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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LordEntrails" data-source="post: 7165542" data-attributes="member: 6804070">Let's actually look at the definitions of these lifestyles from the PHBNow let's compare those lifestyles with what we know for someone in the woods with survival proficiency.Poor"going without comforts" Not really, unless you are talking about wifi. But, arguable depending on how you define."simple food" sure, but not a lack of food, and no concern over food stability."threadbare clothing" Nope, furs are rich, worth tens or hundred of gold."unpredictable conditions" excluding weather (which effects those in town too), conditions are very predictable."unpleasant, experience" Not. And it seems Calion has even conceded this point.The described accommodations describe noise, cleanliness and neighbors; none of which are appropriate for the survivalist.Description of the people who live this way do not, to me, describe an adventurer and survivalist.Modest"maintain your equipment" Don't see how this would not apply to the survivalist. The argument about needing about needing metal to maintain your armor is... well, when has anyone ever said they carry 2 pounds of scrap metal so they can fix their armor every night?Room description is pretty ... useless here. It's more about who you live near than what your living conditions are like."don't go hungry or thirsty" absolutely"living conditions are clean" absolutelyTypes of people, seems to fit.Comfortable"nicer clothing" Yep, furs qualify as that (IMO, so do buckskins)"easily maintain" Yep, given that multiple survivalists can be counted as having made their own equipment, then they must have been able to easily maintain it."small cottage" Ok, this might take a couple of weeks to build.People associated with, hard to say, but certainly feasible.Notes- Except for the poor, nothing about legal protections are mentioned. Besides, if the local authority claims sovereignty over the neighboring woods (which they do if they want to use the resources from it, and they always do), then their laws apply there just as well as in the town. Maybe their is not the watchman walking about, but if a crime is committed, then the laws still apply.- Never is food stability mentioned, though again, the survivalist doesn't have this problem, despite what @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=73976" target="_blank">Calion</a> thinks.Conclusions?So, modest and comfortable (as defined by the PHB) both fit. Since the higher "quality" fits, it seems the more appropriate lifestyle. If one argues that the first two weeks a survivalist lived at a Modest lifestyle and then after that a Comfortable lifestyle I would not argue. But, once the cottage is built, you can always return to it after your next adventure.</blockquote>

Verification