Stone Knives and Bear Skins

[Prince Atom]

One era of history I have not seen in an RPG is prehistory or primitive people. I'm not talking barbarians here, but Stone Age or earlier. I'm just going to jump in and detail a few things you'd need for Stone Age playing. Feel free to argue or add things.

1) Terrain. The terrain would definitely not be under control in the region of play. It'd grow wild and woolly, and support lots of wildlife. Food would grow small and uncultured, and finding it would take up a lot of time. I'm thinking any sort of travel would probably require Wilderness Lore and Intuit Direction to be effective. Perhaps these could be class skills all round?

Lots of dark forests, rolling plains, and verdant swamps, all ready to be filled with whatever haints the local tribes can come up with.

2) Population. Low, very low. No settled communities (because that implies farming), and the wandering tribes are each the size of villages or thorps. High-level characters are few and far between. The people subsist on hunting and gathering. They are a superstitious lot, and tend towards running away from the unknown. People who actually seek out the unknown and confront it are seen as crazed, and only rarely heroes.

3) Races. I'd probably have to make up my own races, based on those in the PHB. They'd be primitive, given to bonuses to Spot and Listen, Hide and Move Silently, and a little more feral in appearance. Gender roles would be more pronounced; the males go off and hunt and die, and the females gather and raise the children. Of course, this does not mean the women can't fight or do anything else they want; and goddesses would dominate the religions. Life expectancy would be low, and birth rates much, much higher.

4) Classes. Some of the more sophisticated classes, such as paladin or wizard, would be banned; their existence implies a certain level of social development. Certainly no wizard would exist if there's no written language. No large organization of classes (such as a church that would support clerics) would exist, and those that rely on them would have to make do without. This might take some rewriting. No, I'd say the most common PC classes are Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Rogue, and Sorceror. The others would have to work on their character concepts to fit them in. There's no room for someone who just fights; they'd have to hunt, too, and know how to prepare skins and such. The NPC classes would be thus: Adept, Commoner, Warrior. The tribal power would reside in the chieftain (probably the strongest in combat) and the medicine man or witch. Those who can wield magic are important, because they can influence the world around them.

That's all for now. Please feel free to rip this post apart and put it back together again to see what will work and what won't.

Ta!

TWK

 

[Furn_Darkside]

3) Races. I'd probably have to make up my own races, based on those in the PHB. They'd be primitive, given to bonuses to Spot and Listen, Hide and Move Silently, and a little more feral in appearance. Gender roles would be more pronounced; the males go off and hunt and die, and the females gather and raise the children. Of course, this does not mean the women can't fight or do anything else they want; and goddesses would dominate the religions. Life expectancy would be low, and birth rates much, much higher.

I would disagree on the gender roles- without technology/magic, most races would not equipped to be succesful enough of hunters to feed their people. Throw monsters into the mix, and you probably have a people more interested in hiding and gathering food when they can.

As for the races-

If you use elves, then recall they live a very long life time. It is possible they are already advanced compared to the rest of the "lesser" races, but do their best to stay away from them. The other races might be more scared of elves then of most monsters.

And if that applies to elves- then it applies all the more to Dragons.

FD

 

[Prince Atom]

I would disagree on the gender roles- without technology/magic, most races would not equipped to be succesful enough of hunters to feed their people. Throw monsters into the mix, and you probably have a people more interested in hiding and gathering food when they can.

I never said they were technology-impaired. I said this was a Stone Age setting -- they have stone axes and tools. How d'you think our ancestors got through the Stone Age if that wasn't enough?

And how much more frequent are monsters in this era than in others? I didn't think I'd up the monster mix. If anything, I'd lower it. There would be some low-level animals and beasts, and the tribes would eat whatever they could kill. Wild boars are aggressive, but the tribe would rather face them than a tiger or somesuch. Likewise, they'd much rather take a dire bear than a dire lion.

That's the secret to survival here: eat everything you can, because most things you can't.

Additional:

5) Technology. This is the Stone Age, so the most common tools are made either of edged stones or sharpened bone. The tribes have knowledge of tanning skins and shaping wood and stone, not to mention fire. There is no metal in common use and no pottery. Stone weapons do less damage (one die smaller) and are clumsy and fragile (threat ranges reduced one step, weapons break on a natural 1). Bronze weapons do exist, but they are rare (they replace mithril and adamantine on the weapons lists in the DMG) and their creation, a secret. Muscle power is the order of the day, although slings and short bows do exist.

TWK
"Owww -- pointy!!"

 

[loxmyth]

Hmmm... my own thoughts:

I'd say the most common PC classes are Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Rogue, and Sorceror. The others would have to work on their character concepts to fit them in. There's no room for someone who just fights; they'd have to hunt, too, and know how to prepare skins and such. The NPC classes would be thus: Adept, Commoner, Warrior.

Not really sure I understand this reasoning. Why would there be Warriors but no Fighters? Of course your fighters wouldn't be only dedicated to fighting ONLY other humanoids to the exclusion of all else, but fighting off aggressors would definitely make sense, IMO. I'd think you'd need to rework the Bard more than the fighter to fit the concept of the world, since some of it's conventions imply social development to me.

 

[Crazz]

Stone Age Accuracy

While I love your idea for a roleplaying game based on the early history of man, your knowledge of the Stone Age is inconsistent.

First off, let the terrain be anything you want, just don't make it too extreme. Early man would have been devastated and destroyed by a consistently harsh climate. Temperate and moderate is the key.

Second, the stone age did in fact have settled communities, especially in the late Mesolithic and in the Neolithic Eras. The earliest communities existed in very moderate climates that had an abundance of grains available for consumption. A community of this sort would have consisted of mud brick homes. The wild varieties of say, wheat and barely, would be supplemented with the meat from animals.

Third, while I am thinking of it, tanning was beyond the knowledge of this time period. If you include it, its not accurate.

Fourth, birth rates wouldn't be higher. Pregnancy rates might, but birth rates would most likely be low. Depending on what you want to set the life expectancy at, a women could have 10-20 years of child bearing potential. Giving a very rough approximation, the average women might become pregnant about 20 times during her life, and actually deliver 5 kids. Of those 5, having more than 1 survive childhood is a definite boon for a tribe and the woman would be cherished as fertile and possibly blessed.

Fifth, you talk about classes, and I think that you could include all classes if you are creative enough and willing to scale down some classes. While Stone Age man did not have a written alphabet, he did have pictograms. This could serve as the rudiments for wizard spells, as people who could manipulate the pictures into meaning would be among the smartest and brightest among their kind. Now, taking into consideration that Stone Age man posses some type of culture (painting, writing [pictures], and religious beliefs, the ability to have a paladin is possible. The could be the Holy warrior of the tribe or community's pagan/nature religion, battling the other tribes who have different gods or goddesses that are vying for the worshipping power that a new tribe would offer. (This could also be a hook for a early version of a Deity

Last, because it is late, don't discredit their technology. While Stone Age man did not ever have metal tools or weapons, they did have pottery (During the Neolithic Era), and made effective and durable tools out of bone, ivory, and stone. They eventually learned to harden them by fire and polishing them. The stone tools and such were still less durable than metal, but they were more than sufficient. Also, some of the types of tools they had included awls, needles, wedges, drills, saws, and chisels.

That's all, I am tired. But if you want more accuracy or the like, drop me a line and I will be glad to help you out.


Crazz

 

[alsih2o]

I never said they were technology-impaired.

no pottery.

no pottery!!?!?!??? dude, go back and check! pottery was around when people were still discovering some of the best ways to shape certain rocks to break each other!.....gotta have pots!

as for the rest, don't forget the slave-gathering notions of such folk...

oh, and one more time-GOTTA HAVE POTS! even most of the earthmother figures were made of ceramic...pottery came before decent shelter in most societies....holler at me if oyu need help here

 

[Crazz]

as for the rest, don't forget the slave-gathering notions of such folk...

oh, and one more time-GOTTA HAVE POTS! even most of the earthmother figures were made of ceramic...pottery came before decent shelter in most societies....holler at me if oyu need help here

Sorry to refute this, but there is absolutely no proof that stone age man kept slaves or understood slavery. While Stone Age people developed distinctive cultures, they had not yet developed any civilizations. In order for slavery to exist you would need some kind of class structure to support the notion of slaves. This did not exist during the Stone Age.

Also, the Earth Mother figurines that you talk about were most certainly not made out of ceramic. Most were made from bone, stone, wood, or ivory. Ceramics were more advanced than the average Stone Age artisan could accomplish.

Don't confuse making clay pots with ceramics. Early people simply found clay, usually along side riverbeds or lakes. Shaping the clay into bowls or pots wasn't hard. From there, it was just a matter of having them dry in the sun or near a fire.

Hope this helps.


Crazz

 

[alsih2o]

Sorry to refute this, but there is absolutely no proof that stone age man kept slaves or understood slavery. ...
Also, the Earth Mother figurines that you talk about were most certainly not made out of ceramic. Most were made from bone, stone, wood, or ivory. Ceramics were more advanced than the average Stone Age artisan could accomplish.

Don't confuse making clay pots with ceramics. Early people simply found clay, usually along side riverbeds or lakes. Shaping the clay into bowls or pots wasn't hard. From there, it was just a matter of having them dry in the sun or near a fire.



Crazz

firsat of all, the evidence i have seen is that most of the gentic diversity of early men was from one guy stealing a lady or girl from another camp, if you don't wanna call that slavery fine, but i do.

second as a potter, and art historian, you are WAY off base here. "don't confuse making clay pots with ceramics"??? you are gonna have to come up with some funky definitions of cermaics here...at least one not used in the ceramics field. shaped clay dried or hardened is ceramics!

and after a quick run of several books on neolithic and prehistoric art i find 2 "venuses" made of stone, and nearly 80 listed as "ceramic"....

 

[Darraketh]

I like the idea of adventuring in the stone age. Do you have any plot ideas? What would a typical adventure consist of? You may want to consider having a more advanced race, that died out, precede the arrival of man. That way you can still have megolithic structures to adventure in and advanced technology to find.

Here are some interesting dates to help put things in perspective.
(Of course you have the power to make anything happen at anytime you choose.)

All dates BC of course.

2,400,000 Date of the oldest known stone tools, from Hadar, Ethiopia.

1,000,000 Beginning of the Pliestocene (ice age).

400,000 Oldest known surviving wooden tool, a spear (found in Shöningen, Germany).

300,000 Oldest known structure, a hut at Terra Amata, France.

135,000 Date of the earliest anatomically modern human fossils, Omo, Ethiopia.

100,000 Modern humans begin their migration out of Africa.

45,000 Date of the oldest know musical instrument, a flute found in North Africa.

32,000-14,000 Period of cave art traditions in Europe.

28,000 The last of the Neanderthals become extinct.

12,000 Joman hunter-gathers make the first pottery in Japan.

11,000 Dogs become the first domesticated animal.

10,000 Beginnings of Agriculture in the Middle East.

9000 Wild sheep flocks are managed in the Zagros mountains, Iraq.

9000-8000 Cultivation of wild grains in the Fertile Crescent.

8000 End of the last glaciation.

8000-7700 Wheat and barley are domesticated in the Fertile Crescent.

6500 Rice cultivation in the Yangtze valley.

6200 Copper smelting and textile manufacture in Chatal Huyuk (Turkey).

6000 Wheat, barley and sheep farming begins in Egypt. The first cattle are domesticated in the Middle East. Farming spreads across southern Europe.

3800 Bronze casting techniques employed for the first time in the Middle East.

3400 Earliest writing appears in Uruk (Iraq). City-states emerge in Sumeria.


I hope this helps. Please keep us posted as to how you develop your idea.

--
source ISBN 1-58663-238-8
Check it out, I haven't finished reading it yet but I am enjoying it.

 

[Crazz]

firsat of all, the evidence i have seen is that most of the gentic diversity of early men was from one guy stealing a lady or girl from another camp, if you don't wanna call that slavery fine, but i do.

second as a potter, and art historian, you are WAY off base here. "don't confuse making clay pots with ceramics"??? you are gonna have to come up with some funky definitions of cermaics here...at least one not used in the ceramics field. shaped clay dried or hardened is ceramics!

and after a quick run of several books on neolithic and prehistoric art i find 2 "venuses" made of stone, and nearly 80 listed as "ceramic"....

First off, there is no way that anyone can genetically prove that different DNA in a burial site is the result of "stealing" a lady from another camp. Even if that could be proven, it's still not slavery. You can't prove the condition of their life afterwards. While our current standards may view such behavior as savage and wrong, you can't give the behavior of Stone Age people equal footing with ours because too many factors make each unique.

Second, when you talk about ceramics, I pictured someone spinning clay and then firing up a kiln to do some glazing. I am far from being a potter, but I mistook you to mean that pre Cro-Magnon people were firing up kilns. My mistake.

You made a quick run on several books on Neolithic and prehistoric art? How? What were the actual dates of these figures? What books did you "run" through? I am just curious because I didn't realize that there was a great call for books solely dedicated on the subject neolithic and prehistoric art. I am just curious.


Crazz