Jagatai's page

How about a small table to determine those fees and risk. For instance, you can dock in a safe location with local guards, services for loading and unloading cargo, etc. for 10gp per day. This can protect the boat from banditry and provide a bonus to moving cargo and resupplying.

On the other hand, you can go with the shady part of the docks with a lower fee of 2 or 5gp per day. If you do not leave enough of the crew aboard there is a risk of thievery. Of course, the crew will want to be off the ship to do what sailors like to do. Perhaps in the poor dock you will be approached for an unofficial "protection" fee as well.

Finally, you can anchor in the harbor at no cost, but the only way to move to the mainland or trade goods is via a small boat or skiff.

I'd even adjust the amounts randomly as larger harbors protected by by fleets and harbor defense require a greater tax to maintain. A dingy harbor without much traffic will be happy to accept a smaller fee or maybe even waive the fee based on good roleplay.

Oh, come one now. I can't be the only person that played the first stronghold game. Power attacking stone at its finest, which is why a GM shouldn't be afraid with injecting a little bit of "realism" now and again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxykCFLopzY&feature=related

First man to chop me down that section of wall gets a flagon of ale!

Thinking more about high fantasy magic in the medieval-ish warfare, I would imagine that national unification would have occurred much more rapidly than in European history.

One of the reasons for greater centralization was the increasing need to manufacture cannons, muskets, equipment, armor, etc. at a level that decentralized blacksmiths could not accomplish. And of course, once a king learned how to better centralized the powers to do that (financial, logistics, etc.), those weapons provided a significant advantage over those that did not have them. Those arms races consumed a great deal of the national income of early “nations”, minus a few lovely palaces of course. Magical communication and transportation would only hasten this centralizing effect.

Magic would probably result in a similar situation. Rulers would seek to bind as many casters as possible to their will while seeking to neutralize those that do not wish to follow their lead. Assassins would target rogue magic users or those from other nations. Kings would attempt to bribe those they could not kill. Similar conspiracies surrounded the mysteries of early gun powder and cannon manufacturing, a.k.a. state secrets. If you did not wish to learn battle magic you would only be allowed to use magic for commercial purposes. You can’t have random people walking around with WMD after all… pesky cloudkill. Pretty sure the most powerful magics would be carefully regulated and tracked, with the state magicians providing the tracking.

Military units would be more successful based on the logistical support that a centralized government can provide. I mean, you need a magical standard, perhaps a golden eagle, with protective powers. You need those state owned magic users to heal you or kill those other spell casters as well as provide the needed healing potions. Only a powerful state and industry could provide those things.

You would also see a greater number of elite units as well. You can’t afford to equip your entire army with the best, but a wise ruler will need that magically enabled, mithril equipped, high level fighting force for personal protection and to keep the rest of the country/barons/armies in-line.

Again, it really depends upon how common magic is in the world.

For my own worlds I use a similar low level calculation.

Level 1: 40%
Level 2: 30%
Level 3: 15%
Level 4: 8%
Level 5: 5%
Level 6: 2%
Level 7-8: Extremely Rare

Magic rates vary by race, but they are somewhere in the 20% range. So in a city of a 1,000 people you will only have about 200 people capable of magic and only about a dozen even capable of level three spells. Most of those people will not be “warrior” casting fireballs, instead they will provide commercial services like crafting because that is where a comfortable livelihood can be found.

Based on this rule system, I think magic is very powerful but ultimately limited by the low numbers. Even magical items will be more limited to the lack of capable crafters; especially as not everyone with magical aptitude will have access to training, etc. However, if you do make it to 3rd of 4th level spells then people will not want to mess with you and kings will be willing to pay a pretty platinum penny for your services.

A previous post pointed out how much the game world itself is more important than the particular PFRPG rules. For instance, Golarian warfare would be very high level, especially as that game world does not place any restrictions on spell casting. Casters would likely be very common in any army, resulting in combat more similar to the last hundred years.
For example, cannons entered the battlefield in the 1300’s, but they did not revolutionize warfare until armies learned to deploy them in significant numbers with better, more accurate versions. When that started to occur, you saw radical changes such as in new fortifications like star forts.

So, how prevalent is magic and at what level?

I prefer play similar based on the E6 system with significant restrictions on the number of casters in the world. In this case, you get something much closer to traditional medieval warfare with massed formations, magical duels, more counter spells, and a greater reliance on magic for reconnaissance, communications, and AoE or attacks at specific points in the battle to try and turn the tide. Yes, those few wizards and clerics can rule that battlefield, but there are only so many of them and the other side will keep theirs in reserve as a counter. Moreover, losing a caster would be devastating, so many would not wish to risk them to take down the massed charge of peasants and instead wait for the charging cavaliers.

I think Golarian would be closer to the later part of the American Civil War due to the availability of powerful magic (artillery and rifle fire). There would be massed formations, but also a much greater reliance on skirmishing and defensive measures such as entrenchment in order to protect the masses against long range, accurate spells. At Antietam, the two armies fought in a small area that you can walk across in about an hour. A couple years later at Petersburg, similarly sized armies were spread out over 50 miles of entrenchments.

Massed formations can work under the right circumstances, but they can also be shredded when confronting a strong position with a reserve of arcane blasters. Fighters would start to prefer ranged weapons in order to strike casters without exposing themselves as much. Clerics would also continual heal the injured, which would extend the length of battles as the wounded are reconstituted in reserve formations. You would be forced to grind down the opposing army, depleting the enemy’s reserves of magic, scrolls, and wands, before you could break them. Of course, one or two level 20’s could stop by at any time and all the careful planning in the world wouldn’t do much against a wish or two.

I just thought I’d add my own experience to the discussion to highlight how much fun multiclassing can be without and ulterior motive of developing the perfect character or without crippling a build.

Just for background, I’ve enjoyed both multiclass and single class characters, and I’ve found that neither is necessarily a metagaming approach. Multiclass characters often sacrifice some of their key abilities, especially in Pathfinder, but gain greater access to other abilities that help to mitigate the traditional weaknesses. Nothing wrong with that, in fact, it feels very real to life. Some athletes specialize in only one sport to reach the peak of their abilities, but others cross train for greater flexibility and to participate in more events. MMA fighters are another great example, some are very specialized and others spend more time blending fighting styles. Both types win.

My latest Pathfinder Society character follows the organic growth method that Ashiel mentioned. He started as a barbarian from the north, but chose to go south and follow in the footsteps of others that chose to serve in Taldor’s elite guard. The Pathfinder Society opened that door to him, via the faction line, and in between adventures he served in Taldor. After that, I took levels in Fighter, due to his access to the disciplined training regimes available in a great kingdom. However, with more Society missions, I found that most of the time was spent traveling to distant locations. So, I took one level in Ranger to represent this experience, as gained from hard travel and exposure to companions using “ranger” abilities.

Now, he is 6th level (4 in Fighter, 1 in Ranger, and 1 in Barbarian), and each represents the experiences of the character. So far, this has not derailed him in the adventures. Although not as capable as a pure Barbarian or Fighter in combat, he still holds his own very well while also providing substantial support using a multitude of class skills. Even the increased saves makes since, as this character is well travelled and experienced numerous threats that make him more aware and able to resist new dangers.

Sorry for the long winded post, but I think multiclassing offers incredible options for shaping your character in accordance with the world and experiences without implicitly metagaming or nerfing your ability to contribute to a party.