Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Divine Magic and Commoners


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

51 to 71 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Osirion

While I'm on the fence about James ruling on adepts and cantrips, it is true that cantrips don't *always* 'work that way.'

See; Gnomes, who get some daily uses of cantrips, but certainly can't cast them at will.

Even if I didn't go with adepts getting unlimited cantrips, I'd still consider giving them a few more, such as an extra cantrip per day per point of their Wisdom modifier, or, since they can't cast them at will like clerics/druids/sorcerers/wizards/etc. a few more as they progress in levels (like an additional cantrip / day at 4th, 8th, 12th and 16th levels).

Ashiel wrote:
Awesome, great news. I love adepts though. I don't expect every caster to also be a great war priest (IE - druids / clerics). Just need one for arcane casters.

The Eberron Campaign Setting has an Arcane NPC spellcaster called the Magewright, IIRC, and also buffs up Adepts by giving them access to a single Domain.

Green Ronin / The Game Mechanics 'Temple Quarter' also divides the Adept into arcane and divine versions.

I like splitting the difference a bit.

Arcane Adepts could have the summon familiar option at 2nd level, like 'generic' adepts, or can choose the other arcane bond option, an item of some sort. (as well as various 1st through 5th level arcane spells)

Divine Adepts choose a single Domain at 2nd level, instead of getting a familiar. (as well as various 1st through 5th level divine spells)

As for the 'magi-nation,' there's nothing mechanical, or even flavor-wise, really, to prevent every single NPC with an Intelligence 10+, Wisdom 10+ or Charisma 10+ from being able to pick up the ability to use cantrips as a wizard/witch, cleric/druid/adept or sorcerer/oracle. With humans having a floating +2, it's also more credible to have every member of a nation being able to assign that to Int, Wis or Cha, so that they can eventually use up to 2nd level spells, if they manage to gain the necessary amounts of XP, but that goes even farther into territory I'm not fond of...

I'm not really in love with that idea, and would prefer just having all the peasants of 'magi-nation' blowing their starting feat on picking up a feat that allows them to cast a few cantrips per day (or one cantrip at will?).

I like to think of PC classes in general, and especially spellcasting classes, as being at least somewhat rare, and, Eberron aside, tend to think of 'magical' and 'mundane' as two different ends of a continuum, not as synonyms. The prevalance of them as BBEGs at the end of adventures does tend to give the impression that Golarion has dozens of 15th-20th level wizards running about, which implies hundreds or even *thousands* of 5th-15th level wizards, but I like to think of each AP as existing in a vacuum, and for not every potentially world-changing AP (like Second Darkness or Legacy of Fire) to be going on at the same time. (I also wouldn't mind seeing more non-spellcaster BBEGs, like an awakened Iron Golem barbarian or something. It would tickle my sense of contrariness to see a statblock at the end of a campaign that said, 'Here is X.' 'X has exactly the same stats prebuffed or postbuffed or unbuffed or in an antimagic field.' 'Buffs are for the weak!')


LazarX wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Commoners in D&D/PF are nothing like dark age commoners unless it is do to excessively poor management/leadership. Commoners in 3.x/PF make plenty of money (earning about 5 gp / week for untrained laborers taking 10 on Craft or Profession checks unless they are extremely inept, and the average cost of living a middle class life in Pathfinder is 10 gp / month). Magic naturally helps in functioning, and commoners can afford magic within reason.
Pathfinder maintains compatibility with D%D in that it's complete rubbish if you're trying to see similarities with medieval style economies, or any coherence outside of the obvious "Gold Rush" as Gygax would put it style economy that Adventurers are a part of. Items were priced the way they were so that adventurers would get big ticket amounts of GOLD and wind up spending it just as quickly. Everything else about how economies were built in the gaming world was subordinate to that one overriding principle.

Perhaps, but it is fine with me. I don't find the prices of things like services and food to be unreasonable for example. I have no desire to see medieval style economies because D&D is not a medieval world. Trying to mimic a medieval style economy would be, to me, incredibly stupid in a world where magic exists.

The only way you're getting the poor busted run down peasants that you have in medieval societies is to make it a government enforced thing...much like medieval societies. If a government takes what they want and taxes what they leave, then you can end up with NPCs who are destitute, downtrodden, and pitiful like serfs. The Robin Hood movie with Russel Crowe would be a good example. You have a community that honestly wouldn't be hurting, except they are taxed to the point of starvation, aren't allowed to hunt wild game, and so forth.

You want medieval society in a fantasy world? Despotic government. Done. Raise taxes until your government folk are sitting prettier than the polished rubies on their crown, and their people are paying 90% of their income in taxes and living expenses, and you've got yourself a suckfest like medieval peasantry.


Technically there is absolutely no reason why every commoner in a setting doesn't take profession or craft as one of their skill picks as even on rank in either of those skills increases their quality of living significantly. Granted crafting would likely require some investment in tools and a shop plus raw materials and training in guild controlled crafts is likely limited but basic clothmaking/weaving can be done with a massive expenditure of resources although the market for substandard goods might be limited.

Use of the profession skill is even less restricted and while there might be an investment in tools and a place to practice that skill it should be relatively trivial to find some sort of return using profession as a skill. Hell begging would conceivably be a profession.

So Ashiel is correct to a degree, it's largely safe to assume minimum wage is something like 5 GP a week based upon a take 10 on profession. A cure light wounds spell cast in extremis by the village priest is going to cost a half month's wages for a baker burned in a fire but it's likely that the village priest will offer the baker the option of baked goods in lieu of payment as a couple of months worth of free bread for the priests can be worth a lot. It's not like the baker is going to run away from the village like the average untrustworthy adventurer.

Taxes and a higher cost of living will absorb some of that increase in base pay but Ashiel's largely correct, most towns and villages will not have a ton of people living in abject poverty without some sort of despotic ruler in charge or some sort of massive disadvantage (racism, slavery) that prevents a percentage of the population from using profession or craft for their own benefit.


Set wrote:

While I'm on the fence about James ruling on adepts and cantrips, it is true that cantrips don't *always* 'work that way.'

See; Gnomes, who get some daily uses of cantrips, but certainly can't cast them at will.

Even if I didn't go with adepts getting unlimited cantrips, I'd still consider giving them a few more, such as an extra cantrip per day per point of their Wisdom modifier, or, since they can't cast them at will like clerics/druids/sorcerers/wizards/etc. a few more as they progress in levels (like an additional cantrip / day at 4th, 8th, 12th and 16th levels).

Ashiel wrote:
Awesome, great news. I love adepts though. I don't expect every caster to also be a great war priest (IE - druids / clerics). Just need one for arcane casters.

The Eberron Campaign Setting has an Arcane NPC spellcaster called the Magewright, IIRC, and also buffs up Adepts by giving them access to a single Domain.

Green Ronin / The Game Mechanics 'Temple Quarter' also divides the Adept into arcane and divine versions.

I like splitting the difference a bit.

Arcane Adepts could have the summon familiar option at 2nd level, like 'generic' adepts, or can choose the other arcane bond option, an item of some sort. (as well as various 1st through 5th level arcane spells)

Divine Adepts choose a single Domain at 2nd level, instead of getting a familiar. (as well as various 1st through 5th level divine spells)

Sounds awesome. :D

Quote:

As for the 'magi-nation,' there's nothing mechanical, or even flavor-wise, really, to prevent every single NPC with an Intelligence 10+, Wisdom 10+ or Charisma 10+ from being able to pick up the ability to use cantrips as a wizard/witch, cleric/druid/adept or sorcerer/oracle. With humans having a floating +2, it's also more credible to have every member of a nation being able to assign that to Int, Wis or Cha, so that they can eventually use up to 2nd level spells, if they manage to gain the necessary amounts of XP, but that goes even farther into territory I'm not fond of...

I'm not really in love with that idea, and would prefer just having all the peasants of 'magi-nation' blowing their starting feat on picking up a feat that allows them to cast a few cantrips per day (or one cantrip at will?).

Heh, well I figured that there as very little difference between the Adept and Commoner class (d6 HD, +1/2 BAB, 2 + Int mod skills, the only real difference is decent Will save and some casting ability), so the net result looks very similar to using a feat, just without feeling as clunky to me. For example, when the PCs were visiting the region for the first time, they met a young woman who was a dancer. That was her profession. The fact she could cast endure elements 1/day and some 0-level spells was rather negligible because she it was "normal" to them. In said magic society they use mindless undead or magic to do manual labor and everyone is required to get an education, so while they still have the same 3 pb stats as other common folks, their stats tend to be lopsided to reflect it.

For example, the average array for humans in this region is Str 8, Dex 10, Con 9, Int 13, Wis 13, Cha 13. They're a nation of nerds, essentially.

As for the level range of the NPCs, my world tends to be a very low-CR world. Even in said magic nation PC classed mages are pretty rare, and most of the magic item creation is done by 3rd level adepts (like the one I posted). The leader of the region is an 11th level lich and is likely the most powerful NPC for hundreds of miles and rarely does anything except tend to governing and maintaining the defense of her domain. Her superior is a queen that is on another continent who is a higher level and has lived a very, very long time, but exercises her powers very rarely (she is almost like a minor deity really).

That's probably pretty obvious though, given my posts about how low level NPCs survive and thrive in worlds where stuff like hydras be lurkin' in the local lake. ^-^"

Quote:
I like to think of PC classes in general, and especially spellcasting classes, as being at least somewhat rare, and, Eberron aside, tend to think of 'magical' and 'mundane' as two different ends of a continuum, not as synonyms. The prevalance of them as BBEGs at the end of adventures does tend to give the impression that Golarion has dozens of 15th-20th level wizards running about, which implies hundreds or even *thousands* of 5th-15th level wizards, but I like to think of each AP as existing in a vacuum, and for not every potentially world-changing AP (like Second Darkness or Legacy of Fire) to be going on at the same time. (I also wouldn't mind seeing more non-spellcaster BBEGs, like an awakened Iron Golem barbarian or something. It would tickle my sense of contrariness to see a statblock at the end of a campaign that said, 'Here is X.' 'X has exactly the same stats prebuffed or postbuffed or unbuffed or in an antimagic field.' 'Buffs are for the weak!')

My campaign kind of varies from region to region. Magic is kind of like technology in the sense that it is harnessed, studied, and used to make living easier. It's almost like a gradient of sorts, with certain areas being heavy magic and others being light magic with mixtures in between. There are cultures who are still living in tents and tribal communities whose magical technology is more primal and druidic, while other places have a slightly more civilized usage (such as using magic and Roman-level technologies to do stuff like providing running water or lighting streets).

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:
As for the 'magi-nation,' there's nothing mechanical, or even flavor-wise, really, to prevent every single NPC with an Intelligence 10+, Wisdom 10+ or Charisma 10+ from being able to pick up the ability to use cantrips as a wizard/witch, cleric/druid/adept or sorcerer/oracle.

Sure there is flavor wise at least. Lack of mentors, costs of tuition, or maybe you can't become a spellcaster of any type without a certain "Gift". (PC's of course are assumed to have this)


I think the default assumption is generally that only a small percentage of people qualify for a class other than commoner for reasons related to social class and access to training.

Aristocrats have social class minimums, experts/warriors require a certain access to training.

The rule of thumb I generally use are the following for civilized human lands:

50% of people are commoners
20% of people are experts
15% of people are warriors (D&D realms are scary)
5% of people are aristocrats (D&D realms are rich)

In some demihuman cultures these numbers are significantly changed but basically no more than 10% of the population actually are capable of being adventurers and the bulk of those individuals tend to be be fighters and rogues. Actual casters seem to be pretty limited (certainly no more than 1%-2%) of the population. Adepts are almost exclusively those casters with the talent to cast spells but without the training to be practiced spellcasters or the innate power required to be a spontaneous caster. Most civilized nations are relatively good about steering those capable towards actual adventurer caster classes but humanoids and rural populations often have hedge wizards and shamans instead of wizards and clerics.

This reinforces the idea that PCs are special but not unique (most villages are going to have at least a handful of people with adventurer classes) but that magic isn't going to be there to solve every problem.

If a village of 100 people only has a single priest and a hedge wizard that brews up a couple of potions every couple of months the ability of a village to deal with a sudden plague is really limited. Lay clergy with heal and experts with skills at apothecary and alchemical medicine might be able to help but a deadly disease that is particularly communicable is deadly.

I think that fits the idea of the standard D&D trope of the heroes being a major force for good (or evil) well because the adventurers can make a significant difference as they can basically double or triple the ability of a small community to deal with stuff like a plague just by coming into town.

That isn't to say that a high magic society isn't worth investigating but the adept class is so meh that I'm really reluctant to build a setting where adepts make up a large percentage of the population.


Hey Vuron. I haven't seen you around the boards in a while. How ya been? ^-^

vuron wrote:
Technically there is absolutely no reason why every commoner in a setting doesn't take profession or craft as one of their skill picks as even on rank in either of those skills increases their quality of living significantly. Granted crafting would likely require some investment in tools and a shop plus raw materials and training in guild controlled crafts is likely limited but basic clothmaking/weaving can be done with a massive expenditure of resources although the market for substandard goods might be limited.

Preform is pretty cool too. Though you kind of have to be really good at it to make any real money off of it (DC 10 perform earns a paltry 38.5 copper pieces a week as is noted as essentially begging, but a DC 15 produces about 4 gp a week). If you can take 10 for a DC 20, you can earn a whopping 11.55 gp wper week. Still, it's doable by an NPC of 1st level. 1 rank, +3 class skil, +1 Charisma, +3 skill focus, +2 mwk tool = +10.

Quote:
Use of the profession skill is even less restricted and while there might be an investment in tools and a place to practice that skill it should be relatively trivial to find some sort of return using profession as a skill. Hell begging would conceivably be a profession.

Mmhmn. I could see begging being a Perform skill. It does note that DC 10 performing is essentially begging, and that would make sense as beggars would be able to afford the destitute lifestyle (which means they are basically homeless and convert their coppers into immediate needs such as food), while your average performer makes a bit less than average (likely in the poor lifestyle), while anyone with a steady job (be it anything from just being an extra hand to load cargo, a prostitute, or selling dock dumplings on the seaside of Korvosa) can support an average lifestyle, and trained professionals (those guys with 1 rank in Craft or Profession) pull 7 gp per week, allowing them to live average lifestyles with more disposable income.

Quote:
So Ashiel is correct to a degree, it's largely safe to assume minimum wage is something like 5 GP a week based upon a take 10 on profession. A cure light wounds spell cast in extremis by the village priest is going to cost a half month's wages for a baker burned in a fire but it's likely that the village priest will offer the baker the option of baked goods in lieu of payment as a couple of months worth of free bread for the priests can be worth a lot. It's not like the baker is going to run away from the village like the average untrustworthy adventurer.

I mentioned something akin to this on my (rarely updated) blog, where I mentioned that the GPs generated by Craft / Profession don't necessarily magically appear as actual currency, but often in trade goods. The short version is an NPC farmer probably doesn't magically produce 7 gp per week in goods each week, but might produce an equivalent amount of trade goods like tobacco and livestock. Likewise, many services are probably paid in things like silk, spices, and so forth.

I use this sort of thinking when I'm running my D&D games. Often times PCs are paid (or find) large stockpiles of mundane goods. Bars of iron, silks, spices, cheap gems (like bags of quartz), and so forth. The most common sort of coin in my games is copper, and you're likely to find about 3 times as many copper pieces as gold pieces easily during an adventure (roughly 3:2:1:.5 in copper to platinum ratio, at least).

Quote:
Taxes and a higher cost of living will absorb some of that increase in base pay but Ashiel's largely correct, most towns and villages will not have a ton of people living in abject poverty without some sort of despotic ruler in charge or some sort of massive disadvantage (racism, slavery) that prevents a percentage of the population from using profession or craft for their own benefit.

Which is actually pretty cool I think. It gives a lot of leeway to the GM to build the sort of world they want. Commoners live a "comfortable" lifestyle by default. By easing up or pushing down on certain social situations you can easily adjust the level of poverty or affluence that exists for people in your setting.

In my setting, the magic-heavy nation is run by an undead ruler who sees her carefully constructed culture as the great project of prosperity, and they tend to be more affluent (most of the common people are educated, live in villas, have gardens, vinyards, and can make comfortable livings as artists like painters, sculptors, and so forth, with menial labor handled through magical means).

Meanwhile, not far beyond its borders is a place with a clearly established Feudal system and its citizens are not nearly as affluent, but that's because their power-hungry rulers take a lot more from them to fund their machinations for expansion and empowerment (taxes to fund armies, pay mercenaries, maintain spies, etc). In that kingdom, the lower you are on the totem pole the worse your life is, and the nobles have all the power both socially and economically.


vuron wrote:

I think the default assumption is generally that only a small percentage of people qualify for a class other than commoner for reasons related to social class and access to training.

Aristocrats have social class minimums, experts/warriors require a certain access to training.

I kind of see most NPC classes as what you get when you lack training or exceptional talent or forced circumstances. To me a warrior is a guy or gal who knows how to fight, but likely never studied formally. Might be the town militia, a weekend warrior, or some thug named "Gutsy" hired by the local criminal underground to rough up the common folks who don't pay their dues (oh, which is another good way to create poor peasants, and that's crime :P).

Quote:
This reinforces the idea that PCs are special but not unique (most villages are going to have at least a handful of people with adventurer classes) but that magic isn't going to be there to solve every problem.

Something important to note is that in the way the world was designed in 3.x D&D (and presumably Pathfinder, but it's hard to tell with all the CR 1 barmaids and PC-classed prostitutes), even if casters are common high level casters are theoretically less so. For example, you need either a cleric of 5th level or an adept of 9th level to cast remove disease or neutralize poison. Unless your world is just swimming in superhero NPCs, then they are not going to be able to keep up with any major contagious disease or great poisoning. Especially since remove disease doesn't provide any sort of immunity or resistance to further infection (meaning you might remove the disease temporarily), making removing diseases an up-hill battle at best and a hopeless endeavor at worst.

At which point, problems occur. At 50 gp per pop of antiplague/antitoxins which would need to be administered regularly, medicines and potions are damn expensive. And not because casters are greedy, but because you literally have to have at least 1/3rd the cost of alchemical goodies or 1/2 the cost of potions to get anything. Even if you were administering antiplagues at cost to create, you would run into issues trying to save the lives of a city affected by a rapidly spreading disease.


Set wrote:


In Golarion;

1) Urgathoa refused Pharasma's judgement.
2) ???
3) Disease!

The germ theory of disease might not apply at all, considering that negative energy, antithetical to life, can *create* disease, and ghoul fever is just one example of a disease that can apparently thrive on meat that is supercharged with anti-life-energy. Also, positive energy, which creates and sustains life, can be used to kill disease.

If disease in Golarion were based on micro-organisms, negative energy would be the ideal way to kill them, and positive energy could cause them to multiply like mad, possibly overwhelming a patient's defenses, but, since that's not the case, it seems likely that Golarion diseases have nothing to do with 'germs.'

Being linked instead to Urgathoa cutting in line and refusing to go gentle into that good night, disease in Golarion seems to be the symptom of some sort of fundemental universal imbalance, sort of like ancient earth religions / myth-cycles that describe a first race of perfect immortals who messed something up, and now we have death and disease and hunger and all that stuff.

If disease is a symptom of a universe out of balance, holistic / 'restoring the body to balance' type remedies might be far more relevant to removing disease in Golarion than washing your hands, boiling your water or not coughing on people when you're sick.

That is brilliant applied (magical) science. If nothing else, this highlights the subjective nature of what is "positive". If positive energy is a totally natural force that has no "good intentions", then it would indeed manifest in micro-organisms as you say. On the other hand, if there is a benevolence behind positive energy, and a malevolence behind negative energy, then you have the more classic image of negative energy causing (and feeding off of) disease and corruption.

It's a sticky point as pos/neg energies are usually described and treated as natural unthinking (or unfeeling) forces in Pathfinder etc. However, at the core these energies represent good and evil. I rather like that. (And it gives us a convenient out from the ramifications of channel positive energy killing a room full of influenza patients)

-Cheers


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Set wrote:


In Golarion;

1) Urgathoa refused Pharasma's judgement.
2) ???
3) Disease!

The germ theory of disease might not apply at all, considering that negative energy, antithetical to life, can *create* disease, and ghoul fever is just one example of a disease that can apparently thrive on meat that is supercharged with anti-life-energy. Also, positive energy, which creates and sustains life, can be used to kill disease.

If disease in Golarion were based on micro-organisms, negative energy would be the ideal way to kill them, and positive energy could cause them to multiply like mad, possibly overwhelming a patient's defenses, but, since that's not the case, it seems likely that Golarion diseases have nothing to do with 'germs.'

Being linked instead to Urgathoa cutting in line and refusing to go gentle into that good night, disease in Golarion seems to be the symptom of some sort of fundemental universal imbalance, sort of like ancient earth religions / myth-cycles that describe a first race of perfect immortals who messed something up, and now we have death and disease and hunger and all that stuff.

If disease is a symptom of a universe out of balance, holistic / 'restoring the body to balance' type remedies might be far more relevant to removing disease in Golarion than washing your hands, boiling your water or not coughing on people when you're sick.

That is brilliant applied (magical) science. If nothing else, this highlights the subjective nature of what is "positive". If positive energy is a totally natural force that has no "good intentions", then it would indeed manifest in micro-organisms as you say. On the other hand, if there is a benevolence behind positive energy, and a malevolence behind negative energy, then you have the more classic image of negative energy causing (and feeding off of) disease and corruption.

It's a sticky point as pos/neg energies are usually described and treated as natural unthinking (or unfeeling) forces in Pathfinder etc. However, at the...

Healing spells used to be necromancy spells. Remove disease was necromancy. As was raise dead (and I don't mean animate). 3.x messed it up by making conjuration (healing) where you channel positive energy to heal stuff, leaving all the inflict spells necromancy, and didn't think of any of the ramifications or logical problems of painting necromancy with only negative energy and trying to fluff it all as bad-evil-nasty.

The game was a bit more Intelligent back in the day.


Set wrote:

While I'm on the fence about James ruling on adepts and cantrips, it is true that cantrips don't *always* 'work that way.'

See; Gnomes, who get some daily uses of cantrips, but certainly can't cast them at will.

Ah, but those aren't "cantrips" they are spell-like abilities.

I can understand your reservations regarding "just assuming" they meant to do 0-level spells on the Adept the same as all other spellcasting classes, but I think James' comment makes it clear that is the case. It was most probably just a matter of an oversight when cut/pasting the NPC classes to the CRB. They changed the hit die, but didn't rewrite anything else.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:


With the Heal skill? Sure, one rank, a +1 Wis bonus, and a +3 class skill bonus can really put a dent in the spread of a disease (and it only takes 10 minutes per person).

Wow! This actually makes the Heal skill very powerful. I normally think of the heal skill as advanced first aid, which seems useless against diseases.

Aelryinth wrote:


The level of technology might be low, and they can't tell a microbe from a virus...but they don't have to.
Fever would be a fairly common malady with a common origin and he'd know it was contagious.

Hmmm, HMMMMM! Microbes? Fantasy setting? This made me think of magical and/or intelligent bacteria. Wouldn't that just be ... evil? Or very useful.... Tarrasque? No problem. Just toss this little bottle in its mouth.... Of course one of you will need to volunteer to, um, administer the dose....

Really enjoying this thread.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Basilforth wrote:
Could even low level clerics stem the tide of famines, plagues, etc.

With the Heal skill? Sure, one rank, a +1 Wis bonus, and a +3 class skill bonus can really put a dent in the spread of a disease (and it only takes 10 minutes per person).

With magic? Not really. You need a 5th-level cleric to be able to cast remove disease, and she's only casting it once per day (or twice if her Wis is 16+). Curing two people per day isn't going to put a dent in an outbreak of anything that's remotely contagious.

6th level PALADINS however, are pretty damn good at it. They heal ~6 people a day and are immune to disease at level 3. A single communal Bracelet of Mercy can reduce the level needed to level 3.

I think quarantine administration is very in-character for an order of Abadar Paladins.

Osirion

Basilforth wrote:
Hmmm, HMMMMM! Microbes? Fantasy setting? This made me think of magical and/or intelligent bacteria. Wouldn't that just be ... evil?

Planar critters (celestial/fiendish/whatever) automagically have Spell Resistance as part of their templates.

So, logically, *diseases* from the planes might also have Spell Resistance, and be much more resistant to Remove Disease than a mundane cold or flue or hemmorhagic fever...

Since Spell Resistance, as written, wouldn't have any effect against Remove Disease, instead, the 'daemonic leprosy / gray wasting' or 'elemental fever' (from the plane of fire, which causes victims to actually *burn up* and, if they die, catch on fire and burn to ash!) might have a +4 to their DC to be cured by remove fever (but not to their standard DC, making it perhaps easier to treat them with a really high Heal skill than an expensive healing spell!).

Green Ronin's Shaman Handbook had the shamanic version of remove disease / poison / curse require the shaman to fight off a physical manifestation of the disease / poison / curse in actual combat, and if he failed, he not only failed to cure the patient, but could also be afflicted! Having a planar or magical disease resist curing by materializing an ectoplasmic 'body' and attacking the healer could be one way to go. Alternately, a microbial or malign spiritual entity behind a disease or curse could possibly force the body of the victim to actively resist a cure, 'animating' or 'possessing' it temporarily to attack a healer, or flee from attempts to cure it.

In a game setting were remove disease may have been around for 10,000 years, diseases that have evolved defensive abilities or reactions (such as 'spell resistance' or causing those afflicted to become paranoid and violent, and willfully resist curing) would be more 'successful' than diseases that can be easily treated.

On the other hand, remove disease is usually a divine spell, and the gods themselves might not put up with an evolutionary arms race of this sort, and serve as a sort of celestial CDC, automatically upgrading the remove disease 'innoculation' spells they grant every season to be able to handle any mutations in the diseases afflicting the mortal world, leaving the whole thing a status quo.


LazarX wrote:

Tetanus shots have to be renewed every 5 years.

That's recommended, but if you had a shot 15 years ago, you probably still have some resistance to tetanus, it's just no longer something reliable.

But you are right, it does depend on the disease. Most of the really nasty epidemics worked like that, though; the black plague, smallpox, or the Spanish influenza would just burn through a town or a country, infect almost everyone, then everyone would either die or recover (and thus be immune), and then the disease would almost vanish for about 20 years or so, until there was a new generation of people who had never been exposed to it.


vuron wrote:
Technically there is absolutely no reason why every commoner in a setting doesn't take profession or craft as one of their skill picks as even on rank in either of those skills increases their quality of living significantly. Granted crafting would likely require some investment in tools and a shop plus raw materials and training in guild controlled crafts is likely limited but basic clothmaking/weaving can be done with a massive expenditure of resources although the market for substandard goods might be limited.

Historically speaking, though, there was pretty limited access to the kind of training that would allow you to get those skills. In a town, there might be one blacksmith, and he might take one or two apprentices; no one else in that town would be able to learn those blacksmith skills. In a city, you would usually have to join a guild to get training/ become a professional craftsman, and that usually required a certain level of social class and/or social connections.

Craftsmen were generally better paid then most people, but access to those skills was fairly limited.


vuron wrote:

Technically there is absolutely no reason why every commoner in a setting doesn't take profession or craft as one of their skill picks as even on rank in either of those skills increases their quality of living significantly. Granted crafting would likely require some investment in tools and a shop plus raw materials and training in guild controlled crafts is likely limited but basic clothmaking/weaving can be done with a massive expenditure of resources although the market for substandard goods might be limited.

In medieval Europe, about 90% of the population lived in the countryside primarily producing food. Yes, a proportion were professionals or craftsmen, but if everybody is making a living crafting goods, then there won't be enough people working on the land to feed them all.


Chief Cook and Bottlewasher wrote:


In medieval Europe, about 90% of the population lived in the countryside primarily producing food. Yes, a proportion were professionals or craftsmen, but if everybody is making a living crafting goods, then there won't be enough people working on the land to feed them all.

Keep in mind that Profession: Farmer is a skill and one that most commoners are going to take. The result is that in theory at least all but the most inept farmer should be getting the equivalent of 5 GP worth of trade goods a week.

Of course the vast bulk of that wealth is probably in the form of foodstuffs that can be sold at market and reason should also dictate that most of the farmer's "wealth" is harvested at the end of the growing season although some obviously gets harvested throughout the growing season.

Tenant farmers are almost certainly going to have to pay a certain percentage to their landlord and a certain percentage to the local nobility in the form of taxes but even if we assume 50% of total value is paid in taxes and rents then the average farmer gets 2.5 GP worth of wealth per week. It's not a huge amount but is still certainly better than 1 sp per day.

Lantern Lodge

In general the landlord was the nobility.

Nobility owned the land, the workers and crafters worked. The nobility was also usually the warriors.


Keep in mind that D&D (all editions) and Pathfinder are not medieval economics simulators. There simply is no way that the skill and economic system scale once people break out of the silver economy and it's not really useful to try to make D&D fit into a realistic medieval economic system.

Lantern Lodge

No, but it is the ruler for DnD is based. The economics might breakdown if examined too closely (because of fantasy elements), but the medival system was used as the guidelines for design, therefore it can be legitamitely referenced in these conversations.

If you want you can always make your own system that isn't based on medival, but it would be your own system, not DnD or PF (medival, however, is a reference of actual facts that can be researched, and is generally known at least a little bit, thus is more solid as a foundation then a pure fantasy creation)

51 to 71 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Divine Magic and Commoners All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.