Information Flow in "typical" D&D

[Mahiro Satsu]

I always assumed that the common flolk know next to nothing about things farther away form their village than you can walk in two days. Beyond that they only know rumors and myths (most of which are wrong).

PCs have knowledge skills to handle that kind of stuff, but building a fire or feeding a horse is common knowledge.

 

[Thorntangle]

The typical DnD commoner would likely know a about agriculture and the local area. This would include local officials and local gossip.

This type of knowledge probably isn't General, at least according to the PHB/SRD. Otherwise, why would Profession (Farmer), Knowledge (Local), or even Knowledge (Agriculture) exist? The PHB/SRD pegs the DC of an easy Knowledge question (remember trained only) at 10. This seems to imply that easy, basic questions that fall under an existing Knowledge category cannot be known unless somebody has allocated points to that skill unless the DM rule 0s the situation.

If general knowledge (untrained Int check) included vastly diverse topics such as this, I, as a player, am less likely to ever take any sort of knowledge or profession skills just for the sake of character building.

This in my mind is indicative of a small but annoying shortcoming of the d20 skill system - insufficient skill points to represent the characters past and accumulated knowledge. For example, adventurers start to accumulate vast knowledge about monsters, but this is not quantified in any way. In reality, nobody willingly starts allocating cross-class skill points to Knowledge(Monster).

 

[hong]

This type of knowledge probably isn't General, at least according to the PHB/SRD. Otherwise, why would Profession (Farmer), Knowledge (Local), or even Knowledge (Agriculture) exist? The PHB/SRD pegs the DC of an easy Knowledge question (remember trained only) at 10. This seems to imply that easy, basic questions that fall under an existing Knowledge category cannot be known unless somebody has allocated points to that skill unless the DM rule 0s the situation.

Local gossip would cetainly be general knowledge. Knowledge about agricultural techniques might not be, but most commoners (except those with Wis <9) would have practical knowledge of how to fend for themselves.

If general knowledge (untrained Int check) included vastly diverse topics such as this, I, as a player, am less likely to ever take any sort of knowledge or profession skills just for the sake of character building.

This in my mind is indicative of a small but annoying shortcoming of the d20 skill system - insufficient skill points to represent the characters past and accumulated knowledge. For example, adventurers start to accumulate vast knowledge about monsters, but this is not quantified in any way. In reality, nobody willingly starts allocating cross-class skill points to Knowledge(Monster).

If this sort of knowledge is assumed for everyone, then you don't _need_ lots of skill points.

 

[mmadsen]

My question to you all is: What is considered "common knowledge" in a D&D world? How does information flow in the D&D world?

When you realize how much we know about the world just by passively absorbing TV and newspaper images, it's pretty amazing. We all know what the major cities of the world look like (New York, London, Paris, Rome, Moscow, Tokyo), we know what people from around the world look like (Europeans, Africans, Asians) and how they dress, we know what exotic animals from around the world look like (lions, elephants, giraffes, llamas, cobras). Only a true adventurer would know those things in a medieval/renaissance world, because he'd have to see them all first hand.

We also tend to learn about world events almost immediately, with live video coverage no less. As biased a media coverage may be, compare it to a bard's tale!

What should characters in a D&D world know? What would an "educated" character versus "uneducated" versus "average" know?

Everyone should know the myths and legends of their culture, that is, its religion and history. In medieval Europe or Asia, the educated tend to be even more educated on religion and history -- the classics. That's what scholars learn, what previous scholars wrote down.

Also, how exactly would information get from one place to the other? Bards (or would they be a mix of infotainment)? Traveling scholars? How common would this be?

In a D&D world especially, virtually all information should travel through Bards. That's their role.

So what exactly does a character know, and in which ways could they learn more (other than traveling from library to library across the country?)

They should learn from first-hand experience. "So that's what a dragon looks like!"

 

[zyzzyr]

Hi all,

Thanks for the varied and invigorating comments.

I guess this faces one of the problems of the D&D system - players start off with a class, and no NPC classes (though of course you could house rule this).

Most people are something else, before they become a druid, or wizard, or fighter. They were teenagers (of varying ages) at one point, and would have knowledge buildup from there. Probably this could be completed by having them take a "background NPC class" or assigning a "background template" - this is what you know, this is who you are. You were a peasant on a farm? Then you've never read up on effective uses of cold spells. And so on.

I had always been of the mind that mmadsen describes ... You get very biased news and information from bards, and the rest is just folklore. You might hear directly from the lips of an adventurer what happened, and of course that might be biased too. Libraries, I assumed, would be found only in big cities, would probably require an entrance fee (unless funded by a patron), and would be mostly a collection of folklore, and some true and accurate books.

Thus if I want to learn about mermen, I have to travel to a city, seek out a bookstore or library, and there is a small % chance that it is actually a good book - not just fairy tales (which might contain a grain of truth). You can represent the gathering of knowledge via fairy tales, probably, by having the character amass many fairy tales, then doing an Int check to see if they can pull out any similarities. Of course, I could always find another adventurer who saw mermen and ask her!

In terms of gossip/myths/legends, though, what would be common legends? Dragons, I assume - but would they be described as having wings, a tail, four legs, and a breath weapon of some sort? Would that be consistent? What about manticores? Would they be named, or would it be "A fearsome flying lion with stones on its tail!" or something like that? Is it safe to assume that legends today are known as legends back then? Werewolves only come out on full moons, don't step on a crack, the honest politician?

hong - I would be surprised if they knew Survival - is Wilderness Lore trained only? Perhaps not, but I'd still be surprised - I couldn't take Joe Nobody out of Toronto, place them in the wild and tell them to live - and if you think Toronto's too big, well, I couldn't do that with Tillsonburg (15k people) either, or even Straffordville (600 people). Granted, we're in a different day and age, but I don't think someone raised as a blacksmith would know how to survive in the wild.

I really wish the Knowledge skills would have been different - everyone gets X + int bonus knowledge points every level, X depending on your class (6 for wizards, 2 for barbarians). And only some knowledge skills are class skills - all other knowledge is cross-class. E.g. Knowledge (monster) is a class skill for all, but knowledge (poisons) is cross-class for a cleric. If you put points into something that you didn't see on your last trip, then you need to spend time in a library.

Hmm, that sounds like a nice house rule. I might adopt that Although it would be tough to justify knowledge (monster) as class for everyone - "you saw 300 orcs, but nothing else - that doesn't tell you anything about kobolds or howlers".

Thoughts?

zyzzyr

 

[hong]

hong - I would be surprised if they knew Survival - is Wilderness Lore trained only?

No.

Perhaps not, but I'd still be surprised - I couldn't take Joe Nobody out of Toronto, place them in the wild and tell them to live - and if you think Toronto's too big, well, I couldn't do that with Tillsonburg (15k people) either, or even Straffordville (600 people). Granted, we're in a different day and age, but I don't think someone raised as a blacksmith would know how to survive in the wild.

Someone raised as a blacksmith might (in game terms) have allocated points to Int, Con and Str, at the expense of Wis. If they only have 9 Wis, they wouldn't be able to succeed by taking 10.

In general, though, D&D is not meant to simulate medieval reality. All that nasty stuff about surviving day-to-day goes on behind the curtain, if you will. The Wilderness Lore thing (among others) represents how the average person in a D&D world is competent in different areas to modern-day people, without bogging down the game with tons of skills and skill points.

 

[mmadsen]

What should characters in a D&D world know? What would an "educated" character versus "uneducated" versus "average" know? Basic math? Calculus?

If you want a medieval feel, even scholars won't know many aspects of basic modern math.

Medieval documents don't use modern "arabic" numerals; they use Roman numerals. Thus, most of the arithmetic algorithms we learn in grade school aren't appropriate. What's xx plus xi? xxxi. What's xx times xi? Um, let me get out my abacus.

Medieval mathematicians wouldn't have any notion of modern symbolic algebra, geometry merged with algebra, etc. They certainly wouldn't have access to calculus, statistics, etc.

 

[Mark Chance]

Too narrow a focus

Too many people seem to be obsessing over the fact that Knowledge skills are trained only. Big deal. In the game world, the most common way that information would be exchanged would not be via Knowledge skills. It would be through Gather Information, which is usable by anyone, trained or not.

As has also been pointed out, skills such as Craft and Profession can be assumed to act as Knowledge skills within a narrow range. The same could be said of probably any skill. For example, if a player wanted his character to try to identify a disease based on its symptoms, I wouldn't require a Knowledge (Pathology) skill check. I'd require a Heal check or a simple Wisdom check for the unskilled.

The d20 skill system isn't perfect (show me a perfect skill system in any game), but it is a good deal more flexible than some of the posts let on.

Few people seem to have noticed that there is also an in-character learning curve to the game. Once my character learns who the king of Fundonia is, I don't need a skill to know who the king is. Once my character has seen a troll in action, there's no need for Knowledge (Monsters) vis-a-vis trolls.

 

[Renaissance Man]

IMC, I take a very liberal stance on what passes for "common knowledge", i.e. what can be verified through an unskilled knowledge check. In general, "common knowledge", IMO, is any question that would be considered "really easy" (DC 10) for a particular area of knowledge.

I also take into consideration that the average person receives most of his information through legend and heresay. In addition to those things which can be verified through an unskilled knowledge check, he also has misconceptions on any number of topics. (The world is flat! Like a pancake!)

As for monster knowledge, I have considered implementing such an area of expertise, but I think I would refine it further, according to monster types. Or perhaps a general monster knowledge category for humanoids, dragons, undead, and other "archetypal" monsters, and specific categories for the "weirder" types: abberations, outsiders, etc. Something like that.

 

[Tonguez]

Re: Re: Information Flow in "typical" D&D

Medieval documents don't use modern "arabic" numerals; they use Roman numerals.
Medieval mathematicians wouldn't have any notion of modern symbolic algebra, geometry merged with algebra,

Of course the Arab peoples during the medieval period DID use Arabic numerals and invented AlGebra which in turn was derived from Indian mathematical notions.

In DnD there is no reason why that Arabic knowledge couldn't be more widespread

As to Communication channels

- Bards, Church/Temple anoouncements, Merchant gossip, Wizard Sendings, Myths (Religious stories) and Legends (Historic stories)

Remember that ALL those fairytales collected by the Grimms et al were originally Common Knowledge shared amongst peasants in a world were dwarfs, witches, Dragons and princesses were real.

As to adjudicating Common Knowledge

I use a mechanic like Spycrafts education check = D20 +int mod + level vs DC commonality of Knowledge 10 Very Common - 40 Specialised/Secret