10 Absolute Truths about the World of D&D

[Remathilis]

Yeah, if gods are relatively interactive then a "D&D atheist" can say they are just powerful beings. And if gods are remote you can say that they don't exist and divine magic is just another kind of magic that doesn't prove deities exist any more than a fireball proves they exist.

Which is the approach Eberron uses.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Because the effects of magic are MUCH more difficult to fake. I could easily see various forms of cons being done in a DnD world, but, impersonating a wizard or cleric would be extremely difficult. When magic is known and not all that rare, it's pretty difficult to fake healing magic.

Who says magic is common? Looking at the NPC charts, there are only a handful of casters per city/village, and they do magic at such expense (10 gp * spell level * caster level) that they're entirely out of reach for commonfolk. A cunning man who will cast your fortune for a few days' pay (say, 3 sp) would be consulted far more often, methinks. Plus, what can you get for your 60 gp with a wizard? Locate object (within 520 feet)? Knock? A down payment on an identify?

A wise man with enough perception (and perhaps Knowledge) to make up a good fortune that seems real would surely be willing to part with the omens he pretends to read for less than 90 gp that a cleric might charge for an augury that has a 73% chance of success in looking 30 minutes in the future with even more cryptic signs than the wise man.

 

[Remathilis]

Who says magic is common? Looking at the NPC charts, there are only a handful of casters per city/village, and they do magic at such expense (10 gp * spell level * caster level) that they're entirely out of reach for commonfolk. A cunning man who will cast your fortune for a few days' pay (say, 3 sp) would be consulted far more often, methinks. Plus, what can you get for your 60 gp with a wizard? Locate object (within 520 feet)? Knock? A down payment on an identify?

A wise man with enough perception (and perhaps Knowledge) to make up a good fortune that seems real would surely be willing to part with the omens he pretends to read for less than 90 gp that a cleric might charge for an augury that has a 73% chance of success in looking 30 minutes in the future with even more cryptic signs than the wise man.

I actually have to agree with this.

Between Adepts, Craft: Alchemy, and Use Magic Device, (not to mention bluff, intimidate, etc) could be a reasonable con-man who plies bad mojo for hard gold. D&D doesn't exclude this from happening.

What I was interested in was the fact the legitimate arcane casters have a role in society. Normally, wizards, witches and such are outcasts; shunned from society and feared and hated. With a few small exceptions (sorcerers and warlocks) most arcane casters suffer no real stigma like that and can be productive happy members of a society with a unique and useful trade. Nobody in a small village gives much hoot that old Heldra down on the edge of Mulburry Lane can cast magic that cause insomniacs to sleep, climb the sheer cliffs of Mount Pass, or sense if the local ale supply has been poisoned. They just give her some space in case one her her summons gets loose or a stray ray of fire lights the neighbors barn on fire. This seems a uniquely D&Dism that isn't even common to fantasy, just the game in general.

 

[Storm Raven]

What I was interested in was the fact the legitimate arcane casters have a role in society. Normally, wizards, witches and such are outcasts; shunned from society and feared and hated. With a few small exceptions (sorcerers and warlocks) most arcane casters suffer no real stigma like that and can be productive happy members of a society with a unique and useful trade. Nobody in a small village gives much hoot that old Heldra down on the edge of Mulburry Lane can cast magic that cause insomniacs to sleep, climb the sheer cliffs of Mount Pass, or sense if the local ale supply has been poisoned. They just give her some space in case one her her summons gets loose or a stray ray of fire lights the neighbors barn on fire. This seems a uniquely D&Dism that isn't even common to fantasy, just the game in general.

I think that their integration into society is a natural consequence of their magic being real. In the real world, (from which "witches and warlocks are shunned" traditions have their source), magic was a bogeyman, used to persecute the weak and politically unpopular and blame them for any number of unexplained ills.

But in a world where magic is real, and in many cases beneficial, it would probably be seen as a useful and valuable tool. Since magic has been around for a long time (in most cases), it would not be "new" or "unknown", but rather something that most people had grown up around. Rather than being shunned, those that can wield it would probably be considered quite valuable. If you think of spellcasters like modern engineers or physicians, then the place they would likely hold in a society where magic was real.

 

[sckeener]

Actually, this isn't true. Plant Growth is the only spell that might be useful for farming (Sure, Speak With Animals lets you speak to those rabbits...but will they leave the carrots alone? Not necessarily. Why leave a concentrated, safe source of food?) and it enhances ALL plants productivity in the area, even the weeds--and not all "weeds" can be useful.

where to begin....

CLW, farming is dangerous work...cuts happen
remove disease, thought that visit to the village wench wouldn't bite ya?
Create Water, at some point farms need water,
Mending, things break on farms
calm animals, I bet some cowboys would have appreciated this spell
charm animals, nice to charm that led horse or bull....led all the animals back...
Speak w/ Animals/plants, figure out what is wrong with the bull's manhood or if the plants need more water
summon nature's ally, extra help on a farm is always appreciated
heat metal, branding?
warp wood, warping the keystone tree in a dam would be a nice way to release water,
wood/stone shape, lincoln logs....heck a good druid could churn out wood/stone simple products that only machines can do as quickly
neutralize poison, is the farm free of snakes and spiders?
plant growth, profitable
quench, no body wants to see the forest or crop go up in smoke.
dominate animal, needed sometimes with the difficult to break animals
diminish plants, make it easier to remove the tough big plants
blight, hybrid crops sometimes have to be destroyed
control water, move the cow pond to a better location
repel vermin, not as useful...but still
rusting grasp, get rid of those old tools
trasnmute rock/mud, shape your land
stone tell, find out what is beneath
commune with nature, find out the best times to plant, harvest, etc.
move earth, make a cow pond
heal, accidents happen
antimate plants, move those annoying trees to the edge of the fiend,
control weather, duh
Earthquake, break that earth up for planting
Sympathy, need more "cows" (insert rare animal for cows here and above)

 

[VirgilCaine]

summon nature's ally, extra help on a farm is always appreciated
plant growth, profitable

commune with nature, find out the best times to plant, harvest, etc.

A) For 1 round/level? Pretty impractical.

B) Not really. More weeds also.

C) I thought we already knew this stuff?

And also, shouldn't this hypothetical druid be saving his spells for fighting monsters, as stated above?

 

[Andor]

Alignment exists in the game for META-game reasons. That is, it is present in the game for the use and misunderstanding of PLAYERS, not the perceptions of CHARACTERS in-game. Thus it is difficult to assign any concrete tangibility in-game since it's purpose and effects are so oriented to meta-game issues.

Nope. You got this exactly backwards. Alignment matters for the players only insofar as it affects class choices. Depending on the party/campaign alignment can have concrete day to day effects on the lives of the characters. Alignment is routinely (if not 100% reliably) detectable. Furthermore is has physical effects in the world of the characters. Mikos smite would have killed Roy if he had been evil, He wasn't, and lived. Unholy blight doesn't bother Belkar. A holy or unholy blade has physical impacts upon people of the wrong alignment. Silimar effects exist for Law vs Chaos.

Similar to #1, the experience point system in the game is a META-game tool. It is intended for PLAYERS to use to monitor and execute the improvement of their characters inherent abilities. It is intended for DM's to use to pace the improvement of player characters and by ASSIGNING experience points and levels, to DICTATE levels of skill of NPC's as well as their mere survivability in comparison to PC's. It is NOT intended as a logical system of IN-GAME self-improvement and comparison for the characters that inhabit the game world.

Also wrong. While it more rarely impact the lives of characters directly, XP is a concrete, measurable and expendable resource for every character with an item creation feat. It even has a fixed ratio to 'magical components' when it comes to making those items.

This one too. Resurrection magic (Raise Dead, Resurrect, Reincarnate) exists in the game for PURELY meta-game reasons - for the continued play of PLAYER characters. I've never seen anyone even attempt to demonstrate otherwise, yet it is ALWAYS assumed otherwise in any discussion regarding the disruptive effect it has when applied wholesale across a game world. It has simply never been included to imply anything about its use by NPC's on ANY scale and it is thus a mistake to make inferences about what a D&D society would/could/should believe about the finality of death even though these spells exist in RAW.

Now this one is (no offense intended) just nonsense. Unless you're claiming that the PC cleric is the first one in the history of his world to become powerful enough to cast raise dead or ressurection or reincarnation, then it is SURELY well known that it can be done. I'm not claiming it's common, but it doesn't have to be. One ressurection 2000 years ago has been reshaping our world history ever since. (Let's not debate the reality of it, or this is a dead thread.) The fact that is can routinely be done in D&D, not to mention the much more common speak with dead spell, and the existence of undead, surely means that most people have a pretty clear idea of what happens after death. It's possible that they are wrong, but they have good evidence to support what they do know, and anyone sufficiently interested in investigating death can (with significant resources) die and be brought back to record direct observations.

Well I hope I'm not ranting - and I'm certainly not trying to label any of the OP as actually IMPOSSIBLE. I just find them to be frequently undesireable conclusions based on false, or unnecessary assumptions. It is as a RESULT of thinking on these things as a person living in a D&D world sees them that I have reached many of the opposite conclusions that the OP presents. YMMV, but I prefer a game world that perhaps actually considers much of the PH, DMG, and even MM to be little better than speculation about its realities much less that it dictates to me basic elements of how my NPC inhabitants should view their reality.

As has been mentioned however, this thread is about the generic world of the RAW, what you do in your own campaign does not matter. Assume the RAW are correct, also assume that the inhabitants of that world are not morons, and proceed from there. What do they know? And how does it effect how they think?

 

[JohnSnow]

But in a world where magic is real, and in many cases beneficial, it would probably be seen as a useful and valuable tool. Since magic has been around for a long time (in most cases), it would not be "new" or "unknown", but rather something that most people had grown up around. Rather than being shunned, those that can wield it would probably be considered quite valuable. If you think of spellcasters like modern engineers or physicians, then the place they would likely hold in a society where magic was real.

Well, it all depends on whether "magic" is something anyone can do, or whether it's something you have to have some form of "gift" for. IF anyone can do it or learn to, you're right that magic is just a career.

But, if you have to have a gift, magic is more likely to be viewed differently. People are mistrustful of that which is strange. Combine this with the old adage: "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," and you have the makings of a world where most people don't want to hear about "magic users," have no interest in going to them for help, and are more likely to turn them over as dangerous threats than go to them for help raising the town. These are people who, at the heights of their power can read your thoughts, get into anything you own, and basically TAKE anything they WANT. It's not a stretch of human nature to assume people would mistrust letting ANYONE have that power.

As such, most peasants would avoid them. Most people in power would try to control them, suppress them, or kill them before they became a threat.

I won't go into ALL the fictional examples, but consider just a few:

1. In the Wheel of Time series, only some people can channel. Men who can have a tendency to go crazy. As a result, while commoners recognize that channeling is real, they don't go seeking channelers out for help - unless they have no choice. The Seanchan go one step further and leash ALL channelers (wilders anyway) so they can't be a threat. They don't acknowledge that those who can control channelers could learn to channel. It's anathema to their society.

2. In the X-Men comics, only some people have mutant powers. Those who don't have them react very naturally by distrusting those that do. To the extent that they can, they try to persecute those people before they can become a real threat. They figure that what can't be brought to heel should be eliminated. A few mutants with really scary powers is enough to convince "the powers that be" that ALL mutants are dangerous.

3. In Star Wars, only some people have the necessary connection to use the Force. As a result, when the Jedi are hunted down and killed, it takes only a generation for people to conclude it's a "hokey" "ancient religion." Belief in it is more a matter of faith than fact, as few people have ever really SEEN anyone do" jedi stuff." Those who are old enough to remember are dismissive of the force because acknowledging its power is inherently dangerous.

So, how do you change the "flavor of magic" in D&D? You can simply make one rule: while players can choose any character type they want, magic isn't, by default, something anyone can learn.

Once it's "restricted," basic human nature makes magic rare and less likely to be used. Even if a wizard seems benevolent, who hasn't heard stories? How can you trust anyone with this level of power and moreover, why should you?

Especially when anybody who shows any talent whatsoever can be whacked before they become a real threat.

 

[Remathilis]

Once it's "restricted," basic human nature makes magic rare and less likely to be used. Even if a wizard seems benevolent, who hasn't heard stories? How can you trust anyone with this level of power and moreover, why should you?

Especially when anybody who shows any talent whatsoever can be whacked before they become a real threat.

This is true if for all those settings you've discussed, but in RAW D&D, all someone needs to become a wizard is

a.) A suitable intelligence
b.) enough XP to multi-class.

Bobbo the Fighter could have 15 levels of fighter, but decide he wants to learn magic. At 16th level, he invests some time and bammo! ftr15/wiz1. (This ignores the in game elements of finding a tutor, training, etc.)

This tells me that magic can be learned by anyone with enough determination and natural ability (score). Unlike in WoT or Star Wars (which places limits on channelers and Jedi, respectively) there is no limit on magical training.

 

[Arkhandus]

But wizards in the core rules have no implications that their power requires special talent or gifts or quirks. Anyone, in a RAW D&D world, can study and learn to cast Magic Missiles, Mage Hands, Prestidigitations and Expeditious Retreats. Only sorcerers are implied in the core rules to require some kind of magical gift or bloodline to use their magic. Divine casters are of course referred to as receiving their power from divine forces, and must adhere to certain tenets and alignment restrictions to receive power from any given deity. But people are going to trust their local pastor, just as in the real world, even moreso if that pastor can visibly and undoubtedly heal the injured, cure the sick, raise the dead, smite evildoers, and instantly repair broken objects with a prayer.

The local cleric of Heirroneous can confirm that Heirroneus has revealed to him that there is no madness and no ill intent within the town's neighborhood wizard. A priest of Pelor or the like may be a little less trustworthy in that regard (since they can be chaotic good and still receive divine spells), but would only have reason to lie if they had some deep and significant personal rivalry/disputes/feud with the local wizard. The wizard isn't trying to steal his flock or corrupt them, if anything he's just selling alchemical concoctions and minor arcane baubles and his services as a spellcaster. So no inherant reason for the local priest to lie and claim that the local wizard is not, in fact, just as normal and relatively innocent as the priest's flock (the wizard could well even be a part of that flock).

Ergo, there is nothing really preventing wizardly colleges and individuals proving that they can be trusted as much as any other person in town, and nothing preventing them from proving to the general populace that they can, indeed, learn to do the exact same things that the wizards do, without any silly misconceptions of being corrupted or driven insane by such practices. The local priests can prove it, and the wizards are not fundamentally antireligious or unfaithful. This is even more true amongst elves and gnomes, for instance, where their patron deity, the one who empowers their priests to heal and protect the community, also endorses wizards and their ilk quite openly and freely. And the local human priest of Pelor can confirm for the town that the local elven wizard devoted to Corellon Larethian is, in fact, quite a decent fellow by Pelor's admission.

Surely, if you expect every wizard to rampage maniacally, would you not expect the similarly-powerful clerics to go rampaging likewise in a mad rush of power? Certainly not. The wizard devoted to Pelor is nearly as trustworthy as the cleric devoted to Pelor, and at least as trustworthy as the commoner devoted to Pelor. The fact that the wizard probably contributes as much to the community's defense as any of the local sheriffs or templars do would certainly add clout to the wizard's claims of being trustworthy. Now, sure, true neutral or chaotic neutral or chaotic good wizards may be less trustworthy, but there would be enough precedent for common folk to know that wizards in general aren't any worse than normal people, or at least no worse than adventurers, mercenaries, soldiers, or any other person with power. Certainly the town guards don't all go around threatening and mugging every person they see, just because they have some combat training and better armaments than the common farmer or merchant. The fact that those guards are 3rd-level warriors who can kick most commoners' butts does not mean that they WILL do so. Just as the fact that the local mage is a 2nd-level wizard who can incinerate a typical farmer and steal his meager possessions does not mean he is just going to go right ahead and do so; the wizard can just as likely be a decent fellow as the average town guardsman, and the rules support an average town guardsman being more advanced in level than the average town wizard.