How many of D&D's rules could a character in the game figure out?

[Obryn]

I posted something similar on another board, and thought I'd post here, too. I got to thinking last night (prompted by other conversations I've seen before) ... let's assume a perfectly "associated" system/game world in which the game's rules are the physics of the universe and the player's choices are based on their character's knowledge.

I've been thinking a lot about Earthdawn recently, which more or less takes D&D's tropes and makes them elements of its metaphysics - spell matrices, adepts, levels, etc. Anyway, I thought it'd be fun to hop down this rabbit hole and apply that logic to D&D. Since the edition where the game's rules are most assumed to be the game's physics is 3.x/PF, that's the one I went with.

So... Let's assume there's a tower with a bunch of smart wizards, as you'd expect to find in many fantasy settings. They decide to start experimenting about the nature of the universe. How many of the game's rules could a character in that game figure out through experimentation and observation?

Here's what I've come up with so far...

(1) They know that their members can prepare X, Y, Z spells of I, II, III levels - spell level is an obvious sort of thing - and that these are always distinct quantities in a regular progression. They have at this point figured out the basics of the spell chart.

(2) The ranges, durations, and areas of effect of their spells increase in distinct, quantized measurements - usually 5' or 10' or 6 seconds or 1 minute each* - and this increase corresponds with the number of spells prepared.

(3) These gains only come in specific, discrete units.

At this point, these Wizards have figured out Levels as a fundamental feature of the universe, and can even engineer out their specific levels through use of (for example) spell ranges. (Example: Summon Monster I. It can be cast at discrete ranges that increase every other level, and for durations that increase by precisely 6 seconds every level.*)

(4) From these formulas, they can easily determine their actual numerical level, and it would be incredibly sensible for them to refer to Bob as a "5th level wizard" in the same sense as his player would.

(5) From differences in max spell levels and bonus spells, they've not only figured out the granularity and existence of the Intelligence stat, they know who's smarter.

(6) With some assistance of some clerics (those of the gods of magic and/or knowledge should suffice) they can work out the same for Clerics - and work out their actual numerical levels. Likewise, with Sorcerers. In the process, they have determined the existence and granularity of the Wisdom and Charisma statistics.

(7) The Wizards can get people to lift heavy things. They notice the maximum amounts their subjects can lift are, in turn, quantized into distinct units of measurement instead of scaling smoothly. By casting buffing spells, they can work out the progression and notice that it matches at every step. They have just worked out possibly as much as the entire 3-18 or 3-22 scale for Strength and can refer to it by a number.

(8) By blasting damaging spells at uniform targets of specific kind - like walls and blocks of wood - they can determine the percent of the time the item is blown up. By letting Wizards of different levels do this, they can further chart the efficacy - the block of wood is destroyed X% of the time by a Fireball spell by a wizard of Y level. At this point, they can figure out Hit Points as a fundamental feature of objects.

(8a) If they're particularly unethical, they can figure it out about goblins or kobolds, too.

(9) By the same token, they can determine that the probability of destroying targets is shaped in a curve best represented by Xd6, where X is their Level.

(10) With repeated uses of spells like Charm Person (or a new 0-level spell called "I failed my Will Save if I say 'AGH MY BRAIN'") on each other, they can determine (a) saving throws, (b) characters' Will save progressions, (c) the caster's Intelligence bonuses, and (d) the targets' Wisdom bonuses with sufficient trials.

Okay. So at this point, these Wizards can speak about Levels, Saving Throws, Wisdom Bonuses, Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma and Hit Points. What else can they do? Can they - from the spell list in the PHB - figure out the entire rules of the game in which they are characters?

-O


* As an aside, "five feet" and "six seconds" are fundamental measurements of the universe, bound into its metaphysical laws. It would do them well to use those for the basis of all measurement and timekeeping.

 

[Manbearcat]

An absolutely excellent idea for a post and a monumentally excellent first post. Would xp you 10 times if I could.

Given that they understand the relationship of Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma to the physical world, they should be able to smooth that out and extract the signal embedded in the physical relationship of level to Skill acumen with skills that leverage those ability modifiers. Given enough time, observation and data points, they should be able to work out:

- the relationship of focused training/experience in any specific Skill discipline to practitioners level (eg level + 3 on Class Skills).

- the relevant Class and Cross-class skills for each class (that they are aware of).


Once they know those values, they should be able to:

- work out the minimum threshold Skill level required to reliably (95 % success rate) achieve tasks and then map out the DC table.

- discover that there is always a 5 % failure rate regardless of Skill level or ease of task *

* and then cry themselves to sleep every night or commit sepuku over the futility of it all.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Here's what I've come up with so far...

(1) They know that their members can prepare X, Y, Z spells of I, II, III levels - spell level is an obvious sort of thing - and that these are always distinct quantities in a regular progression. They have at this point figured out the basics of the spell chart.

Yes.

Discworld does this too (max level eight).

(2) The ranges, durations, and areas of effect of their spells increase in distinct, quantized measurements - usually 5' or 10' or 6 seconds or 1 minute each* - and this increase corresponds with the number of spells prepared.

(3) These gains only come in specific, discrete units.

At this point, these Wizards have figured out Levels as a fundamental feature of the universe, and can even engineer out their specific levels through use of (for example) spell ranges. (Example: Summon Monster I. It can be cast at discrete ranges that increase every other level, and for durations that increase by precisely 6 seconds every level.*)

Yes to all this. At this point, you can figure these things out in a lab, without going into the "real world".

(4) From these formulas, they can easily determine their actual numerical level, and it would be incredibly sensible for them to refer to Bob as a "5th level wizard" in the same sense as his player would.

This is getting a bit iffy.

Spell levels are probably easier to "measure" than caster level (due to variability, etc). It's possible to have spells perform better or worse due to feats, backgrounds, items and what have you.

Also, wizards might not allow themselves to be tested (once they're out of school), especially wizards that have enemies.

(5) From differences in max spell levels and bonus spells, they've not only figured out the granularity and existence of the Intelligence stat, they know who's smarter.

This I disagree with. Wizards can't measure feats (which might grant bonus spells, or allow a spell to be recast, etc). Wizards might have trouble figuring out how much "smarter" a headband of intellect makes someone. A wizard with a prestige class could be gaining (or losing!) spell slots.

You might not be able to tell if a wizard is a specialist or not, which certainly changes the number of slots available.

And again, unless a wizard allows themselves to be tested, you don't get good measurements. (I doubt following a powerful wizard around and measuring their aftereffects gives good ratings. Just "more powerful", "less powerful", etc.)

(6) With some assistance of some clerics (those of the gods of magic and/or knowledge should suffice) they can work out the same for Clerics - and work out their actual numerical levels. Likewise, with Sorcerers. In the process, they have determined the existence and granularity of the Wisdom and Charisma statistics.

Same issues as above. I think clerics would have an even harder time. Putting aside the religious conflicts (would clerics of an evil god cooperate with clerics of a good god for this kind of measurement? Maybe, if they're both gods of knowledge...) but domains just make things more complicated.

(7) The Wizards can get people to lift heavy things. They notice the maximum amounts their subjects can lift are, in turn, quantized into distinct units of measurement instead of scaling smoothly. By casting buffing spells, they can work out the progression and notice that it matches at every step. They have just worked out possibly as much as the entire 3-18 or 3-22 scale for Strength and can refer to it by a number.

Oh lord, this actually makes sense. (Still requires a lab; the subjects must all wear the exact same amount of clothing, boots of the exact same weight, etc, even though they won't all be the same size.) But in general, they'll have an idea of how this works.

(8) By blasting damaging spells at uniform targets of specific kind - like walls and blocks of wood - they can determine the percent of the time the item is blown up. By letting Wizards of different levels do this, they can further chart the efficacy - the block of wood is destroyed X% of the time by a Fireball spell by a wizard of Y level. At this point, they can figure out Hit Points as a fundamental feature of objects.

This works easiest if someone is willing to sacrifice a Staff of Maximized Fireball for this kind of thing. (Raising the question, "isn't this expensive?")

(8a) If they're particularly unethical, they can figure it out about goblins or kobolds, too.

No. Goblins might have randomly rolled hit points, different values based on class/level (maybe most goblins are 1st-level warriors as described in the Monster Manual, but you can't count on it; some are bound to be experts, rangers, scouts, and they might all seem alike) or they might even be minions.

Even their saving throw/defense values would be too variable.

(9) By the same token, they can determine that the probability of destroying targets is shaped in a curve best represented by Xd6, where X is their Level.

Yes, taking into account that feats and so forth might change damage values unpredictably.

(10) With repeated uses of spells like Charm Person (or a new 0-level spell called "I failed my Will Save if I say 'AGH MY BRAIN'") on each other, they can determine (a) saving throws, (b) characters' Will save progressions, (c) the caster's Intelligence bonuses, and (d) the targets' Wisdom bonuses with sufficient trials.

A) Yes. Figuring out categories of saving throws make sense.
B) No. Among other things, gauging a non-caster's levels isn't easy. (In fact, gauging a caster's levels isn't easy, if the caster has a few levels of expert, or isn't optimal, and so has lower save DCs, etc. But it's worse if they're not a caster.) Getting any two characters with identical saving throws is pretty much impossible (despite what the game rules say, having every guard being a 3rd-level Soldier with a Will defense of X just doesn't make sense)...

I think, at best, you could figure what sort of people tend to have good Will defenses, good Reflex, and good Fortitude, but have to guess beyond that.

You might have an easier time if you used summoned monsters (some of the same issues) or constructs (same issues, but less; they tend to be immune to a lot of stuff, but probably not Slow spells unless they're golems).

C) No. Again, there's too many ways of messing with save DCs. Spell Focus, for instance. A smarter wizard without Spell Focus (Enchantment) could have the exact same save DC as a less intelligent wizard with Spell Focus.

D) No, because you can't "standardize" Will saves that well. You could use items that have more standardized save DCs though.

Okay. So at this point, these Wizards can speak about Levels, Saving Throws, Wisdom Bonuses, Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma and Hit Points. What else can they do? Can they - from the spell list in the PHB - figure out the entire rules of the game in which they are characters?

I believe they can only figure out the fundamental rules. They can figure levels, for instance, and have an idea about save DCs, saving throws, and so forth, but no two characters should be alike. Thus, the wizard college probably cannot figure out how to construct a fighter, or even another wizard because they can't get those derived stats "perfect".

In fact, class by itself is one of the biggest barriers. A fighter with ranged combat feats and cross-class ranks in Listen and Spot could call himself a ranger. Nobody knows if they're a ranger or not. (Heck, the fighter could have multi-classed with ranger. And could have levels in warrior, or aristocrat.) Rangers have a good Reflex save. Fighters do not. The multiclass? character with the high? Dexterity score makes for a poor Reflex save measurer.

-O

 

[Obryn]

This is getting a bit iffy.

Spell levels are probably easier to "measure" than caster level (due to variability, etc). It's possible to have spells perform better or worse due to feats, backgrounds, items and what have you.

Right, but caster level is fairly obvious for Wizards based on "what's the highest-level spell you can cast," and "are you able to cast exactly as many spells as you did on the day you were able to cast that higher-level spell?"

Also, wizards might not allow themselves to be tested (once they're out of school), especially wizards that have enemies.

We're assuming a cooperative endeavor for the purposes of this thought experiment. If we can have 100 wizards living in a tower, might as well make them all ascetic searchers-after-knowledge.

You might not be able to tell if a wizard is a specialist or not, which certainly changes the number of slots available.

Sure you can. Edwin the Evoker knows he can cast X spells, but 1 of them of each level has to be an Evocation. (Leaving aside whether or not he decided to be an Evoker, the results of it are directly observable.)

Same issues as above. I think clerics would have an even harder time. Putting aside the religious conflicts (would clerics of an evil god cooperate with clerics of a good god for this kind of measurement? Maybe, if they're both gods of knowledge...) but domains just make things more complicated.

Well, like I said, these are clerics of magic and/or knowledge, and thus will either cooperate or drive this sort of questioning. And again, we're going with an assumption of some basic level of cooperation. Domain spells - like specialist wizard spells - would have to be transparent to the caster as well. Like, "I always have THIS ONE spell, but my rest are flexible! And Peter of Pelor always has that OTHER spell."

Otherwise, interesting thoughts.

-O

 

[pemerton]

This thread is oddly disturbing.

(Also, my hardcore simulationist play has all been with Rolemaster, which is much closer to points-buy than D&D, and so makes all this stuff harder to do in-game.)

 

[RangerWickett]

They might delve into economics, and notice that people of a given level tend to have about the same amount of wealth. I mean, with enough data points they'd be able to determine that a belt that increases your strength by 2 points always costs 2000 gold pieces (40 pounds of gold) to make. The market price for the item might fluctuate, but they'd be able to figure out the cost to produce and track wealth by that.

But then a PC shows up and messes up the math, because he has more wealth than is expected for a typical person (NPC) of his level.

Then they start to figure out that some people are superior to everyone else. These people have more wealth by level, and higher stats. I wonder what that would do to society.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Just imagine the calculations on rituals, elites, solos, and minions that 4e would bring. Utter chaos

As to my above example, while I don't think you can "standardize" NPCs or monsters that have class levels, I think in a D&D-as-physics world, you could standardize generic gnolls, horses, and other such creatures. As a result, you could quickly calculate creatures' strengths and weaknesses.

Get enough wizards together and you could start Planar Binding fiends (and angels?) and start doing calculations on them. They might even figure out the "average" treasure value of a monster, and start calculating CRs that way.

 

[Obryn]

Just imagine the calculations on rituals, elites, solos, and minions that 4e would bring. Utter chaos

Well, I read an essay somewhere that said that 4e's not "associated" enough for this kind of experiment.

-O

 

[Hautamaki]

If we assume that Galileo, Newton, Einstein, etc, are INT 18, just imagine what an INT 32 character could figure out...

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

If we assume that Galileo, Newton, Einstein, etc, are INT 18, just imagine what an INT 32 character could figure out...

In 3.x, skill ranks are worth more than stat points.

Einstein would be a high-level (ish) expert, say 10th-level, with a starting Int of 18 (so 20 by 10th-level) plus add 1 or 2 points for age... and he has Skill Focus (Knowledge (theoretical physics)) too plus maxed out ranks.

That would give him:

13 ranks
+6 Int (assuming he's about 60, but perhaps he was a bit younger when he did his best work)
+3 feat
+2 from a "mastercraft" library (his "toolkit")

Total bonus: +24. He can regularly hit DC 35 skill checks.

If we were using d20 Modern instead, which lets you cheese skill scores much more easily, he might have 10 levels in Smart. No Skill Focus (it's a Dedicated talent) but the Educated feat gives him a +2 bonus instead.

Add a +10 level bonus from the Savant talent. Yes, the talent gives you +1 per Smart level. That gives him a bonus of +31!

To really optimize this, trade out one level of Smart for one level of Dedicated, and take Skill Emphasis, which stacks which Educated. That lets him squeeze an extra 2 point bonus out of the system, so +33. He's hitting DC 43 skill checks on a regular basis, and can sometimes even hit DC 50 without even spending action points. (At absolute max, assuming only a +2 library bonus, he could hit a DC of 59 if he rolls max on an action point. If he can squeeze one more point out of this, or just take another level, and he could win (another?) Nobel Prize by getting a 60. I think Field Scientist might give extra skill bonuses, but it doesn't optimize the same way the Savant talent does.)