-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Are there scientists in D&D? Should there be.....???
- Thread starter Tuzenbach
- Start date
steeldragons
Steeliest of the dragons
No.
...and no.
I play D&D to play a fantasy adventure game. Sorcery & "the Gods". Wizards & Clerics & Rogues & Warriors. Elves & Halflings. Goblins & Orcs. Dragons...& Dungeons (not necessarily in that order).*
I don't want or need sci-fi/space travel/robots & aliens. I don't need or want "modern"/guns/cars/spies & scientists. I don't want or need cthulu/madness/victorian horror what not...or post-apocalyptic/mad-max/planet of the mutants or wild west/cowboys & zombies or..."steampunk"...ANY "-punk", for that matter.*
There are games that are for and do those genres. And they're great when one wants to play a game in those genres. That is not what D&D is for*.
All the rest of this mumbo-jumbo, get the frig -and stay- out of my D&D.*
Anything else I can give you my opinion on today?
* This entire post brought to you with the obligatory, yet unspoken, "to me", "for me", and/or "imho" where/when appropriate to keep people's "personal-preferences-panties" [tm] from gettin' all bunched.
...and no.
I play D&D to play a fantasy adventure game. Sorcery & "the Gods". Wizards & Clerics & Rogues & Warriors. Elves & Halflings. Goblins & Orcs. Dragons...& Dungeons (not necessarily in that order).*
I don't want or need sci-fi/space travel/robots & aliens. I don't need or want "modern"/guns/cars/spies & scientists. I don't want or need cthulu/madness/victorian horror what not...or post-apocalyptic/mad-max/planet of the mutants or wild west/cowboys & zombies or..."steampunk"...ANY "-punk", for that matter.*
There are games that are for and do those genres. And they're great when one wants to play a game in those genres. That is not what D&D is for*.
All the rest of this mumbo-jumbo, get the frig -and stay- out of my D&D.*
Anything else I can give you my opinion on today?
* This entire post brought to you with the obligatory, yet unspoken, "to me", "for me", and/or "imho" where/when appropriate to keep people's "personal-preferences-panties" [tm] from gettin' all bunched.
No. "Scientists" as we currently understand them, are a modern, post-Renaissance development. They don't really fit into a pseudo-Medieval setting.
I don't think there's call for it in most D&D worlds - scientists are not about adventuring, they are about finding out what makes the world operate. If "how the world operates" is not a plot element for your campaign, a scientist is apt to be very frustrated.
And how many GMs are prepared to create a game-world physics that is solid and self-consistent enough to meet scrutiny? When "it is magic" is an alternative, you never have to worry about that, but with scientists, you do.
I don't think there's call for it in most D&D worlds - scientists are not about adventuring, they are about finding out what makes the world operate. If "how the world operates" is not a plot element for your campaign, a scientist is apt to be very frustrated.
And how many GMs are prepared to create a game-world physics that is solid and self-consistent enough to meet scrutiny? When "it is magic" is an alternative, you never have to worry about that, but with scientists, you do.
Last edited:
Scrivener of Doom
Adventurer
And in 1E they were called a sage.
Voadam
Legend
Sure, if you want.
Ravenloft had Doctor Mordenheim, a Frankenstein knock off and Markov, a Doctor Moreau knock off, both scientists.
D&D is basically fantasy renaissance in a number of ways and there are plenty of steampunk style D&D settings where scientists can fit right in.
Fantasy pseudo-scientists can be made with things like the technologist class from The fantastic Science: A Technologist Sourcebook for 3.5.
Dias Ex Machina Games has a bunch of scientist/technologist type classes for their Amethyst setting in a variety of game systems (3.5, 4e, 13th age).
Deadlands d20 the deadlands setting adaptation using 3.0 rules has a mad scientist class. It has its own sourcebook Way of New Science.
3.5 has the expert, if you want a real world scientist type.
Pathfinder has an alchemist class that can fill the trope. Also the technomancer prestige class for mixing high tech with magic and a couple technology themed class archetypes from the Technology Guide.
If you want a Mage the Sorcerer's Crusade type game with magic, fencing, and adventuring scientists as the theme and setting it is easy to do.
Hmm, I'm pretty sure Adventure! d20 has a scientist base class as well. Some d20 supers games likely has adventuring scientist ones as well.
Ravenloft had Doctor Mordenheim, a Frankenstein knock off and Markov, a Doctor Moreau knock off, both scientists.
D&D is basically fantasy renaissance in a number of ways and there are plenty of steampunk style D&D settings where scientists can fit right in.
Fantasy pseudo-scientists can be made with things like the technologist class from The fantastic Science: A Technologist Sourcebook for 3.5.
Dias Ex Machina Games has a bunch of scientist/technologist type classes for their Amethyst setting in a variety of game systems (3.5, 4e, 13th age).
Deadlands d20 the deadlands setting adaptation using 3.0 rules has a mad scientist class. It has its own sourcebook Way of New Science.
3.5 has the expert, if you want a real world scientist type.
Pathfinder has an alchemist class that can fill the trope. Also the technomancer prestige class for mixing high tech with magic and a couple technology themed class archetypes from the Technology Guide.
If you want a Mage the Sorcerer's Crusade type game with magic, fencing, and adventuring scientists as the theme and setting it is easy to do.
Hmm, I'm pretty sure Adventure! d20 has a scientist base class as well. Some d20 supers games likely has adventuring scientist ones as well.
Last edited:
delericho
Legend
If you want, I guess. It's not for me - the closest I'll get is an Artificer and maybe an Alchemist class (or, more likely, one class covering both).
Actually, I suspect IMC it's unlikely science will even be a viable thing. In order to proceed, science is dependent on reproducible results. That's a feature of our universe, but it isn't necessarily the case in a magical universe where, sure enough, it could indeed by the will of the gods that this time the PC falls 100 feet and only suffers 10 damage, walking away with barely a scratch.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Can you observe, hypothesize and test in-character in D&D? Probably. Whether it works depends a little on edition and how the DM runs. A DM running highly simulationist RAW 3e, for instance, will probably give you repeatable enough results to perform valid experiments. You'd be able to uncoverthe existence of hit points, skill checks, and quantify bonuses, and the like. You'd be able to 'prove' the superiority of one weapon over another, reverse-engineer character class and level from population survey data and so forth.
OTOH, a DM running 5e in full 'empowered' mode would drive the would-be scientist crazy.
OTOH, a DM running 5e in full 'empowered' mode would drive the would-be scientist crazy.
Note that Deadlands "Mad Scientists" are not doing science. In the standard metaphysic of the setting, they are opening themselves up to evil spiritual entities, that tell them how to make a thing that performs the desired function. Doing this is not good for the brain ("thing men were not meant to know," and all that) so they tend to lose sanity, and go mad. They are drawing on the same forces that drive magic in the setting.
