NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LordEntrails" data-source="post: 7165841" data-attributes="member: 6804070">Actually, it's only in the description of the Poor lifestyle. All of the other lifestyles don't say anything about legal protection. And really, this legal protection is about your social standing. Historically, social standing and perceived wealth are what dictate legal protections. You could argue that is no different today (many people make such arguments that are compelling). But again, this should not be part of the discussion because it is not part of the Comfortable or Moderate lifestyle DEFINITIONS in the PHB. And you have been repeatedly told and given examples that this level can be obtained in days, not weeks or months. And you have failed to comment on my suggestion to say the first two weeks are Moderate, after that it's comfortable.Depends on the society. In Waterdeep? Probably not. In towns like those in the Dessarin Valley? Most likely.Again, food and clothing really isn't the challenge you think it is. At least not in North America forests of today or the last thousand years (look at the historical record of the American Indian tribes such as the Navajo that were nomadic) And there are risks associated with residing in a city. The details of both are left of to the DM to determine for their setting. I could not find reliable statistics, but lots of supporting info, here are scholarly sources on fires in the middle ages;- "<a href="http://ihrrblog.org/2014/06/24/risk-society-in-the-middle-ages/" target="_blank">Fire too was recognised as one of the greatest risks, not surprisingly given the use of flammable materials in construction and the close proximity of houses in medieval towns and cities.</a>"- "<a href="http://www.medievalists.net/2010/11/water-public-hygiene-and-fire-control-in-medieval-towns-facing-collective-goods-problems-while-ensuring-the-quality-of-life/" target="_blank">Finally, as a fire presumably was the highest risk for the physical basis of urban settlements, and damages due to town fires were extremely costly to repair, the omnipresent hazard coming from the use of open fire. had to be handled in order to guarantee urban dwellers a minimum quality of life at least.</a>"- See page 531, it also has an informative description of what living in a town was like. <a href="http://ihrrblog.org/2014/06/24/risk-society-in-the-middle-ages/" target="_blank">http://ihrrblog.org/2014/06/24/risk-society-in-the-middle-ages/</a>- Though this list is by no means comprehensive, you will see that the number of urban fires of note (obviously forest fires that were not significant to major populations are not recorded, though they would be important to a woodsman. But, so are all the fires that happens in cities everyday today that are not reported). <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fires" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fires</a>Neither are fires, legal protection (except for poor) and many other things you bring up. All of these things are setting and DM specific. If a DM wants his woodlands to be full of bandits and his cities safe havens, then they are. But that not specified in RAW.These are good question IMO. And I go back to the 2 week comment. And if you come back to the same town between adventures then it might only take a day or two (or less) to get back to the standard of living.I never missed a meal. And I know you find that surprising, as fiction and entertainment sources always say otherwise. If you're not comfortable with us saying yes, then go with 2 weeks.I disagree. Using the definitions I posted above and why.If their lifestyle during downtime is important to them, then yes they will take that skill. Who cares? It's like trying to push the rogue who tries to maximize his passive perception.If it's a meaningful choice to the characters, then why take that choice away from them or otherwise disadvantage or minimize that choice?Final thing of note, often you talk about living in the woods as if you are isolated. I imagine it more like you are 30-60 minutes out of town (by foot or horse). Sure, you live in the woods, but you can still go into town everyday to hang with your homies.Also, self-sufficient has two definitions according to <a href="http://www.dictionary.com/browse/self-sufficiency" target="_blank">Dictionary.com</a> and <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/self-sufficient" target="_blank">Merriam-Webster</a>; One says take care of oneself without outside aid/assistance. That might infer, but does not require no outside trade or interaction. It usually is used this way when talking about a civilization being self-sufficient (i.e. does it require imports of food etc).Two says having exteme confidence in one's own abilities.</blockquote>

Verification