Upgrading classes

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:bjjm419mjgh6vnho1ifco5do9scdilcmon@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:05:50 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye"
> And for weather prediction the Knowledge (local) check using just Int
> that they get for 'common knowledge' will be sufficient for basic
> prediction of weather in their home area.

That would only get you knowledge of typical averages (ie; things an
almanac would contain), not a prediction of the future based on an
assessment of current conditions. And it should be knowledge/nature that is
providing the almanac-savvy; this has a synergy with survival (+2) which
allows dead-on weather prediction with just a skillfocus feat.

-Michael
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd4mjvn.nrj.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> > And for weather prediction the Knowledge (local) check using just Int
> > that they get for 'common knowledge' will be sufficient for basic
> > prediction of weather in their home area.
>
> Or they could use Survival untrained. That ends up being Wis or Int
> bonus, whichever is better, which is plenty good enough. Anyway, good
> catch.

Good *enough* <> BEST. FARMER. IN. THE. WORLD.

The best farmer in the world never misses his predictions.

-Michael
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:27:05 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
<mistermichael@earthlink.net> scribed into the ether:

>"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
>news:slrnd4mjvn.nrj.bradd+news@szonye.com...
>> Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>> > And for weather prediction the Knowledge (local) check using just Int
>> > that they get for 'common knowledge' will be sufficient for basic
>> > prediction of weather in their home area.
>>
>> Or they could use Survival untrained. That ends up being Wis or Int
>> bonus, whichever is better, which is plenty good enough. Anyway, good
>> catch.
>
> Good *enough* <> BEST. FARMER. IN. THE. WORLD.
>
> The best farmer in the world never misses his predictions.

Well that's nonsense. By that logic, the best warrior in the world never
rolls a 1 and auto-misses.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:15:20 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye"
<bradd+news@szonye.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Medieval farmers didn't own horses; the landlords did. The important
> peasants did own oxen (15 gp), which they shared with the whole village
> to plow the fields.

In later times this moved to horses, but again, the whole village
owned or at least supported them. Also, that was close to the end of
the middle ages. Mind you, D&D is post-medieval in most way, so horses
would be more appropriate, as would higher incomes for farmers - the
"post-plague" model, if you like.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Bradd wrote:
>> Medieval farmers didn't own horses; the landlords did. The important
>> peasants did own oxen (15 gp), which they shared with the whole village
>> to plow the fields.

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> In later times this moved to horses, but again, the whole village
> owned or at least supported them. Also, that was close to the end of
> the middle ages. Mind you, D&D is post-medieval in most way, so horses
> would be more appropriate, as would higher incomes for farmers - the
> "post-plague" model, if you like.

Hm, good points, although even post-plague I think the Profession wages
are too high. I'm not nearly as well-versed in that period though, so
consider that an educated guess, and I'll happily accept evidence to the
contrary.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:41:01 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com>
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Would you consider a 20th level commoner with +5 BAB and +3 F/R/W to have
> "significant combat ability"? Consider how he would fare against 20th level PCs.
> He'll be a speedbump.

That's +6 F/R/W. And he's about as good as a 10th level warrior,
assuming a decent weapon, and he has more wealth. Yes, he has
significant combat ability.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Matt Frisch wrote:

> That even the best person in the world at something still screws up
> sometimes. The comparison of mechanics is admittedly not the best,
however.

True, of course, but not often enough to justify a 1 in 20 chance of
failure, I think. That's the sort of thing best left to DM fiat.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 01:23:09 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye"
<bradd+news@szonye.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Hm, good points, although even post-plague I think the Profession wages
> are too high. I'm not nearly as well-versed in that period though, so
> consider that an educated guess, and I'll happily accept evidence to the
> contrary.

I'm not either, and I doubt the jump was that big, too. Also, the
plague pushed the cost of all "bottom-end" labour up, so it would
affect the 'unskilled' wage as much or more than the 'professional'
wage.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd4neja.tqj.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Michael Scott wrote:
> > Bradd, you keep accusing *me* of attacking men of straw, but you're
> > the one waving one around like a body shield. *You* insist that there
> > is no such thing as a "higher level farmer" ....
>
> The 20th-level farmer you keep going on about certainly doesn't exist.
> RTFM: Commoners only get that good in urban settlements.

<falls on the floor laughing>
And now Commoners *can't move*!

-Michael
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd4nf7s.tqj.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> > I am somewhat amazed that you just attempted to make that argument in
> > public. The D&D demographics *rules* which are *inviolate* and
> > *never* allow a DM to put *any* NPC he wants into his game world
> > unless they obey the *strict* rules about NPC frequency make it
> > *impossible* for a 20th level commoner to pick up in the country?
>
> Here's another example of your beloved reductio fallacy.

It's your argument, Bradd. If it's a fallacy..

> The rules as written never actually produce the result you dislike, yet
you still
> attempt to use it as an example of absurdity.

No. Your *misuse* of the rules is absurd.

-Michael
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:chmn41ll6cjd3tj3qjvmgm8esiev6bgadu@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:13:02 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
> > A wizard has no control over whether his opponents will conveniently
> >leave him physically unharrassed. It is very often the case that the
wizard
> >*is* confronted with melee combat. Training in self defense is a
critical
> >survival skill - even if it is "insurance" against the failure of their
> >magic to win the day, or against _running out_ of magic. Wizards are a
> >class of intelligent people. They can do the math.
>
> Which would be a fine arguement if there was some mechanism to improve
your
> AC with levels...BAB does squat for helping you survive an attack.

Combat Expertise.

-Michael
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:dnmn41po3gkhmbk3k2bcplji8agf8atbu3@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:27:05 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
> > Good *enough* <> BEST. FARMER. IN. THE. WORLD.
> >
> > The best farmer in the world never misses his predictions.
>
> Well that's nonsense. By that logic, the best warrior in the world never
> rolls a 1 and auto-misses.

Please review the take-10 game mechanics. Stop being a moron in public.

-Michael
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Chipacabra" <chipb@efn.org> wrote in message
news:Xns962A5E47FA16Achipbefnorg@216.196.97.131...
> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in
> >> Patently incorrect. He can get there through story awards and
> >> equivalent-CR challenges.
> >
> > Of course, this is unlikely to happen in a human lifetime.
>
> That's why Gary invented elves.

Look at the ears! He's got the makings of a great farmer, this one!

-Michael
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Michael Scott Brown just
said...
> "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd4neja.tqj.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> > Michael Scott wrote:
> > > Bradd, you keep accusing *me* of attacking men of straw, but you're
> > > the one waving one around like a body shield. *You* insist that there
> > > is no such thing as a "higher level farmer" ....
> >
> > The 20th-level farmer you keep going on about certainly doesn't exist.
> > RTFM: Commoners only get that good in urban settlements.
>
> <falls on the floor laughing>
> And now Commoners *can't move*!

Can't? No. Don't (save perhaps to other cities)? According to the only
source we have, apparently so (and historically that does make *some*
sense).
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Clawhound wrote:
> My understanding of farming, pre-modern times, was that 95% of the
> population farmed, and the rest were professional craftsman and the
> nobility. If you got better numbers and sources, I'm happy to go read.

The agricultural margin in pre-modern Europe was better than that, and
northern Africa was significantly better. Also, even with your figure,
that's not "subsistence farming."
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:
> There is one serious problem with any commoner getting to that level.
> He isn't going to be able to beat any combat oriented challenge with
> his very poor combat skills.

He doesn't need to, so long as the challenge is still on the XP chart
(i.e., within 7 levels of him). I think a wealthy, 20th-level commoner
could cope with CR 13 stuff, especially if he routinely tried non-combat
approaches first.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 31 Mar 2005 08:41:38 -0800, "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> scribed into
the ether:

>
>Matt Frisch wrote:
>
>> > Good *enough* <> BEST. FARMER. IN. THE. WORLD.
>> >
>> > The best farmer in the world never misses his predictions.
>>
>> Well that's nonsense. By that logic, the best warrior in the world
>never
>> rolls a 1 and auto-misses.
>
>I'm sorry, are we playing the same game? ones miss in combat because
>it's inherently unpredictable. The one missing isn't about your skill
>or ability, it's about your opponants, it's about terrain, and about
>flukes that are out of your control just as much as anything.
>
>Skills are not treated the same way. A roll of a one in a skill is not
>an automatic failure. So where is your logic there?

That even the best person in the world at something still screws up
sometimes. The comparison of mechanics is admittedly not the best, however.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:37:04 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com>
scribed into the ether:

>MSB wrote:
>>> A wizard has no control over whether his opponents will conveniently
>>> leave him physically unharrassed. It is very often the case that the
>>> wizard *is* confronted with melee combat. Training in self defense
>>> is a critical survival skill - even if it is "insurance" against the
>>> failure of their magic to win the day, or against _running out_ of
>>> magic. Wizards are a class of intelligent people. They can do the
>>> math.
>
>Matt Frisch wrote:
>> Which would be a fine arguement if there was some mechanism to improve
>> your AC with levels...BAB does squat for helping you survive an
>> attack.
>
>But BSB and escalating hit points do.

I thought about mentioning HP, and given MSB, probably should have. Oh
well.

>Furthermore, the latter perform
>exactly the same function that defense bonuses do in other RPGs. MSB is
>correct about the improved defenses of high-level wizards, at least.
>Whether he's correct about the rationale is another story.

So then his real objection should be to Commoners gaining HP with levels,
not fighting ability. Increased HP (particularly as wizards get so little
of it) doesn't require combat-to-the-death to improve upon. A few hours a
week sparring with the party's fighter would be ample. Given the greatly
expanded time frame of commoner level advancement compared to most anyone
with a PC class, the required frequency of any weapons practice a farmer
gets is also similarly expanded.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 31 Mar 2005 09:00:42 -0800, "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com> scribed
into the ether:

>
>Matt Frisch wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:40:02 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
>> <mistermichael@earthlink.net> scribed into the ether:

>> A 20th level farmer is going to have to have endured some real
>fighting to
>> get there, so having decent combat abilities is not out of line..if
>he
>> couldn't fight well, then he'd be dead. Of course, it is relevant to
>note
>> that 20th level farmers are going to be *REALLY* rare.
>
>There is one serious problem with any commoner getting to that level.
>He isn't going to be able to beat any combat oriented challenge with
>his very poor combat skills.

Enough to beat off the occasional orc or gnoll that comes calling, which is
all that is really required of such a person.

Being able to defeat orcs or gnolls with enough class levels to still give
experience in the mid-teens is questionable, however.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

MSB wrote:
>>> I am somewhat amazed that you just attempted to make that argument in
>>> public. The D&D demographics *rules* which are *inviolate* and
>>> *never* allow a DM to put *any* NPC he wants into his game world
>>> unless they obey the *strict* rules about NPC frequency make it
>>> *impossible* for a 20th level commoner to pick up in the country?

Bradd wrote:
>> Here's another example of your beloved reductio fallacy.

> It's your argument, Bradd. If it's a fallacy..

That poor paraphrase is not my argument. And your "Doctor, it hurts when
I do this" complaint is silly.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <slrnd4nftv.tqj.bradd+news@szonye.com>,
Bradd W. Szonye <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote:
>Sure, there's some leeway. However, there's the bigger problem that
>these are not farming activities, not even remotely. MSB keeps insisting
>that high-level farmers are a problem, but so far he's failed to even
>demonstrate that they exist. While there are a few higher-level farming
>challenges, they mostly involve nasty monsters like ankhegs.

I must have read the thread in disjoint chunks, because I forgot we were
talking about farmers.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:29:03 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
<mistermichael@earthlink.net> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> That would only get you knowledge of typical averages (ie; things an
> almanac would contain), not a prediction of the future based on an
> assessment of current conditions. And it should be knowledge/nature that is
> providing the almanac-savvy; this has a synergy with survival (+2) which
> allows dead-on weather prediction with just a skillfocus feat.

Good heavens! I never knew, but at the age of 14 I had SF (Survival),
and five ranks in Kn (nature). Or maybe I just had five ranks in
Survival. I was a second level dude at 14!

I see no reason at all why use of common knowledge of a local area
wouldn't allow a check to predict the weather for the next 12 hours or
so, and guess on the next day or two. Rural people do that all the
time.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:29:03 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
><mistermichael@earthlink.net> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>> That would only get you knowledge of typical averages (ie; things an
>> almanac would contain), not a prediction of the future based on an
>> assessment of current conditions. And it should be knowledge/nature that is
>> providing the almanac-savvy; this has a synergy with survival (+2) which
>> allows dead-on weather prediction with just a skillfocus feat.
>
> Good heavens! I never knew, but at the age of 14 I had SF (Survival),
> and five ranks in Kn (nature). Or maybe I just had five ranks in
> Survival. I was a second level dude at 14!
>
> I see no reason at all why use of common knowledge of a local area
> wouldn't allow a check to predict the weather for the next 12 hours or
> so, and guess on the next day or two. Rural people do that all the
> time.

Methinks Mikey has spent too much time in Bezerkely and LA. Not that
ignorance has ever stopped him before.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:g6nn41puolrjd5fu6ehinvv3ffrpn2j6n8@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:29:03 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
> I see no reason at all why use of common knowledge of a local area
> wouldn't allow a check to predict the weather for the next 12 hours or
> so, and guess on the next day or two. Rural people do that all the
> time.

And *they* are just guessing.

Knowledge/local covers "legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws,
customs, traditions, humanoids".

*Please* stop making blatantly wrong statements.

Survival is the skill. It can be used untrained, and it can be used well
by wise untrained persons, but the Best. Farmer. In. The. World never misses
a call.

-Michael
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom