Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6649397" data-attributes="member: 177">With respect, scientific inquiry is the defining raison d'etre for a scientist.  Without the inquiry, they aren't really a scientist, they are a person who has knowledge of science, which falls somewhat sort of the archetype.  IMHO, anyway.Yeah, but Indiana Jones isn't really much of an archaeologist.  Sorry.  He's a roguish adventurer with knowledge of history.  The *science* of archaeology, which has a lot of similarities to forensics, plays very little part in his adventures.  The Staff of Ra is about it.I think you'll generally find such characters expounding, sometimes at length, on their world's physical (or psychological, or biological) laws in a fairly consistent manner, especially when they're using science to solve a problem.  So much so, that it is kind of a trope.  The laws differ from those of our world, so that if we try to decode them into real-world science it is gobbledigook, but there is some internal consistency there enough that Marvel instituted the No-Prize in part for those who managed to patch holes for them  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Yes, and their "science" generally doesn't matter or impact play, and they fall over gibbering sooner than most.  Yippee.  At least they come from a culture with a history of scientific inquiry, which D&D worlds generally don't.</blockquote>

Verification