Science in Dungeons and Dragons

[Lord Zack]

I've been considering how to represent scientific knowledge in Dungeons and Dragons. I feel that characters aught to be able to be knowledgeable in scientific areas, since it would make sense for, say a wizard to have knowledge of mathematics, physics and the like. Further I have Tinker Gnomes, who must know of certain scientific principles so they can create technology that applies those principles. So how do I represent this?

The obvious choice is to create Knowledge skills to represent this. I've checked the d20 Modern SRD which has:

Behavioral Sciences
Earth and Life Sciences
Physical Sciences
Technology

The thing is some of these overlap with existing categories. Earth and Life Sciences probably would work as just an expansion of Nature. Physical Sciences has engineering as a category. I don't imagine a dwarven architect necessarily being knowledgeable about astronomy, or chemistry. Another thing is that astronomy doesn't work the same way in my campaign. Maybe physical sciences would be part of arcana?

So what do you think?

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

I'd redirect this back to the ideas behind philosophies and alchemy as a semi-religious institution, as opposed to outright science. The sciences were borne directly from philosophy, and had a very "occultish feel".

And in fact, a Dwarf may have a very solid understanding of proto-chemistry (alchemy), since atypically they are natural metallurgists. However, I don't know whether you're going for typical tropes in your game or not.

 

[Simm]

The problem with adding knowledge skills to the game is that it dilutes the value of each skill and makes it harder for a character to actually know a useful amount of information. You probably want to try to keep the number of knowledge skills the same (or even reduce them, who takes geography?),but expand or redefine the fields they cover.

I would take this in one of two directions. Either A, add no skills and just figure each field of knowledge you want to add into the current skill into which it fits best, or B, completely rework the knowledge skills keeping the total number of skills about the same.

Try compressing religion and the planes, geography and nature, local or nobility and history. Then fold engineering into a new technology skill, and scatter the functions of dungeoneering across other skills. That would give you about three extra knowledge skills you could add to the game.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

Using backgrounds may even fit the bill better, so they can suppliment the 4E skill system.

 

[Lord Zack]

I use Pathfinder.

Yeah, actually reducing the number of knowledge skills might be a good idea. Though I do want to have a knowledge (tactics) skill as well.

I use mostly traditional Dungeons and Dragons (pre-4e) tropes. I do want to have characters that can use the engineering skills of the gnomes, which will likely be similar to engineering in World of Warcraft, in fact i am considering using the system from World of Warcraft d20.

 

[Jack7]

I'd redirect this back to the ideas behind philosophies and alchemy as a semi-religious institution, as opposed to outright science. The sciences were borne directly from philosophy, and had a very "occultish feel".

And in fact, a Dwarf may have a very solid understanding of proto-chemistry (alchemy), since atypically they are natural metallurgists. However, I don't know whether you're going for typical tropes in your game or not.

Real Good advice. I think Simm also gave good advice.

The way I've addressed the problem LZ is that in my setting the Wizard, who is human, is actually a proto-scientist. The Mage is as well, just that they address different scientific interests.

For instance the Wizard is primarily a physical and natural proto-scientist, physics, botany, biology, etc. The Mage is primarily a psychologist, occultist, behaviorist, medical doctor, etc. Both classes can do illusions, one based on props and physics, the other based on mentalism, some psychic capabilities, and hypnotism. Both classes are good at alchemy and chemistry.

The non-humans in my setting have classes that are like the traditional Wizard class. And I've noticed interest in both magic and science mixing and being in opposition to one another for awhile now. Merlin and Mr. Wizard.
But you could easily adopt proto-science into your existing classes in a wide range of ways.

One of the supplements, I can't remember which one, had a class called the Factotum. He was a sort of Jack of All Trades but also good at collating and incorporating a wide range of knowledge skills and backgrounds. He was a Renaissance Man, which is how I envision a human Wizard anyways, the Wizard being a Wise Man and a "Whiz". I liked the Factotum so much that I incorporated many of the class elements, with some modifications, into both the human Wizard and the human Mage.

You might find it valuable as an idea source.

 

[phloog]

How I would handle it (and obviously this makes it the only correct way):

I would definitely avoid adding knowledge skills, and I would tend to break the fairly strict rule in 3e that says "NPCs/Monsters work like PCs".

For NPCs, other non-PC races, monsters, etc. I would just give them situational/circumstance bonuses in the areas of interest. So rather than add a skill called Kn:Botany, I would do something like:

Floral Elves have 5 ranks in Kn:Nature, with a +4 racial bonus to checks dealing with plants.

For PCs, if you really have someone who wants to be an expert on Botany, I would take this potentially two ways:

1) Variant of older Shadowrun specialization rule -- The character takes 5 ranks in Kn: Nature, but then elects to only effectively have 4 ranks in all Kn:Nature, but 6 ranks in rolls dealing with Botany. In this case, I would not charge any extra for this, unless the player specializes in something that is universally great. I would also allow them to break the Level + 3 rule in their one area of specialization. you could potentially allow them to take TWO off the general to add two to the specialization.

2) Add specialization feats. As a variant of Skill Focus: <<SKILL>>, have a category called Focused Study: <<KNOWLEDGE SKILL>>. The prerequisites might simply be ranks in the Knowledge under consideration. I'd have a hard time determining the bonus though...it would have to be far better than the general Skill Focus, and all the caveats above would apply.

 

[phloog]

Forgot to cover multiple specializations...I could see someone wanting to take bonuses in Insects, Echinoderms, and Gastropods...in those cases, since the sub-categories are soooo specific, I might be tempted to allow them to add 2 to each of these in return for a -2 to the general.

Okay...one last thought....this takes more paperwork...but why not allow each character to select one area of specialization for free for each rank in any Knowledge skill, granting a +1 to a single specific category? Allow them to put their +1 in the same category multiple times (perhaps limited to no more than half their ranks?).

So I take Knowledge: Nature with four ranks and have Int +2, I have +6 in general checks, and split my free points between Botany and Marine Biology, so for those two I get +8.

The biggest issue is going to be: what is too big/small to be an area of specialization? What if my character takes Zoology and you take Barn Owls?

 

[Ydars]

Most of the sciences, at least as we think about them, did not really exist in the medieval world. The problem with all the above replies is that they are coming at science from a modern perspective. For example, talkig about different types of molluscs. Well until Linnaeus (1700s), we did not really have any kind of good classification of animals into real groups and the ideas about things like species were not understood at all well. Science, in the medieval world was so bound up with religion and mysticism as to be indistinguishable from magic.

Science in medieval times revolved around concepts that we would find very alien. They searched for things like;

Fluidium vivarum (or life substances) or forces that separate living material from that which was inorganic or had never lived. This was almost a search for God in materials via Alchemy.

Elixir vitae (potion of eternal life), bound up with the discovery of the life substance.

Philosophers stone; a vital principle that would allow transmutation of one material into another. This idea came from experiments with things like Cinnabar (mercury sulphide) which is a rusty brown powder because when you heat this substance it decays into mercury metal. Mercury was thought to be Dragon's semen according to the Chinese estoerics who discovered it and there were whole layers of superstition surrounding this.

Metallurgy was also hedged around with mystical symbolism; how metal was pulled out of ore via smelting. The word Kobold comes from the idea that mischevious underground spirits cursed miners by spoling their ore when in fact the ore actually contained another metal that was spoliing the smelting process; we now call it Cobalt, but you can see where its name came from.

An intrinsic part of medieval sciences was the belief that the past and the future and the nature of things was bound up and linked with their appearance. So we have things like the Doctrine of signatures in herbalism, where plants that look like certain parts of the human body have mystical powers to heal disorders of that organ.

This is also why doctors, even in the 1700s, would chart horoscopes before treating patients because they believed in astrology and the signs and portents that could be gleaned from a study of the stars.

Similarly, medicine was centered around the idea of 4 humours; blood, phlegm, black bile and yellow bile. They believed that an imbalance in the humours could cause disease, as could poisonous miasmas (clouds of toxin or disease). This is why they used to bleed people, to rebalance the humours.

So if I were making up a way of introducing science into D&D, I would try and use this perspective. I do not think any of the sciences were well developed enough to be studied in isolation. Instead, the knowledges should be grouped into the way they were studied at the time during the study for a degree (the examples below are from Oxford);

The Trivium; logic, grammar and rhetoric

The Quadrivium; maths, astrology, music, science.

That way you would need only two skills to understand the nature of the physical world. What you could do with them would be quite limited because most of the theories of the time were only descriptive (they seemed to explain why things were the way they were) not predictive (modern theories allow us to make predictions about the future behaviour of any system at study and hence are useful).

 

[Jack7]

I agree that in a medieval fantasy setting you're not really gonna have science Ydars, but then again that's why I mentioned proto-scientists, rather than scientists.

And I think what you said mostly reflects what Moniker said.

I think the Trivium would be a good way to approach looking at certain matters like this. I've incorporated rhetorical skill and musical skill into the Bard class in a much more classical way.

Then again I think you also have to consider the atypical genius type throughout history, like Archimedes and Heron and Hippocrates and Pythagoras and Leonardo, who while not scientists of today (modern science really requires a worldview, a technological base, and a sort of societal popularization of itself to be considered a "separate thing") were certainly ancient scientists and could easily have been called Wizards.

People like that have always been proto-scientists if not outright scientists, even if they were "out of their time." And most were Renaissance men as well.