How is the Wizard vs Warrior Balance Problem Handled in Fantasy Literature?

[Hussar]

Neither the above, nor the post you linked to, answers the question:

Do you require your players to take Knowledge Geography so that their characters can read a map?

It is a pretty simple question, which can be answered with one word: Yes or No.


RC

Yes, I require players to take Kn Geography to read a naval chart. Note, that this should be obvious in context with what we were talking about, but, since we're getting all pedantic and such, I just thought I'd be extra clear.

I do this because the rules in Stormwrack say that you need Kn Geography to plot your course followed by the Prof Sailor check to sail that course.

Clear enough?

 

[Hussar]

Ok, this sidebar about maps and such is interesting, but, could we please actually roll back around to the main issue which is the discrepancy between casters and non-casters?

There's been some rumblings in this thread that this is something new. That this is somehow something that's only come up in recent memory as a way to bash 3e. This is simply not true. I've already provided some examples, but, let's look at a bit of history shall we?

Casters get whack like a pinata with the nerf bat in a number of areas over the years. High level AD&D modules have a shopping list of spells and effects that do not function (and match almost word for word the problematic spells and effects listed earlier in this thread). Additionally, various settings also take casters to task. Dragonlance, back in 1e, only allowed casters to reach 18th level but placed no such limits on non-casters. Ravenloft, as I recall, also bludgeoned the casters with the nerf bat, reducing their effectiveness in the service of the setting.

I just happened to pull out an old 2e module, A Heroes Tale, which is a series of small modules centered around a single theme - a sort of really, really mini adventure path. The highest level adventure takes place in a planar prison with the following effect:

... The effect of the Abados becomes clear when someone casts a spell or uses a magical item with a spell-like effect. There is a flat 25% chance that a spell's effect will be completely random. Use the wild surge table in the Tome of Magic, or the Wand of wonder table in the Dungeon Master Guide...

If an illusion or phantasm spell is successfully cast, there is a 5% chance that the illusion will become real

Guess what happens to the non-casters... if you said nothing, give yourself a cookie.

Heck, even a quick perusal of the excellent "Let's Read the Entire Run" thread shows up examples (such as this (prophet proofing article) talking about the issues with spells in 1978!

This is an issue that has been around a REALLY long time.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Yes, I require players to take Kn Geography to read a naval chart. Note, that this should be obvious in context with what we were talking about, but, since we're getting all pedantic and such, I just thought I'd be extra clear.

Well, in the event that I later wanted to quote you, I wanted to make sure that you actually answered the question. That doesn't seem pedantic to me.....esp. as you have a history of saying "I never actually said that" or words to that effect.

I do this because the rules in Stormwrack say that you need Kn Geography to plot your course followed by the Prof Sailor check to sail that course.

Clear enough?

Sure. Now, let me add a couple of follow-up questions.

(1) I notice that you've backed off of "read a map" and changed to reading "naval charts". I take it, then, that you do not require Knoweldge Geography to read a map? Just this specific form of map?

(2) Can you quote the actual text of Stormwrack for us, so that we can see what it actually says?

(3) Did you require Knowlege Geography to read a naval chart before Stormwrack came out? If so, why? If not, why not?

(4) Would you expect that a character would need Knowledge Geography to read a naval chart in a core-only game? If so, why? If not, why not?

Not really sure what you guys are reading.

Um.....It should come as no surprise that the Player's Handbook contains more information that the Hypertext SRD, and that it trumps the Hypertext SRD as an authority of D&D (as opposed to SRD) rules.

Unless we are going to have a discussion now about how you cannot level in 3.x because the levelling rules are not in the SRD?


RC

 

[NoWayJose]

Yes, I require players to take Kn Geography to read a naval chart. Note, that this should be obvious in context with what we were talking about, but, since we're getting all pedantic and such, I just thought I'd be extra clear.

I do this because the rules in Stormwrack say that you need Kn Geography to plot your course followed by the Prof Sailor check to sail that course.

Clear enough?

So, from what I understand, the argument is that, in 3E, fighters cannot be optimal pirates because they don't have enough relevant skill points (such as Knowledge Geography for reading naval charts).

In contrast, there was an entirely different thread where people criticized 4E mechanics for having metagame limitations that were often arbitrary and meaningless in-game/fictionally. There was a hypothetical example of a "Jump Card" that allowed your PC to jump exactly 3 x day, despite of all circumstances. The standard pro-4e counterargument was that if you're roleplaying in a campaign that involves lots of jumping, perhaps you shouldn't be playing 4E with "Jump Cards". That is, that 4E should be played within the confines of its paradigm.

I guess my point is that 3E should also be played within the confines of its paradigm. 3E is about heroic adventurers who can use skills to dabble in side-venture professions. Yet they are adventurers first and foremost. If you want to be a true 24/7 pirate, then an NPC expert is the way to go.

I find it a bit hypocritical to say that you're fully content to play within the tight confines of the 4E paradigm, and yet criticize 3E for not being a universal one-size-fits-all for everyone else.

 

[pawsplay]

I have to say I agree that Blackbeard is a poor example of a fighter - rogue (at least muticlassed) does seem much more appropriate. This would certainly alleviate any the lack of skills associated with a fighter.

Does he pick locks? Can he tumble? Does he backstab? Does he have evasion? A good Will save? Evasion?

Does he have high hit points? Does he have a high Intimidate? Is he proficient with martial weapons? does he have a high Fortitude save?

I might give him one level of Rogue, just for the skill points, but I wouldn't like it. He's not a Rogue, he's a Fighter. It's simply an accident of the 3e skills system that his particular background is more fiddly than most. It's no different than trying to make a Wizard from a noble background, if you would like to give him Diplomacy.

If I were going to give Blackbeard one level in any non-fighter, WotC-published base class, it would probably be Marshal. However, there are no legends surrounding his effectiveness as a battle leader. While more appropriate than Rogue, it's still thoroughly outside his archetype. Rather, he is famous for being 1) scary, 2) tough, and 3) pretty shrewd. Relative to his fame, he was not extraordinarily successful as a pirate. It's possible that the only wealth his crew had at the end was the cargo of the Queen Anne's Revenge.

Note that in Pathfinder, Blackbeard's skills improve considerably, despite minor changes to the system. I reject the notion Blackbeard is "not a fighter." He is, at most, a fighter variant. He works just fine as a fighter in AD&D or Pathfinder, and presents only trivial problems in 3e.

 

[BryonD]

Um.....It should come as no surprise that the Player's Handbook contains more information that the Hypertext SRD, and that it trumps the Hypertext SRD as an authority of D&D (as opposed to SRD) rules.

shocking.....


And, as Psion so well put it years ago: Use the rules, don't let the rules use you.

I still want to know what this sailor is actually DOING to generate income if the skill provides nothing except the ability to make sp appear.

So we have the rules and we have the things that shouldn't be expected of the rules. Obviously that is not enough.

(Bet you didn't know you were playing BryonD&D all this time, did you RC? I accept personal checks... heh )

 

[pawsplay]

Why can't they be 2nd level rogues? Or Warrior 1/Expert 1?

They could be 15th level wizards. I picked 2nd level Warrior because I think that is the most likely. For one thing, that's exactly what they were in AD&D. I assume they are veterans (level 2+) but not skilled fighting men (so not fighters). Some of them might be rogues, but only incidentally. Most are sailors, in this case, sailors who rob and kill people.

The issue with Pirates, which makes them a bad example, is that they are classes that are focused on a highly skilled profession (sailing in the age of sail was an incredible mix of technology and skill). They need skills like use rope because keeping a sailing ship going during a storm (where deaths among the crew were no uncommon) required skill checks were taking a 10 wasn't really feasible.

Maybe deaths were not uncommon because they, like most NPCs, did not have more than 2 to 4 ranks in a Profession skill.

But a highly skilled group of people who happen to be good at dirty fighting sounds a lot like rogues.

Whereas a bunch of thugs who travel around attacking people and taking their money sounds like a bunch of Warriors.

Pirates also seem to get extremely worried when they meet actual soldiers in any numbers (which would be the expected reaction to a gang of rogues meeting a company of fighters) and often try to use tricky to solve this (which, given the skills available to the fighters, is just the natural course of events).

Probably because unlike RPG characters, pirates didn't want to engage in unnecessary battles. They were, after all, essentially businessmen, and dying is bad for business. Note that 2nd level Warriors would have a justifiable concern about taking on a group of 1st level Fighters led by a 2nd level Fighter (such as a group of green marines). Despite being outnumbered, Blackbeard's last crew put up a little of a fight. Note also that pirates were typically less well-equipped than soldiers; running out of powder was a big concern.

 

[Fifth Element]

Some passages potentially relevant to the sidebar.

NAVIGATION
Ships in strange waters can become as hopelessly lost as travelers in a featureless desert or deep forest. Keeping track of where you are and how to get to where you’re going are difficult challenges for many mariners.

Setting Out: The difficulty of setting an accurate course depends on the quality of information you have about where you’re going. See Knowledge (geography) in Chapter 4 for a list of DCs and modifiers for course setting. The DM makes this check for you, since you don’t know for certain if you have planned an accurate course.

If you don’t have any particular destination in mind, you don’t need to set a course. As long as you keep a record of course changes and distances sailed, you won’t have trouble retracing your steps or setting a new course.

Daily Piloting: Each day of your voyage, you make a piloting check to establish your position and make the routine corrections necessary to hold to your intended course. Refer to Knowledge (geography) in Chapter 4 for DCs and modifiers.

Failing your piloting check once is not a problem; you simply failed to establish your location for the day, but you can go back to your previous day’s established position and estimate your current position given the course and speed you think you’ve followed since. You do not become lost until you fail your piloting check on three consecutive days.

There are two key skills for travel on board ships: Profession (sailor) and Knowledge (geography). Profession (sailor) covers all aspects of shiphandling—maneuvering close to the wind, steering through a storm, passing through hazardous waters such as crossing a river bar or threading one’s way through ice floes. Knowledge (geography) covers the rare art of piloting and navigation—knowing where you are, where you’re going, and how to get there from here.

Captain: A ship’s captain is usually an experienced sailor, navigator, and commander. There is a good deal of overlap between captain and master; generally, a master is someone who owns the ship she commands, while a captain is someone who does not. A ship might sail with both a captain and a master, in which case the master generally permits the captain to exercise command and only intercedes if she feels her vessel is at risk.

A captain is usually an expert (or multiclass expert), bard, fighter, paladin, or rogue with at least 7 to 10 ranks in Profession (sailor), 4 to 7 ranks in Knowledge (geography), 2 to 4 ranks in Knowledge (nature) or Survival, and 2 to 4 ranks in an interaction skill such as Bluff, Diplomacy, or Intimidate.

Master: The term master can overlap with the term captain in some degree. In general, a master owns her vessel, while a captain doesn’t but typically exercises complete authority over all matters of sailing, navigation, discipline, and administration of the crew.

A master is usually an expert (or multiclass expert) or rogue with at least 7 to 10 ranks in Profession (sailor), 4 to 7 ranks in Knowledge (geography), 2 to 4 ranks in Knowledge (nature) or Survival, 2 to 4 ranks in an interaction skill such as Bluff, Diplomacy, or Intimidate, and 2 to 4 ranks in Profession (merchant).

BALANCE
Boats and ships offer clumsy characters a variety of ways to fall. Many characters who spend time on or around boats pick up a rank or two in Balance, simply because you never know when your life could depend on it.

Difficult Surfaces: Some of the more common difficult surfaces found in seafaring environments include the following:
Green Water: A ship’s deck that is washed by a violent wave that covers the deck to a depth of 1 foot or more.
Heeling Deck: A ship that is heeling over (the deck is sloped sharply due to the way it’s running with the wind or the ship’s maneuvers) is the same as a sloped floor; see page 67 of the Player’s Handbook.
Roll, Heavy: A ship that is violently rolling from side to side, as opposed to simply heeling in one direction and staying there.
Sargasso: Floating mats of seaweed come in two varieties: light and heavy (see page 19). Only those who are truly light of foot can remain standing on light mat sargasso, but heavy mat sargasso is thick enough to support anyone walking with a little care.
Surf: Moving water between 1 foot (light surf) and 4 feet deep (heavy surf); see page 17.
Yardarm: The horizontal spar suspended from a ship’s mast. Deckhands taking in or setting sails generally stand on sturdy lines below the yardarm and lean into the yardarm for support; walking on top of a yardarm is a real stunt, since there isn’t anything to brace against.

 

[Hussar]

So, from what I understand, the argument is that, in 3E, fighters cannot be optimal pirates because they don't have enough relevant skill points (such as Knowledge Geography for reading naval charts).

In contrast, there was an entirely different thread where people criticized 4E mechanics for having metagame limitations that were often arbitrary and meaningless in-game/fictionally. There was a hypothetical example of a "Jump Card" that allowed your PC to jump exactly 3 x day, despite of all circumstances. The standard pro-4e counterargument was that if you're roleplaying in a campaign that involves lots of jumping, perhaps you shouldn't be playing 4E with "Jump Cards". That is, that 4E should be played within the confines of its paradigm.

I guess my point is that 3E should also be played within the confines of its paradigm. 3E is about heroic adventurers who can use skills to dabble in side-venture professions. Yet they are adventurers first and foremost. If you want to be a true 24/7 pirate, then an NPC expert is the way to go.

I find it a bit hypocritical to say that you're fully content to play within the tight confines of the 4E paradigm, and yet criticize 3E for not being a universal one-size-fits-all for everyone else.

First off, when did this become a 3e vs 4e debate? Who says I'm content about 4e anything? AFAIK, this is a discussion about a possible limitation within the 3e ruleset.

Secondly, this isn't really a hypothetical like the Jump Cards. Fighters flat out, as shown above, DON'T have enough skill points to become effective pirate captains. They barely qualify as pirates in the first place and most other classes make better pirates than the one class that comes to mind (possibly barring rogues, I could see the arguement there). But, if a pirate isn't a fighter, what exactly is he? Expert? Really?

Um.....It should come as no surprise that the Player's Handbook contains more information that the Hypertext SRD, and that it trumps the Hypertext SRD as an authority of D&D (as opposed to SRD) rules.

Funny how "more information" means skipping over the bits that counter your argument though. I mean, the skill tells you EXACTLY how it's to be used. Look what it says under "Action". That's what the Skill does.

Since you're taking me to such task for enforcing using KN Geography skills to read charts, I wonder why you are playing so fast and loose with the other skills?

----------

Y'know what? That's enough for me. This is getting personal, and I've come to realize that this will yet again devolve into another discussion of The Edition That Shalt Not Be Criticised. It's a shame we cannot actually talk about possible issues with the game that have been around just about as long as I've been alive without people resorting to cheap pedantry and ad hominem attacks.

But, then again, that's what I should expect I suppose.

Y'all have a good time. It was fun.

 

[pawsplay]

Y'know what? That's enough for me. This is getting personal, and I've come to realize that this will yet again devolve into another discussion of The Edition That Shalt Not Be Criticised.

It really isn't. I'm sorry you see things that way.

It's a shame we cannot actually talk about possible issues with the game that have been around just about as long as I've been alive without people resorting to cheap pedantry and ad hominem attacks.

Yes, that sure is a shame.