A village of NPCs, and Average Joe Farmer is a professional.


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 267 of 267 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Abraham spalding wrote:

Sorry been a bit busy:

I agree that the "untrained" bit could probably go the way of the dodo at this point -- there really isn't much point to it and I think allowing profession to be untrained wouldn't be a bad idea.

Personally in my games I have reorganized the skills some and the entirety of the "craft, profession, appraise" skills are covered under the new skill of "Trade(type)" -- so if you have "Trade(blacksmith)" you can forge stuff, make a living doing so and can appraise goods that a blacksmith would deal with.

Actually I really like the new downtime rules with the crafting and trade goods because I agree that straight coin is probably not how most the world runs... but coin does move and isn't that strange of an item to see.

thankies for reviewing my interpretation, most people don't see outright gold coins, the untrained profession checks to make trade goods make more sense when you look at it that way? right? the untrained laborer isn't getting a gold piece a day, he or she is baking a gold piece worth of bread a day or growing a gold piece worth of crops a day. assuming a 5 day workweek.

i agree that tangible coins aren't your primary form of income, and you are more likely to see goods being traded in the market than money, grain farmers trading potatoes for a cut of beef from the butcher, jewelers trading minor trinkets for clothing, that kind of thing. plus allowing untrained professions makes sense for the apprentices studying those professions because they have to mature before they can spend the skill point.


Oh, coins will still be the primary form of income. There's a reason we still use money and why every culture has developed some form of it.

In general coin is going to be the bulk of trading done even in an agricultural setting. However you will still see the "chickens for doctor bills" routine too.

I don't think people realize how warped our monetary systems became with the industrial revolution or how we are still not finished working out the kinks of that little happening.


Yeah, our monetary system represents 'promise' as opposed to true value of the coins/metal.


Losobal wrote:
Yeah, our monetary system represents 'promise' as opposed to true value of the coins/metal.

I'll be nice and assume that's supposed to be facetious.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jonnythm wrote:
I read in one of the books from 3.5 (for the life of me I can't figure out which), that there is no real reason for the nobles to be in power. The average person can read, which means information will be passed in a way that means they can't keep their peasants under their thumb. Additionally, the spell casters are dealing with INCREADIBLY powerful magic that could potentially overthrow the masses ant any point. The only setting that has ever addressed the fact that spell casting characters should really be in control of everyone was Dragon Age, where they had to be beaten down at every turn so society wouldn't be overthrown at a moment's notice.

This statement relies on a bunch of unfounded assumptions among which...

1. Anyone can become a spellcaster. And said spellcasters are going to be working for the peasant revolt instead of the nobles that can keep them in comfort and research supplies, as well as being an avenue to power.
2. NPC's operate under the same assumptions, including gear, equipment, and ability as PC's.
3. The ability to read isn't enough, there actually has to be something TO read. And in an age without mail service, the printing press and attendent cheap newspapers, information doesn't get around.


LazarX wrote:
jonnythm wrote:
I read in one of the books from 3.5 (for the life of me I can't figure out which), that there is no real reason for the nobles to be in power. The average person can read, which means information will be passed in a way that means they can't keep their peasants under their thumb. Additionally, the spell casters are dealing with INCREADIBLY powerful magic that could potentially overthrow the masses ant any point. The only setting that has ever addressed the fact that spell casting characters should really be in control of everyone was Dragon Age, where they had to be beaten down at every turn so society wouldn't be overthrown at a moment's notice.

This statement relies on a bunch of unfounded assumptions among which...

1. Anyone can become a spellcaster. And said spellcasters are going to be working for the peasant revolt instead of the nobles that can keep them in comfort and research supplies, as well as being an avenue to power.
2. NPC's operate under the same assumptions, including gear, equipment, and ability as PC's.
3. The ability to read isn't enough, there actually has to be something TO read. And in an age without mail service, the printing press and attendent cheap newspapers, information doesn't get around.

Some of those assumptions are not so unfounded:

1. Well anyone can -- in theory. Of course this doesn't mean everyone will, it also doesn't mean you will have pick of what type of spellcaster you'll be. Long term I agree the argument is neither here nor there.
2. We already know the guidelines NPC's operation under so I think this is something that is weird to say. We have NPC wealth per level tables, starting stat recommendations, NPC classes that follow the rules of PC classes and so on. That is also ignoring the plenty of examples of NPCs provided by the same company that makes the rules that follow these guidelines as well.
3. Golarion has printing press, writings all over the place in public and literacy is a pretty normal thing by the rules. What's more even without the printing press and what have you we have plenty of historic examples that people loved to write and read without such devices (graffiti in the pyramids for example). So while the best examples might have been preserved by those with the means of doing so there is plenty of evidence that literacy wasn't as odd of a thing most of the time.


Abraham spalding wrote:
LazarX wrote:


This statement relies on a bunch of unfounded assumptions among which...

1. Anyone can become a spellcaster. And said spellcasters are going to be working for the peasant revolt instead of the nobles that can keep them in comfort and research supplies, as well as being an avenue to power.

Some of those assumptions are not so unfounded:

1. Well anyone can -- in theory. Of course this doesn't mean everyone will, it also doesn't mean you will have pick of what type of spellcaster you'll be. Long term I agree the argument is neither here nor there.

Er, I would like to see more support for this. [Or, less politely,.... no.]

In particular, RAW states that, in general, not anyone can become a sorcerer. Sorcery is confined very particularly to people with certain bloodlines, so people with the wrong sorts of ancestors simply can't access sorcery. Similarly, oracles are explicitly granted abilities because they are chosen by the gods -- they don't get to self-select.

Now, of course, any PC who wants to take sorcerer levels is assumed to retroactively have had the proper bloodline all along, because to do otherwise is unfun. Any PC who wants to become an oracle will mysteriously be chosen by exactly the right set of gods, because to do otherwise would be unfun. But there's no suggestion that this is true of the population at large, and, in fact, quite the opposite. NPC spellcasters can be as common or rare as the game master desires, to the point where there are (if you so choose) only five arcane casters in the entire world, named Saruman, Gandalf, Radagast, and two blue casters who never get names.....


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Read the entire line -- anyone can become a spellcaster -- but again like I said you don't get to guarantee why type that they'll be or that in practice they will.

So like you said not everyone will be a sorcerer, not everyone will find a deity that will allow them to be a cleric for them, or become an oracle. Likewise you might not find a patron to be a witch, and nature might abhor you. However it's likely that you can learn to cast a cantrip as a wizard (int 10 is all that's needed) or a few bits as a bard.

So I stick with in theory anyone can become a spellcaster. After all there is no reason you cannot learn magic as a wizard, bard, magus, skald, or shaman. However there can be some practical points in the way of everyone doing so.

Again notice the difference in words:

In theory
Anyone

In practice, not everyone -- and not guaranteed as what they want.

So while the guy might want to be a bard, he might not have the aptitude. He could have it for wizard, but not want to take the time. So while he could become a spellcaster, there is no guarantee he will or will want to with the means available to him.

By the rules there is no reason NPCs cannot become spellcasters, and do so in a class that will allow them to cast cantrips other than having below 10 in each and every mental stat plus constitution for humans, half-orcs, half-elves, orcs, and aasimar.

By the setting -- well you might as well admit you are invoking rule zero.


Dotting so it's easier to find.
I haven't read it all but someone should have mentioned crafts during the winter. This is often referred to as making hay while the sun shines. Lots of the things they need will be made in town. Most taxes will be collected as barter. Crops, crafts, and gathered things. Read Foxfire(probably ninjad) to see how some Forrest plants are very valuable. Some people are miners, hunters, gatherers, ect. When panning for gold or gems isn't panning out, many are also farm laborers. A lot of these jack of all trades are 1st level peasants.

Similar topic-Village of the Damned..


IIt comes up later in the thread, as well as the age of the topic (initially crafting couldn't produce funds).


I was just skimming through the NPC Codex and noticed that they changed the levels, classes, skills and feats on some jobs. How do you think this affects your village on either the positive or negative scale.


As I have the GMG I couldn't say without some research. But I'll try to look into it over the next week.


Bump.

(Interesting Threads need more juice.)


Forestedge
N- Village
Corruption-1; Crime-1; Economy 0; Law-1; Lore+1; Society-1
Qualities- Racially Intolerant; Strategic Location
Danger-0
Demographics
Government- Autocracy
Population- 200
Notable NPC’s

Marketplace
Base- 600gp; Purchase Limit- 2500gp; Spellcasting- 3rd
Minor Items- +1 Chain Shirt; Mithral Short Sword; Potion of Cure Light Wounds; Scroll of Darkvision(Arcane); Wand of lesser Restoration
Medium Items- +2 Shock Darkwood Club; Belt of Incredible Dexterity +2; Scroll of Protection from Energy(Arcane)

Spaldings Village

EtG


I consider your premise flawed. Farms of the days were more generalist than they are now, you didn't have someone who planted corn and nothing but corn.

Animals keep growing in winter. Any farm that has animals, as one should presume them to, should be able to continue making income in all seasons.

Then you've got non perishables. Grains and honey harvestes at Fall can be sold at markets or such all through the winter.

Then you must consider weather. Many places in Europe do not have anything remotely close to what I consider winter, and those conditions allow some crops to grow. Heck even here with freezing temperatures and a pile of snow, cabbages and kale keep growing... at least they had for a while last I checked and I know some grow them outdoors all through winter with relatively simple techniques.

Then you must consider produce transformed at the farm to keep longer. Sauerkraut, beer, wine, pickles, etc.

Applying profession rules for weekly farming is honestly rather absurd, but in the end I see no reason to disregard the winter weeks.


I addressed those concerns and the rationale in later posts.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay busting this thread back out for a minor update.

Okay so first thing was the original amount the farmer earned per week. Technically it should be 9.5gp per week not 9 so the new 39 week total is 370.5gp, I turned 5 of the 13 week into crafting jobs so that added another 37.5 and left the last 8 weeks as untrained for an additional 5.6. So new overall total is 413.6 per annum.

But its a different story if you use the farmer from the NPC Codex instead since they have craft (carpentry) +6 and profession (farmer) +5. So the totals are 292.5gp for 39 weeks, 40gp for 5 weeks and again 8 weeks at 5.6gp. So their total is 338.1 per annum.

Now if we add the additional income from the wife we get an additional 36.4gp per year. So Farmer A now has 450gp per year income and farmer B now has 374.5gp per year.

Now if we take off lifestyle costs for both adults as an average cost and add in 3 children at poor the total to remove for both is 348gp per year.

New totals: Farmer A has 102gp a year profit
Farmer B has 26.5gp a year profit.

Just an update to the basic premise using the original Gamemastery Guide NPC farmer and comparing him to the NPC Codex farmer.

Thanks

EtG

251 to 267 of 267 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / A village of NPCs, and Average Joe Farmer is a professional. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.