed to use one or the other, the other being the NWP system, but we liked to use both.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 31, 2021 15:38:53 GMT -5
I started play with 2nd Editions Non-Weapon Proficiency (NWP) system, so to me this is just a given and built right into the game. I wasn't happy with it, it wasn't perfect but it formed a base of how my game developed. Using a point towards a NWP proved mastery and the player could depend upon that skill if it ever came up, either outright or with a skill-check. Anyone can try to use a skill, not being proficient doesn't necessarily mean that you are totally ignorant on the subject. Also, I figure that things will come up during the game, such as learning a specific skillset through practice, such as seamanship or mountain climbing. Spending long periods of time in a different culture grants you a bonus in comprehending a foreign tongue. To make things easier we just lean on making ability checks to see how things go. No mechanics are written in stone. In my world the most common class is Tradesman (based on the Thief's class), and most adventurers know a trade as well, something to fall back on if the whole getting rich thing doesn't pan out. There is a table in the 2e PHB that generated what trade, if any, your family practiced which I've always liked and enjoyed. You were supposed to use one or the other, the other being the NWP system, but we liked to use both. The are DMs, plenty of them who are strictly BtB and if you don't have the skill you cannot even make the attempt to do things. People would have a loss less issues with skills, if more DMs approached it like you do. If you are going to use skills, I like the Traveller system better. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Aug 1, 2021 3:19:53 GMT -5
I never saw clerics as scholars, I agree w above that they are Knights Templar. Thinking in D&D terms, there really is no need for them to be big readers, it's just not their role.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Aug 1, 2021 11:58:43 GMT -5
I never saw clerics as scholars, I agree w above that they are Knights Templar. Thinking in D&D terms, there really is no need for them to be big readers, it's just not their role. Clerics for centuries were the educated class. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Aug 1, 2021 12:00:37 GMT -5
True but the "wizards" were more so(although clergy trained)
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Aug 1, 2021 12:37:31 GMT -5
In my realms, wizards are secretive and never willingly share what they know. It is the cleric scholars that collect/translate/copy texts and write books. Monasteries dedicate themselves to collecting and sharing/editing knowledge, not that a wizard can't get frustrated and try to correct historical inaccuracies, but for the most part, the mage is obsessed with personal power.
5e has kind of built the bard class around researching and sharing knowledge, which is cool, though they tend to keep oral traditions alive. A wizard who stumbles upon some lost historical document is more likely to sell it to a monastery than to use it himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Aug 1, 2021 12:38:33 GMT -5
In my realms, wizards are secretive and never willingly share what they know. It is the cleric schoolers that collect/translate/copy texts and write books. Monasteries dedicate themselves to collecting and sharing/editing knowledge, not that a wizard can't get frustrated and try to correct historical inaccuracies, but for the most part, the mage is obsessed with personal power. 5e has kind of built the bard class around researching and sharing knowledge, which is cool, though they tend to keep oral traditions alive. A wizard who stumbles upon some lost historical document is more likely to sell it to a monastery than to use it himself. NPC clerics would have wiz beat sure. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Aug 1, 2021 12:45:03 GMT -5
Do you guys honestly think that a mere clergyman could stand up to a John Dee, or Da Vinchi, thats what you are saying. Sure there are far fewer in real life but not fantasy.
(loving this how about ypu? )
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Aug 1, 2021 13:29:05 GMT -5
In my realms, wizards are secretive and never willingly share what they know. It is the cleric scholars that collect/translate/copy texts and write books. Monasteries dedicate themselves to collecting and sharing/editing knowledge, not that a wizard can't get frustrated and try to correct historical inaccuracies, but for the most part, the mage is obsessed with personal power. This is what I see as a good take on it. |
|
|
|
Post by restless on Aug 1, 2021 13:29:11 GMT -5
I never saw clerics as scholars, I agree w above that they are Knights Templar. Thinking in D&D terms, there really is no need for them to be big readers, it's just not their role. This is why I'm what I'm working on now there are three (and possibly four) distinct religious classes: clerics for the militant parts of the Church (with a slower spell progression), priests who are the leaders and officiants of other religions, cults and small gods, druids and maybe a non-militant clergy class for the Church, but the division is largely due to setting. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Aug 1, 2021 13:30:56 GMT -5
I never saw clerics as scholars, I agree w above that they are Knights Templar. Thinking in D&D terms, there really is no need for them to be big readers, it's just not their role. This is why I'm what I'm working on now there are three (and possibly four) distinct religious classes: clerics for the militant parts of the Church (with a slower spell progression), priests who are the leaders and officiants of other religions, cults and small gods, druids and maybe a non-militant clergy class for the Church, but the division is largely due to setting. This |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Aug 1, 2021 13:31:39 GMT -5
Do you guys honestly think that a mere clergyman could stand up to a John Dee, or Da Vinchi, thats what you are saying. Sure there are far fewer in real life but not fantasy. (loving this how about ypu? ) We are talking apples and oranges here. We are saying clerics are the most educated and literate class. 20th level Wizards like Da Vinci are extremely rare, but there are thousands of low level clerics that are copying and preserving knowledge. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Aug 1, 2021 13:37:42 GMT -5
They don't wear chainmail do they?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Aug 1, 2021 13:42:41 GMT -5
They don't wear chainmail do they? Who are you asking and about which character class? |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Aug 1, 2021 13:49:40 GMT -5
You and the clerics you cited right above this.
|
|
So it does not factor into my OD&D.
