Sanackranib
First Post
adventurer as a profession
dont forget gentlemen of fortune (that be pirates for all ye land lubbers)
dont forget gentlemen of fortune (that be pirates for all ye land lubbers)
Apparently adventurer WAS a profession
- Thread starter jester47
- Start date
Dr. Strangemonkey
First Post
Adventurers would work as a semi-professional title in a variety of cases. In the same category as gamblers, gunfighters, woodsmen, and yankees.
But if it makes you uncomfortable you shouldn't just call you party people on the road, without land, or wanderers. There are so many other lovely titles and adjectives to use:
younger sons
vagabonds
yeomen
bootless chaps
rangers
freemen
armsmen
freeclerks
friars
sell swords
freescholars
men of the realm
bandits
companions
brigands
freetraders
turks
men-at-arms
gentlemen travellers
pilgrims
gendarmes
and while I'm certain there are even more colorful terms in both historical English and the contexts of other campaigns, rashers from Oathbound is my favorite, I would point out that there are surely a variety of terms in other languages as well.
But if it makes you uncomfortable you shouldn't just call you party people on the road, without land, or wanderers. There are so many other lovely titles and adjectives to use:
younger sons
vagabonds
yeomen
bootless chaps
rangers
freemen
armsmen
freeclerks
friars
sell swords
freescholars
men of the realm
bandits
companions
brigands
freetraders
turks
men-at-arms
gentlemen travellers
pilgrims
gendarmes
and while I'm certain there are even more colorful terms in both historical English and the contexts of other campaigns, rashers from Oathbound is my favorite, I would point out that there are surely a variety of terms in other languages as well.
Celebrim
Legend
Well, first, a clarification. I said that in my campaign world, people were not considered adventurers. I implied that adventurer as a profession really had no place in the culture of my campaign world. I did not imply that adventurer as a profession did not exist in some historical cultures.
Notably, if your campaign is based off the British Imperial period, then you'd be quite in the right to have whole classes of gentlemen, bored gentry, and bandits and plunders pretending to be gentlemen out adventuring - which could mean anything from archeaology, to taking a wild vacation, to playing the game of thrones in some far corner of the world.
I said I had incorporated into my campaign certain medieval elements for the purpose of causing culture shock. Adventurer is a much more modern idea, and our notion of it more modern still.
Note that the 1474 definition is much the same as criminal, and I dare say that the best synonym would be rake. When players say that they are adventurers do they generally mean scoundrel?
The 1548 definition is basically 'merchant'. When players say that they are adventurers do they generally mean travelling merchant?
And the 1667 definition is basically 'mercenary'. This is better, but even so most D&D adventurers don't mean people - especially people of high birth - who volunteered to fight in a war for a country other than thier own. All such definitions are a good bit more recent than I want, and if we started looking into 19th century definitions they'd probably match right up with our D&D sensibilities.
Unless I'm deliberately designing a setting with a Victorian feel, I'm going to do my best to avoid 'adventurer' as a phrase, do my best to avoid the modernity of adventures as something people seek out and not unwanted things that happen to them, and do my level best not to have every barkeep a retired adventurer.
Concensus D&D inspired fantasy seems to have every third bloke an adventurer or a former adventurer, and the phrase got really tired and worn out for me very early in my gaming career. D&D 'adventurers' seem sometimes to be a class of itinerate sanitation specialists or big game hunters and ultimately the term seems to deprive the adventure of its adventurousness, and reduce the occupation of hero to the mundane level of rat catcher or safarii guide. Every second person seems to have a list of chores for an adventurer to perform and is not in the slightest unwilling to pay a stranger to do them. Realistic or not for a world with real monsters, it deprives the whole thing of its mythological power, especially if the profession is common enough to be considered a profession and if the PC's find that they have peers on every street corner. I sometimes wonder whether or not in such a society adventurers should have formal resumes, agents, and talent scouts looking for the next set of adventurers with the right stuff.
"That nice, but we were really looking for someone who could cast fireballs... NEXT!"
And conveinent as a plot device or not, it perhaps becomes to conveinent and too easy to keep hooking the PC's with 'a merchant lord wishes you to investigate the...in return for the generous reward of...'
Not that I haven't fallen into that trap myself, but I strive to keep the motivation more personal than that.
Notably, if your campaign is based off the British Imperial period, then you'd be quite in the right to have whole classes of gentlemen, bored gentry, and bandits and plunders pretending to be gentlemen out adventuring - which could mean anything from archeaology, to taking a wild vacation, to playing the game of thrones in some far corner of the world.
I said I had incorporated into my campaign certain medieval elements for the purpose of causing culture shock. Adventurer is a much more modern idea, and our notion of it more modern still.
Note that the 1474 definition is much the same as criminal, and I dare say that the best synonym would be rake. When players say that they are adventurers do they generally mean scoundrel?
The 1548 definition is basically 'merchant'. When players say that they are adventurers do they generally mean travelling merchant?
And the 1667 definition is basically 'mercenary'. This is better, but even so most D&D adventurers don't mean people - especially people of high birth - who volunteered to fight in a war for a country other than thier own. All such definitions are a good bit more recent than I want, and if we started looking into 19th century definitions they'd probably match right up with our D&D sensibilities.
Unless I'm deliberately designing a setting with a Victorian feel, I'm going to do my best to avoid 'adventurer' as a phrase, do my best to avoid the modernity of adventures as something people seek out and not unwanted things that happen to them, and do my level best not to have every barkeep a retired adventurer.
Concensus D&D inspired fantasy seems to have every third bloke an adventurer or a former adventurer, and the phrase got really tired and worn out for me very early in my gaming career. D&D 'adventurers' seem sometimes to be a class of itinerate sanitation specialists or big game hunters and ultimately the term seems to deprive the adventure of its adventurousness, and reduce the occupation of hero to the mundane level of rat catcher or safarii guide. Every second person seems to have a list of chores for an adventurer to perform and is not in the slightest unwilling to pay a stranger to do them. Realistic or not for a world with real monsters, it deprives the whole thing of its mythological power, especially if the profession is common enough to be considered a profession and if the PC's find that they have peers on every street corner. I sometimes wonder whether or not in such a society adventurers should have formal resumes, agents, and talent scouts looking for the next set of adventurers with the right stuff.
"That nice, but we were really looking for someone who could cast fireballs... NEXT!"
And conveinent as a plot device or not, it perhaps becomes to conveinent and too easy to keep hooking the PC's with 'a merchant lord wishes you to investigate the...in return for the generous reward of...'
Not that I haven't fallen into that trap myself, but I strive to keep the motivation more personal than that.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Of course, as a DM with an established 'adventuerer' profession doesn't mean the PC's have to be in that profession. 
My PC's are at best part-time adventurers. Much of their motivation comes from personal reasons. And, heck, even if they were adventurers -- there's gotta be some intriguing reasons why they'd all like to throw their lives away at the drop of a few thousand gil...
Anyhoo, I guess I just never found that having an established profession of 'those who deal with problems less mundane than rats for money' really deprived my campaign of plot or character motivation.
But that's IMXP. YMMV.
My PC's are at best part-time adventurers. Much of their motivation comes from personal reasons. And, heck, even if they were adventurers -- there's gotta be some intriguing reasons why they'd all like to throw their lives away at the drop of a few thousand gil...
Anyhoo, I guess I just never found that having an established profession of 'those who deal with problems less mundane than rats for money' really deprived my campaign of plot or character motivation.
But that's IMXP. YMMV.
Re
D&D would be rather boring if adventuring were not an option, unless the DM designed the campaign around a different theme such as service to a queen or god or the completion of great quest that will lead to the end of the heroes life or adventuring career.
I can agree that the word adventurers is overused, but that is because D&D uses the term in place of other words like mercernary, explorer, thief, pirate, etc, etc. Adventurer is a gaming word, and though it exists in the real world, more often than not another word would be used to describe adventurous folk.
I just don't see people in medieval times messing with adventurers or admonishing them. I think the common folk would fear a person who had seen many battles and travelled much, and the nobility would view such a person as a possible asset.
Adventurers get the job done when others can't. I personally can't understand why anyone would paint adventurers in a negative manner in the campaign world unless they were known plunderers.
D&D would be rather boring if adventuring were not an option, unless the DM designed the campaign around a different theme such as service to a queen or god or the completion of great quest that will lead to the end of the heroes life or adventuring career.
I can agree that the word adventurers is overused, but that is because D&D uses the term in place of other words like mercernary, explorer, thief, pirate, etc, etc. Adventurer is a gaming word, and though it exists in the real world, more often than not another word would be used to describe adventurous folk.
I just don't see people in medieval times messing with adventurers or admonishing them. I think the common folk would fear a person who had seen many battles and travelled much, and the nobility would view such a person as a possible asset.
Adventurers get the job done when others can't. I personally can't understand why anyone would paint adventurers in a negative manner in the campaign world unless they were known plunderers.
Khorod
First Post
I prefer the 'adventurer' concept to only be in the beginning of a campaign, when the motivations for being heroic are unclear. Once a little momentum is built up the part shouldn't just be wandering troubleshooters, but people with long-term goals (be it survival, or otherwise) that they are working toward.
I find random 'adventuring' to be less satisfying than an actual storyarc.
And for those interested, puple was a typo. I meant pulp-era. Like Indiana Jones, Conan, and so on.
I find random 'adventuring' to be less satisfying than an actual storyarc.
And for those interested, puple was a typo. I meant pulp-era. Like Indiana Jones, Conan, and so on.
Zander
Explorer
Adventurers might organise themselves in companies - not in the modern commercial or military sense, but in the way it was used in the 15th C. before most permanent standing armies were established. So a particular group of adventurers in a fantasy setting could be a "company" with its own name and reputation. Adventurers might describe themselves as "company men" or "members of the company of {insert name}".
Last edited:
Desdichado
Hero
I actually prefer my PCs to not be shifty "adventurers" at all. After all, you can certainly have adventures without being an "adventurer." Rather, I prefer my PCs to have a patron, or patron organization, and what they do they do in their capacity as agents of that patron.
But then again, my biggest gripe with D&D is that it doesn't really resemble fantasy fiction all that much, so this is just one more legacy of that. Very few works of fantasy fiction have adventurers wandering around "clearing out dungeons" and the like, so I tend to get rid of that whole paradigm as often as possible.
But then again, my biggest gripe with D&D is that it doesn't really resemble fantasy fiction all that much, so this is just one more legacy of that. Very few works of fantasy fiction have adventurers wandering around "clearing out dungeons" and the like, so I tend to get rid of that whole paradigm as often as possible.
Re
I really don't know where this idea comes from that adventurers are simply clearing out dungeons and reaping the rewards. The whole acquiring treasure part of dungeoneering is simply mechanics at work.
Really, think about all the modules that are popular. Most of them would make excellent books of fantasy fiction. For example, all of the following:
Night Below: Huge, epic adventure where the heroes are pitted against powerful alien enemies attempting to take over the Underdark and eventually the world.
Temple of Elemental Evil: Epic adventure where heroes are trying to stop evil god from being freed.
RttToEE: Same as original, but different god.
Against the Giants: Heroes are forced to find out why different tribes of giants are raiding local towns and villages.
Slavelords Series: Investigate and capture a group of slave lords and destroy their operation.
I could go on and on. D&D modules and adventures are definitely based upon normal fantasy fiction. The D&D game strongly encourages people to play games emulating fantasy fiction.
I rarely if ever use the wandering adventuring group when bringing a group of adventurers together. They always have backgrounds and some good reason for what they are doing.
To me, the division of treasure is a necessary mechanic, and not the have all, end all of adventuring. I strongly believe that D&D encourages playing the game as if embroiled in the type of adventure one finds in fantasy fiction.
I really don't know where this idea comes from that adventurers are simply clearing out dungeons and reaping the rewards. The whole acquiring treasure part of dungeoneering is simply mechanics at work.
Really, think about all the modules that are popular. Most of them would make excellent books of fantasy fiction. For example, all of the following:
Night Below: Huge, epic adventure where the heroes are pitted against powerful alien enemies attempting to take over the Underdark and eventually the world.
Temple of Elemental Evil: Epic adventure where heroes are trying to stop evil god from being freed.
RttToEE: Same as original, but different god.
Against the Giants: Heroes are forced to find out why different tribes of giants are raiding local towns and villages.
Slavelords Series: Investigate and capture a group of slave lords and destroy their operation.
I could go on and on. D&D modules and adventures are definitely based upon normal fantasy fiction. The D&D game strongly encourages people to play games emulating fantasy fiction.
I rarely if ever use the wandering adventuring group when bringing a group of adventurers together. They always have backgrounds and some good reason for what they are doing.
To me, the division of treasure is a necessary mechanic, and not the have all, end all of adventuring. I strongly believe that D&D encourages playing the game as if embroiled in the type of adventure one finds in fantasy fiction.
Desdichado
Hero
I'm not talking about picking up treasure (although that is part of it) I'm talking about the plots themselves. You say they'd be great fantasy fiction plots, but I say I don't know of any fantasy fiction like that, with the possible exception of some game fiction, which doesn't really count. I mean, really, how many fantasy books are there that have an ensemble cast roaming around through tunnels, catacombs and the like fighting monsters?
