Gremlin, Vexgit

this guy ate my previous avatar's page

237 posts (347 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 11 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 237 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

This thread is offending me I will retire to the privacy of my bedroom.

*returns 5 minutes later with a satisfied look on his face*

Next poster is a passionate Twilight fan.


bump


The Descent.
&
Super Mario Brothers.


James Jacobs wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:
Would you eat a tauntaun?
Gross. No.

Why? It tastes like a mastadge. Don't you like animals that tastes like chicken?


James Jacobs wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:

Mr. Jacobs.

Have you seen Kung Fu Killer aka White Crane Chronicles starring David Carradine (RIP)?

Sincerely Yours,
tgampa
aka John John Jimmy John Tommy John "Gibberling" Edgar Gibbons (not really)

I have not. Is it good?

It's epic, and will definitely give you inspiration for the asian themed stuff.


I think the person who has posted the thread title might be looking for a certain THEGM...


When there is no original post, only a thread title, how do one find out who the OP is?
More imporantly: What is the actual question in the 'whole thing' in the thread title? I for one am puzzled and want to know... Is he just stating that he has asked his old players to team up again, or is there more to it than that?..


Would you eat a tauntaun?



'Underworld: Rise of the Lycans'
'Dragonheart'
'Brotherhood of The Wolf'
'Outlander'
'Pathfinder'
'Solomon Kane'
'Clash of the Titans'
'Excalibur'
'Van Helsing'
'Sauna'
'Sleepy Hollow'
'Willow'
'Stardust'
'Arn'
'Gladiator'
'Centurion'
'The First Knight'
'Braveheart'
'Time Bandits'
'Prince of Persia'


Mr. Jacobs.

Have you seen Kung Fu Killer aka White Crane Chronicles starring David Carradine (RIP)?

Sincerely Yours,
tgampa
aka John John Jimmy John Tommy John "Gibberling" Edgar Gibbons (not really)


It is not ketchup's fault. It is the hotdog vendors. They have a special kind of ketchup that is gross. Try Heinz.


Willpower DM wrote:
"Botanist" Olek Molotva wrote:

Great. Fixed skills so they are 3,5 instead of Pathfinder.

Actually I think Olek is ready for play now.

Oh there is one thing, can you stat up his manta ray, Lijin, for me, Will?

And Will, will we ever get to use more than 1st lvl spells, should I already delete them from my spell-list or just leave them there, knowing I can't use them yet, but maybe later?

@Nerine - I assume you and I were part of the same Wave, both of us being Deep Ones. Do you have any thoughts on that, or should we not mind that at all.

Use this for Your Ray:

From the SRD:

Couldn't find the medium sized stats, but these will do.

Size/Type: Medium Animal (Aquatic)
Hit Dice: 4d8 (18 hp)
Initiative: +0
Speed: Swim 30 ft. (6 squares)
Armor Class: 12 (-1 size, +3 natural), touch 9, flat-footed 12
Base Attack/Grapple: +3/+9
Attack: Ram -1 melee* (1d6+1)
Full Attack: Ram -1 melee* (1d6+1)
Space/Reach: 10 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: —
Special Qualities: Low-light vision
Saves: Fort +4, Ref +4, Will +2
Abilities: Str 15, Dex 11, Con 10, Int 1, Wis 12, Cha 2
Skills: Listen +7, Spot +6, Swim +10
Feats: Alertness, Endurance
Environment: Warm aquatic
Organization: Solitary or school (2-5)
Challenge Rating: 1
Advancement: 5-6 HD (Large)
Level Adjustment: —

Thanks :)


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:

I wonder how the heck a fantasy world with less wyverns is more grim and dark...

But that is just a sidenote. What I really want to ask you now is, on what exactly do you base the assumption that your gaming world is more grim and dark than mine?..

I never said my world had more or less wyverns. I just said that the average person is more greedy, ignorant, and self-centered. Meaning that no one knows about wyverns. It is darker because there is more mystery to the players. Creatures don't seem as dangerous when you can put a name to them. If my level 5 players came across a dragon-like creature, they would be wary, but the moment they knew it was a wyvern they would change their tune to "Oh, hey, this is a wyvern, a level appropiate encounter, we can handle this".

On what then, do you base your assumption that your world is more grim and dark than mine? The soul idea that your non-player characters outside cities are more interesting because they are dumbest dumb stereotypical Medieval ages european farmer, even though Golarion is more than the plague, the lord at the castle and the dirty farmers.

Why does creatures seem less dangerous when you can name them. Faceless stalker sounds pretty horrifying for example. A boar coming at you full speed in the woods is just as weird and terrifying, even though you know it is a boar. If they changed their tune to "Oh, hey this is a wyvern, a level appropriate encounter, we handle this" after identifying it as a wyvern that's so meta-gaming, and I would throw an advanced.

CHARENDER wrote:


Quote:


From my perspective, a world where the average person is ignorant, selfish and greedy, is just less character driven, since it really limits interaction with NPCs.

So you have run a world like that and know what it is like? or are you just imagining what it would be like?

I find it creates more interesting NPC, because everyone has ulterior motives for helping the players, and the player can't always be sure t
they are being told the unvarnished truth. The Sense Motive skill gets a hell of a workout.

Oh so the NPC's are more interested in ripping off the PCs than in them helping them save their community? From what you have said in earlier posts, if they don't have the appropriate Knowledge skill they wouldn't know what a sword is, if they haven't seen one before. They must have some pretty silly utlerior motives. But hey, good for you. I am not going to argue the finer points here.

CHARENDER wrote:


Quote:


You say that I project my religious beliefs into your game world. Nope. I don't. One thing I think that's great about fantasy game world pantheons, is that they are often way more appealing to me than the real world religions.

Whatever you want to believe.

Oh, so now I believe in Fantasy gods. I get it. I'm a clown that you can smirk at gnag gnag gnag.

CHARENDER wrote:


Quote:


An being raised as an atheist, does not nescesarily mean that I don't believe in god. Might be I just don't believe in the religions.

So you admit that the divine may exist in our world? My work here is done.

For the record, I can't stand organized religion or rigid dogma.

So your work is done here again... Nice. I hope you are going to hold it this time.

Admit? I never said I didn't beleive the divine exist in our world. Read Stingburka's reply to you about agnosticism and atheism/theism.

CHARENDER wrote:


Quote:
My only claim is the average person must know some things about the world that they live in without a Knowledge skill, since a Knowledge skill stated in RAW represents a study of some body of lore, possibly an academic or even scientific discipline.

Yes and if you have 0 ranks in knowledge(nature) then you have never spent any significant amount of time studying that specific field of knowledge. That is why you are considered to be untrained in that field.

Most of the other skills are either trained or untrained usage, but the knowledge skill lets you make a certain subset of checks untrained for just this reason. You don't have to have specifically studied plants and animals to make a DC10 knowledge(nature) check, because the rules spell out that anyone can make that check even if you have no training whatsoever.

The DC to identify a common plant like say a oak tree is DC 5. Even if you have never studied nature at all, the RAW assumes you can do that. There is nothing in the knowledge skill that says you cannot take a 10, so in my games I assumes that the players are all taking a 10 if taking a 10 would allow them to make the check. But if I had a player who came from the desert(where trees are rare, give them a +10 circumstance penalty to their DC to identify any tree), they wouldn't be able to ID an oak tree unless they had ranks in knowledge(nature). After they had traveled a while and seen the world, the circumstance penalty would decrease. This is all compatible with the RAW.

You shouldn't even have to consider the rules before letting someone identify that an oak tree, a stream, or a dwarf, is what it is. It's stupid. If it was an alien tree with tentacles, that's another thing.


I wonder how the heck a fantasy world with less wyverns is more grim and dark...

But that is just a sidenote. What I really want to ask you now is, on what exactly do you base the assumption that your gaming world is more grim and dark than mine?..

From my perspective, a world where the average person is ignorant, selfish and greedy, is just less character driven, since it really limits interaction with NPCs.

You say that I project my religious beliefs into your game world. Nope. I don't. One thing I think that's great about fantasy game world pantheons, is that they are often way more appealing to me than the real world religions.

An being raised as an atheist, does not nescesarily mean that I don't believe in god. Might be I just don't believe in the religions.

My only claim is the average person must know some things about the world that they live in without a Knowledge skill, since a Knowledge skill stated in RAW represents a study of some body of lore, possibly an academic or even scientific discipline.


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:


It is clear to me you like low-fantasy. In a standard fantasy world I would assume that monsters and civilization are relative close to each other, especially because of the various Encounter Tables for various fantasy world regions I have seen over the years.

Not at all. I prefer a variety. I also play in lots of different settings.

I get the feeling you are not a big fan of dark fantasy settings.
[/QOUTE]

Since when did dark fantasy mean that everyone but the adventurers are ignorant?

Maybe it is because you think everyone around you are ignorant compared to you, and you transfer that belief into your game world. I don't know. Just a guess.

Charender wrote:


It seems you have a hard time imagining f.
Actually human intelligence has been the same for many centuries, regardless of technology, and in a standard fantasy world I feel it safe to fairly assume that magic is pretty common, especially in

No, I am just more cynical that you. We have the internet. A massive information hose. With a little time and effort, you can learn about anything your heart desires. What do most people do with this amazing piece of technology? The number one internet destination is *drumroll* porn. (Disclaimer: I do it too, so please don't think I am saying I am better than anyone else)

If magic were suddenly available in our world, my bet is that the first spell cast would be charm person to get a piece of tail. The drive to procreate is one of the stronger desires of the human psyche. You can take the man out of the jungle, but you can't take the jungle out of the man.

To me what makes the hero heroic is that they rise above those baser human instincts. The put their life on the line for their fellow man when most people just look the other way or assume someone else will handle the problem. YMMV.

Ok. I feel indifferent about you feeling more cynical than me.

What there is to know is what knowledge that is available about the relevant world. What is to stop someone who wants to know alot and spread that knowledge in a fantasy world that has magic?

I don't disagree with the thing about porn, castin charm person and heroes, but it is avoiding/wriggling away from the points I made. Compare the words in bold in the Pathfinder quotes with the words in bold in the Charender quotes.

Charender wrote:


Quote:


I don't see how they (the people of a community in your case scenario) would be able to kill off a whole race of creatures (in the case scenario you put up), especially not flying ones, without magical means.

A. you don't have to kill off the entire race, just the ones that are encroaching on your settlement. Wyverns are not stupid, after a while they will learn that the wyverns that hunt in certain area dissappear or end up dead. That is exactly how they know to avoid the dragons as well. I am sure that like wolves and other predators, wyverns know that a large groups of humans is trouble. The ones that aren't that smart end up dead.

B. Lure the flying creature into a trap, like a canyon, then ambush it for one. I have no doubt that when their lives and livelyhood are on the line, people get very creative.

Oh, but you did say that if they co-existed the humans would have killed them off and then they would be memory, and some more about a grandpa and a child.

Charender wrote:


Quote:

Another point I must make here is There Needs To Be Balance. If there are dragons, monsters, evil mages and all that stuff, there needs to be their equals in power in humanoid communities, or monsters would rule and non-evil humanoids would be non-existent.

Those are balance and game mechanics considerations. Those are important, but when traveling through a fantasy world, if you come across something that is there for blatantly balance or rules reasons it kills the suspension of disbelief.

I try really hard to make my world as organic as possible. That means I weave my group's beliefs about the nature of mankind while trying to be a consistant about the rules as possible. That is the job of a DM. It is not just about telling a story. You have to tell a story that your group actually wants to hear.

Previous to this statement it seemed to me that you were more the balance and game mechanics kind of guy and not the suspension of disbelief type of guy.

About you making your world as organic as possible, admirable.

Telling me what the job of a DM is, unnescesary.


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:


And about what you said about I don't know if your god speaks directly to you, I am pretty sure I do. I'm pretty sure it's just your big ego, if you think your god speaks directly to you.

Wow, you have been holding out on me big time....

You have irrefutable proof about the existance(or lack there of) of a divine being and you haven't been sharing?

Check Wikipedia, roughly 11% of the worlds population is Atheist. This includes the sects of certain religions that believe there are no gods. That means roughly 89% of the worlds population is either a believer or agnostic. Agnostic allows for the existence of the divine, while believers are just that they believe that the divine exists. So 5.3 billion people believe in some form of diety or at the very least think that they may exist.

this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:


This is a world where the gods of the world speak directly to and through the mortals am I wrong?

Unless I am off the mark, your implication is that this doesn't happen in our world? So you are right and 5.3 billion people are are wrong, and I am the one with a big ego?

What would you say if I told you I think God talks to everyone, but most people, myself included, really don't want to listen?

I must hand it to you, you are very good at wriggling, when you are beaten in an argument.

If you want to debate real world religion take it to that thread. I try to stay away from that thread, as I don't like heated religious discussions. Religious people tend to hold faith over facts. But if you really want to go there, I suppose we could.

Be prepared that I was raised as an atheist but encouraged to learn about a variety of religions. Religions are easy to defend with "that is what I believe and you cannot make me change that" when arguments show their weak points.


Regarding Knowledge

Pathfinder wrote:


Knowledge (Int; Trained Only)

You are educated in one field of study and are capable of answering both simple and complex questions. Like the Craft, Perform, and Profession skills, Knowledge actually encompasses a number of unrelated skills. Knowledge represents a study of some body of lore, possibly an academic or even scientific discipline.

The Knowledge skill represents a study of some sort of lore, possibly an academic or even scientific discipline, it does not represent the knowledge inherent to a person, gained through day-to-day life, communication, and what he picks up from various people and places as Common Knowledge.

Pathfinder wrote:


Check
Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions).
In many cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster’s CR. For common monsters, such as goblins, the DC of this check equals 5 + the monster’s CR. For particularly rare monsters, such as the tarrasque, the DC of this check equals 15 + the monster’s CR or more. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster. For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information.

I see this but seriously does any DM require his or her PC's to roll the appropriate Knowledge check each time they encounter something as common as a dwarf or a goblin, for the first time in the game, to identify it?

If you are going to answer, no, because it is assumed that they already knows what a dwarf og a goblin is because they have seen it before, then you are only supporting a point I have been trying to get across. I would even make the assumption that children in fantasy worlds plays with wooden toys that depict various monsters, and books at that time were rich with illustrations. You could argue that only monks read books, well are monks the same thing in Golarion as in Medieval Europe. No. That was another one of my points.
_______________________________________________________________________
Regarding Clerics

Charender wrote:


What makes you think that gods don't speak to mortals in our world? MAybe he just doesn't speak to you. Maybe he does, but you don't know how to listen. The crazy part is that you cannot prove that my god doesn't talk to me in our world.

The gods of Golaron don't speak to everyone. Clerics and other divine casters are fairly rare. So for the common people, I suspect religion and church are not all that much different from the way they are here.

One of my friends actually DM a world just like that where the majority of clergy were tricksters who used slight of hand, arcane magic, and technology to fake religion. The average commoner couldn't tell the difference between that and an actual divine magic user.

Pathfinder wrote:


Clerics are the warrior-priests of Golarion. They seek to spread their faith through conviction, words, and in some cases, war. Unlike the normal practitioners of religion, even regular priests, the cleric is actually connected to their deity through prayer and practice. They receive training in the basics of war at the same time they learn to channel the influence of their deity.

Religion is everywhere and likewise are the clerics. From the lowliest hamlet to the largest metropolis, all creatures maintain shrines and temples and have some modicum of faith. Where there is faith there is a cleric to maintain and spread that faith.

Only the most dedicated of clerics spread their religion beyond their home region. The call of adventure is a good way to spread word of ones faith, but is also a quick path to the grave. Most adventuring clerics are of good or neutral deities, seeking to combat evil or maliciousness wherever it arises. Evil clerics are more rare - a church founded on evil is rarely united, and chaotic evil churches even less so. Nonetheless, evil clerics are particularly feared throughout Golarion, if only as portends of the actions of much greater evil.

And about what you said about I don't know if your god speaks directly to you, I am pretty sure I do. I'm pretty sure it's just your big ego, if you think your god speaks directly to you.

_______________________________________________________________________

Charender wrote:


this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:

I did not say co-existed in peace...

If they are near each other, they will fight until one side is dead. For them to have co-existed for that long implies they don't exactly live next door to each other. Which implies that wyvern sighting probably are not exactly a common occurance.

Because if there were some wyverns living in the area, and they were preying on livestock, how long until the town pools its money together and pays some adventurers to get rid of them? Or insist that their leige do something about this scourge upon their land?

If wyvern attacks are a common occurance, then eventually, someone is going to kill the wyverns. At that point, the wyverns become just a memory. Another story told around the campfire to scare the kids. "Oh look grandpa's drunk again and telling stories about how he helped kill this dragon thing called a wyvern, someone really should keep him out of the firewater"

It is clear to me you like low-fantasy. In a standard fantasy world I would assume that monsters and civilization are relative close to each other, especially because of the various Encounter Tables for various fantasy world regions I have seen over the years.

In another post you said:

Charender wrote:


this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:
Since a fantasy world is so much more than just medieval Europe, wouldn't the people inhabiting it know so much more than the people who inhabited medieval Europe?

Sure, but it doesn't make much of a difference. It is the technology level that sets the average ignorance level.

Unless you are building a fantasy world where magic is common enough to the point where instand communication is considered normal, and people have magical picture frames in their homes(and thus don't have to rely on verbal descriptions), etc.

If you have a high enough technogy(or magic) level, then mass education becomes feasable. Barring something like that, I don't see how the world of pathfinder would be that different from earth 500-1000 years ago. Hell, 500 years on earth people were sitting around the fire telling stories about unicorns, dragons, etc. That alone sould tell you how reliable the common lore was.

It seems you have a hard time imagining f.

Actually human intelligence has been the same for many centuries, regardless of technology, and in a standard fantasy world I feel it safe to fairly assume that magic is pretty common, especially in Golarion:

Pathfinder wrote:


Magic is force utilized by many of Golarion's inhabitants. It is practiced in many different forms and shapes, with different ends and abilities, but it is all characterised, usually by the use of words of power, and the extra-caster production of some super natural effect, be it arcane or divine in nature. Magic allows the caster to cast a spell.

I don't see how they (the people of a community in your case scenario) would be able to kill off a whole race of creatures (in the case scenario you put up), especially not flying ones, without magical means.

Another point I must make here is There Needs To Be Balance. If there are dragons, monsters, evil mages and all that stuff, there needs to be their equals in power in humanoid communities, or monsters would rule and none-evil humanoids would be non-existent.


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:

Ring Ring

Who is it?

Are you never going to give me up? Are you never going to let me down? Are you never going to run around and desert me?

Not really my style..


Ring Ring

Who is it?


Gimme that Devogun!


What if it's dark and he steps on the soap?


the Smurfoz wrote:
*smurfs a new page*

kudos for teh pagesmurfing


Battling ignorance by promoting it!
I heart it also.
Why does the weird ranger talk so funny?
He is clearly not from these parts. He is clearly not from any parts.


Oliver McShade wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:

Not rambling. Sharing your oppinion. And one I can relate to.

Btw did you like the PC wyvern stats? :)

Was thinking more along the lines of:

Alighment: Neutral
Size: Reduce to Medium
Sence: Darkvision 60 feet, Low-Light Vision
AC: +2 natural. (2nd level +1/level up to Max +7 total at 7th level).
HP: As per character class
Immune: vs Sleep and Paralysis... same as elf.

Speed: Land 20 feet.
Fly: 10 feet + 5 feet per level starting at 2nd level .. up to max of 60 feet. (Poor maneuverable).

Melee: Sting (1d4) or Bite (1d8) or 2 wing ( 1d4 each). Sting or bite can be used are primary attack. Wings as secondary attacks.

Melee Special = At 9th level sting gains, Poison = save Dc 17, Freguency 1/round for 6 rounds; effect 1d4 constitution damage; cure 2 consecutive saves. The save DC is Constitution-based.

Reach: 5 feet

Abilityes: -6 int, -4 cha.

BaB/Saves: as per character class.

------------------------------------------------

Note: If you up the size to Large at 9th level.
ability added bonuses: +8 str -2 Dex, +4 Con +2 to Natural Armor
Melee: Sting 1d6, Bite (2d6), Wings (1d6).
Reach: 10 feet.

------------------------------------------------

I see some more thought put into this than in mine. But isn't it kind of sad that when it is grounded it can't hold anything in any way that a creature with forearms can?


Not rambling. Sharing your oppinion. And one I can relate to.

Btw did you like the PC wyvern stats? :)


Oliver McShade wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:

Plausible indeed.

Interesting anecdote bout your cousin and uncle.

Only thing I am saying is that wyverns should be common enough (much less rare than dragons) that most people (except for maybe the village idiot) would be able to identify them for what they are (in daylight) just as they would be able to identify a dwarf, an elf or an orc.

Should be common... cool, then what are the Player stats for one:)

Medium size:

+2 Str, +2 Dex, -2 Int

Flying

Not able to hold anything in its claws while on the ground.

Extra attack with tail that has poison sting, with penalties unless you take the appropriate monster feats.

And some other stuff.


is a pedestrian walking on a skyway a Skywalker?


Mothman wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Mothman wrote:
My son really likes dinosaurs, I am looking for a good book for him, do you happen to know of any good books that might appeal to a four year old dinosaur enthusiast?
Not off the top of my head; anything with colorful pictures works well, though! Those are the ones I loved the most as a kid. That, and the ones that were like encyclopedias so I could more easily learn the dinosaurs' names.

Maybe 4 years old is a bit too young for this one, but it is very good and child-friendly and has awesome illustrations.

http://www.dinotopia.com/

Oh, we (my sibs and I) used to have Dinotopia when we were kids. The first two books I think. I asked my mum what happened to it just last week, she can’t find it, but I’m hoping it will turn up. I think my son would love it and it’s hard to get hold of these days.

I never knew about the website though, so thanks for the link.

Same here. Still have it. Gonna hold on to it just in case I get a child of my own some day.

You are welcome.


Dinotopia: A Land Apart From Time
Written and illustrated by James Gurney

Explorer Arthur Denison and his son, Will, are washed up on the shore of an uncharted island, where they are astonished to discover a civilization of dinosaurs and humans living peacefully together for centuries. Published in over 18 languages and winner of the Hugo Award, The Colorado Children's Book Award and the World Fantasy Award, this New York Times besteselling book features over 160 pages of full-color illustrations and an uplifting story that will absorb readers of all ages.


James Jacobs wrote:
Mothman wrote:
My son really likes dinosaurs, I am looking for a good book for him, do you happen to know of any good books that might appeal to a four year old dinosaur enthusiast?
Not off the top of my head; anything with colorful pictures works well, though! Those are the ones I loved the most as a kid. That, and the ones that were like encyclopedias so I could more easily learn the dinosaurs' names.

Maybe 4 years old is a bit too young for this one, but it is very good and child-friendly and has awesome illustrations.

http://www.dinotopia.com/


Likewise. Sleep tight.


Point being that no matter what kind of personal real life anecdotes/experiences/views on ignorance/myths and beliefs from history/etc you put in the debate, Golarion is not our world 500 years ago...


Nah, it's just since it is apparently very easy to look at things the opposite way around..


I will ask both of you this, Charender and Stubs, in what ways do you think our modern real-life world would be altered if 500 years ago it was Golarion?


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:


These beings are real in fantasy world, not myth, and there are a myriad of them all around. The people of the fantasy world are exposed to them (if not personally, then through gossip) daily..

And you are missing my point.

Before the Rennasiance, and the industrial revolution.

Women were burned at the stake for witchcraft.
People believed unicorns and dragons existed.
People believed the world was flat and that you would sail off of it if you went too far out to sea.
People believed that having a different skin color made you less than human.

There were all common beliefs. Look how horribly wrong the common lore of our world at that time was. You somehow expect the world of PF to be different because of magic?

In a random village, teyt may have heard stories of wyverns, but the wyverns they tell stories about are 50 feet long, and can impale 10 armored men with a single strike of their tail. Or maybe the guy telling the story mixed wyverns up with dinosaurs, and tells the story where they have wings but cannot fly.

In short, anyone can make a DC 10 knowledge check, anything they know beyond that is probably rumour mixed with exaggerations and outright lies.

This is a world where the gods of the world speak directly to and through the mortals am I wrong?

The rumors you are talking about are about something that did not exist. In a fantasy world it is not only rumors but also facts about beings that are real an exist.


Stubs McKenzie wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:
All the creatures in a fantasy world have existed together for centuries...
I would wholeheartedly disagree... why would humans co-exist with all the other creatures in a fantasy setting but not in our own world? We don't co-exist with pretty much any other creature unless either a) forced to do so, or b) find that creature useful or amusing (dogs, cats, pretty birds). Why would many of the other more violent humanoids, magical beasts, aberrations, etc etc co-exist at all with anything? I see a far richer world in terms of greater diversity being just as divided, prejudiced, and ignorant as our own.

I did not say co-existed in peace...


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:
Since a fantasy world is so much more than just medieval Europe, wouldn't the people inhabiting it know so much more than the people who inhabited medieval Europe?

Why? Because of all the magic spells the average commoner can cast?

Like I said earlier, unless magic is really common, it doesn't change how life works for the average commoner.

Ok then let me try this...

Do you think the real world we live in right now (modern day and time) would be different if medieval Europe had in fact been Golarion?


Stubs McKenzie wrote:
In your campaigns, do you tend to see wyverns harassing most of the small to medium sized villages for long periods of time? Are wyverns really that common in your game? I would think that if they were that big of a threat that humans/humanoids would have sent out all sorts of kill parties sort of like what the Europeans did to most "dangerous" species in the USA before it was such, nearly, or completely wiping out entire species within a few years, even causing some species to become extinct in those vast stretches. I envision wyverns to only be a short term threat that either makes a village up and move, or the village hires adventurers to go kill... not something that persists for centuries, or even decades.

All the creatures in a fantasy world have existed together for centuries...


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:


Did you forget about the local wise ones, the adventurers who comes through, the retired adventurers, those who have served, the hunters, the druids, the local lorekeeper, etc (the list could go on and on..)
Yeah, the bard that comes through every year and tells all these fantastic stories about far away places? They are just that fantastic stories about far away places that the average commoner will never see. Like I said eariler, in our world at that time they told stories about unicorns and dragons. Where do you think the common lore for dragons came from?

So when you usually play a bard and enter a community you are the first bard to have come through in a year?

answering the rest of the post, would require me to go back to my previous answers copy paste and essentially say the exact same stuff to you that I said to you once before, when it was that you said that thing about in our world when they told stories about unicorns and dragons around the campfire. I will try to put it differently instead:

These beings are real in fantasy world, not myth, and there are a myriad of them all around. The people of the fantasy world are exposed to them (if not personally, then through gossip) daily..


Stubs McKenzie wrote:

I agree with Charender, after living in lots of different places (re: climates) in my life, there are a lot of things that you take for granted, thinking everyone should know, that they just don't. Common knowledge should (in my opinion) be restricted to something that a group of people in that area would experience on a semi regular basis, aka;

Farming community: farming of types specific to their community, fishing if water is avail, and some knowledge of common poisonous and otherwise inedible vegetation, and very common predators that live within 10-15 miles. Knowledge of prices of goods derived from farming.

City community: business, politics, and the like. Info gathering (K:local), fishing if docks are present, and lots of common knowledge about different intelligent races that would pass through. Also very likely most any family has at least one shop keeper, shop worker, or servant that is owned by a shop owner in their midst, any basic knowledge about appraising those types of goods sold in said shop.

A farmer generally is ignorant of political intrigue, as a city dweller is generally ignorant of poisonous varieties of native vegetation. This goes for lots of other things too.. without tv and the like to spread information to the masses minute by minute, town criers are generally not shouting about the next towns goings-on as much as their own towns intrigue, or big changes in wars, or politics that people in that town care deeply enough about to pay for.

Even with the PF fantasy setting travel for the vast majority of all populations is still limited to horses and the like, which limits their movements throughout their lifetimes to roughly 30 miles from where they were born, people tended to be born, raised, live and die in the same community, as having extended families were exceptionally important when it came time to harvest food and survive harsh weather/times.

EDIT: these are just some examples of basic knowledge and do not cover all examples by any means.

What I wrote in an earlier post:

Let me begin with stating that there is a difference between common knowledge and expertise knowledge. Common knowledge is that which "everybody knows" ("everybody" in a specific community), and expertise knowledge (a knowledge skill) being acquired by a person through experience or education.

In a village where the local farmers have sighted and had problems with wyverns for centuries, where the local authorities have often had to hire adventurers to deal with the wyverns at times when they became too much for the community itself to handle, and where the local evil-doers have a history of using the wyverns for various purposes such as guards, mounts and hunters, wyverns are common knowledge, and thus people who are local to this area would easily be able to identify a wyvern without a check.

The wyverns' weaknesses, strengths, eating capacities, specific sightings and encounters, nest locations, purposes for harvested scales, feathers, poison etc, would all qualify as expertise knowledge, requiring a knowledge check. The expertise knowledge would be reserved by the rangers who are specialized in hunting wyverns, the assassin who uses its poison, and the wizard who uses its scales for enchanting purposes (just examples).


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:
Charender wrote:


I doubt it. I only know what a boar looks like because I have seen pictures. I grew up in a desert area in a small town. To see a boar I would have had to travel 500+ miles. During that time period, most of the population lived and died without traveling more than 30 miles from home.

Because you live in modern times where you don't have to hunt for food and where there aren't as many wild animals as there used to be.

No, no, no. It is because I would have lived in an area where there are not boars. I would have known something about buffalo though. Of course the europeans didn't know about those, or elephants.

Quote:


The answer to this is exposure. There are such a wide myriadity of fantastic humanoids and creatures in a fantasy world, that even isolated tribal people such as in your example, would be regularly exposed to the many other living beings that inhabit the fantasy world.

If the answer is exposure. Then how do you get exposure? Travel? Most people in those times didn't have the money or means for leisure travel. thus all then knew was what was withing 30 miles of where they lived.

To put it another way. The only thing that was real to then was their farm, and their village. The next town 30 miles down the road was just a story they had heard from a traveler.

Did you forget about the local wise ones, the adventurers who comes through, the retired adventurers, those who have served, the hunters, the druids, the local lorekeeper, etc (the list could go on and on..)


Seems to me you are also editting and adding to posts later in discussion...


Charender wrote:
this guy ate my previous avatar wrote:
My bad, you were referring to the map of course. Well, I thought you said fantasy worlds were based on medieval Europe just a few minutes ago? As far as I can see, that whole area is green with boars...
And then I amended it to say more along the lines of our world 500 years ago, do try and keep up.

Its hard to keep up, the way you keep dodging and jumping.


My bad, you were referring to the map of course. Well, I thought you said fantasy worlds were based on medieval Europe just a few minutes ago? As far as I can see, that whole area is green with boars...


Why would you say that? All those pictures are of boars. Did you picture them any different?


If you aren't indian then no you would have lived where there were boar, and not where there were buffalos. Besides, that's missing the point, you would have lived in a desert/warm plains in medieval times of the real world not in a fantasy world. There's a huge difference.


Charender wrote:


I doubt it. I only know what a boar looks like because I have seen pictures. I grew up in a desert area in a small town. To see a boar I would have had to travel 500+ miles. During that time period, most of the population lived and died without traveling more than 30 miles from home.

Because you live in modern times where you don't have to hunt for food and where there aren't as many wild animals as there used to be.

Charender wrote:


Case in point. When the Native Americans first encountered men of horback, the thought they were some kind of monster because they didn't know what horses were. But, you would just assume that everyone knows what a horse is because you did.

The answer to this is exposure. There are such a wide myriadity of fantastic humanoids and creatures in a fantasy world, that even isolated tribal people such as in your example, would be regularly exposed to the many other living beings that inhabit the fantasy world.


Everybody knew what a deer and a boar looked like, because those were real animals that existed. In the fantasy world, many creatures that did not exist in the real world and were mere myth, do exist, just like bears and deer and such did in the real world.

Besides, what about the town crier, the adventurers in the tavern, the local wizard/wizards/druid/druids/clerics..

Do you still not get it?


Since a fantasy world is so much more than just medieval Europe, wouldn't the people inhabiting it know so much more than the people who inhabited medieval Europe?

1 to 50 of 237 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>