What is Worldbreaking but not Gamebreaking?

[shatterspike1]

When I say this, I mean "What is it that isn't actually overpowered, but still can screw the campaign world?"

When I think "Gamebreaking", I think of an optimized wizard. Assuming they have respect for their playgroup, they won't hog the spotlight, though. When I think worldbreaking, I'm thinking more along the lines of the Frenzied Berserker. Not actually overpowered, but if a frenzy goes wrong, can kill his entire party or important NPCs just due to the way it works. Something that smashes the campaign without being technically overpowered.

Are there any other examples of something like this?

[00dlez]

A botched Teleportation spell can inadvertantly kill people/parties.

My real question, though, is why do you want to know this info ... :annoyed:

[eggs]

Create spring is a level 2 spell that creates an spring with endless water anywhere, with an Instantaneous permanent duration. It pretty much defines this concept for me:
Spend a couple weeks to permanently irrigate a desert, establish a hostile environment as habitable, power mills, whatever.

Not sure if it fits in with the Frenzied Berserker example, but it has deep world-altering changes down.

[laeZ1]

It really depends on your campaign world and your DM style. If my players had a frenzied berserker in their party, and that frenzied berserker killed a party member in combat, my party would react the same way whether it was an NPC or a PC. Things like that can create plot.

The create springs thing can be worldbreaking, but I'd only consider it worldbreaking if a main campaign plot point was beaten by it. But ultimately, a crafty DM could work with it (the new climate made the natural wildlife get big and scary, or some desert spirit could claim that the party is killing it, and want them to stop, or try to attack them.)


Spells and abilities I consider gamebreaking:
Vactic (sp) gaze. A feat, I believe it's out of PHB2. Prereqs are that you have access to detect magic. After taking this feat, you always get to see magic (unless you wish to temporarily turn off the feat). You also can make a static check... sense motive, I think. The DC isn't too tough. After making the check, they get to see all of the prepared spells of the casters highest level, or, if they don't prepare spells, all of the spells of the highest level the caster can muster.

Aside from that, most divination spells provide easy plot solutions, when coupled with a smart player.

[The-Mage-King]

DC is 10+CL,and it only allows you to know the highest level of spells they can cast, not they have for those slots.


Not entirely world breaking, IMO, since you can only get it at level 9+.

[limejuicepowder]

I don't have much experience with it, but the people I play with claim teleport is world-breaking. They favor a horror/suspense type campaign though, and being able to make a quick getaway virtually at will does kind of screw with that plot setting.

I'm more or less of the opinion that the resurrection line is world-breaking. As written and with no additional restrictions, death is but a temporary set back to any party with a cleric of 7th level (not high, in other words). Similarly, any well-to-do NPC is also shielded from non-natural death. This has a definite (negative) impact on pretty much any setting that isn't DBZ.

The unlimited healing given by warshaper or even touch of healing can also cause some problems in the wrong game (a survival type, for example).

[nedz]

There are several spells which are challenge breaking, in that they trivialise some encounters.

Worldbreaking would be things like resetting traps of Create Food which make agriculture a luxury pursuit - rather than a survival necessity, but that's little different to modern technology in this regard. Infinite wealth tricks fit here also.

Gamebreaking would be things like balance issues, where you end up with a party of Angel Summoners and BMX Bandits. Here the DM cannot create meaningful encounters.

[Ravens_cry]

Worldbreaking is, to me, when something abuses mechanics as mechanics in a way that really makes no sense from an in-world perspective. For example, bucket healing. Bringing people up to -1 by drowning them is an excellent example. Being a RAW junkie in general is against my philosophy as a player.

[HunterOfJello]

Worldbreaking actions lead to the creation of a Tippyverse. Gamebreaking leads to automatic DM caveats.

[Urpriest]

See, I don't think that's the distinction the OP is making. If you read the OP, it sounds like "Worldbreaking" is a misnomer, and that what's really being discussed is campaign-breaking. These rarely coincide: a party can run around messing with the world for an entire campaign, heck there are video games based on that premise, and on the flipside something like a frenzied berserker won't break the game world, since any NPC they kill inadvertently could just as easily be killed intentionally by someone else.

[Gamer Girl]

When I say this, I mean "What is it that isn't actually overpowered, but still can screw the campaign world?"

Well, anything can be 'overpowered' if used the 'wrong' way to break a world. You could break a world with charm person.


And most worldbreaking comes from the DM's that run low magic/low fantasy games. When everuone in the world is a poor dirt farmer, even the king, then you can break the world with charm person.

[sonofzeal]

Teleport is not "overpowered", but it can wreck a lot of things and definitely has story-breaking potential. As can the Changeling race or even a simple Hat of Disguise. Can you imagine trying to run a secure business or government in a world where anyone could look like anything they want to, or BE anywhere they want to?

[erikun]

Something that smashes the campaign without being technically overpowered.

Are there any other examples of something like this?
The first big problem is being able to find out information you shouldn't know. Divination is a problem, especially spells where you can ask pointed questions and will get a correct answer 90% of the time. Knowledge skills and Bardic Knowledge can be a problem as well, as it can be difficult to accept a character failing a 50+ knowledge roll while the old guy in the bar still has the information you need.

Teleportation can be another big problem, between getting to a needed location instantly ("scry and die") to getting out of any situation to just bringing whoever you want wherever you want whenever you want to.

Minionmancy can be an issue, either from Animate Dead or Diplomacy, in producing large groups of people with (more importantly) large numbers of actions. If you don't think this is a problem, imagine 1000 people trying to activate blindly a wand at a target; even if only a 5% chance of success, we're still talking large numbers of successes. "Diplomancy" (optimizing Diplomacy checks) can have a similar result, thanks to forcing anyone it is used on to become friendly and helpful.

[Blisstake]

Minionmancy can be an issue, either from Animate Dead or Diplomacy, in producing large groups of people with (more importantly) large numbers of actions. If you don't think this is a problem, imagine 1000 people trying to activate blindly a wand at a target; even if only a 5% chance of success, we're still talking large numbers of successes. "Diplomancy" (optimizing Diplomacy checks) can have a similar result, thanks to forcing anyone it is used on to become friendly and helpful.

Imagine the price of 1,000 wands, or trying to get that many people within line of sight of a single target :smalleek:

[lsfreak]

See, I don't think that's the distinction the OP is making. If you read the OP, it sounds like "Worldbreaking" is a misnomer, and that what's really being discussed is campaign-breaking. These rarely coincide: a party can run around messing with the world for an entire campaign, heck there are video games based on that premise, and on the flipside something like a frenzied berserker won't break the game world, since any NPC they kill inadvertently could just as easily be killed intentionally by someone else.
Yea, there's three levels of broken.

Gamebreaking means that the campaign cannot continue on in the fashion the group is used to playing in, because a character has too many ways of circumventing encounters, ending them entirely, trivializing BBEG fights, near-omniscience, etc. Multiple contingencies, chaingating, making the WBL tables go cry in a corner, etc. Theoretical Optimization goes here.

Campaign-breaking things avoid gamebreaking, but are still things that can break a given campaign premise. Unexpected use of things like suggestion, fly, and teleport in general may well unexpectedly break a campaign, without actually being broken. Practical optimization goes here.

Worldbreaking are things that create logical inconsistencies with how the world is set up. Tippyverse is the most well-known example, relying primarily on teleportation to break the economics and organization of a world, but others like water-producing spells, permanencied walls of fires, and spells that let you literally talk to god can break the status quo of a typical campaign world, when followed through to a logical conclusion. These result as a problem of D&D being a rules-heavy, combat-oriented game, where the rules weren't thought through for much (or anything) other than this.

[Coidzor]

Knowledge skills and Bardic Knowledge can be a problem as well, as it can be difficult to accept a character failing a 50+ knowledge roll while the old guy in the bar still has the information you need.

On the other hand, there's something seriously wrong with the campaign design in that kind of situation.

[Slipperychicken]

On the other hand, there's something seriously wrong with the campaign design in that kind of situation.

Personally, I've come to accept that any Knowledge check above 30 is equivalent to asking the DM in real life.

If he doesn't know, your character doesn't either.
If he wants to tell you, he will.
If he doesn't want to tell you, or it's important to the plot that you don't know, he won't.


World-Breaking
It's sad how pretty much every ailment in D&D 3.5 can be taken care of with 3rd level Cleric spells, and how much tension this removes from the game when adequately thought-through. So many character concepts simply become obsolete when these spells are in the setting. Why do drunkards and crackheads exist when every 5th level Cleric can cast Remove Addiction? Why is insanity a problem with Heart's Ease in play? Why is anyone still blind? It's not like advanced medical technology, every damn Cleric 5th level and higher can cast these spells for free. Multiple times every day if they want to. And their religions often compel them to aid the sick/wounded/etc, so you don't even have apathy as an excuse like you do for Wizards.

Character is crippled? Cured.
Blindness? Removed.
Insanity? Cured.
Addiciton? Drunks? Remove Addiction.
Seeking redemption? Atonement, maybe an xp cost.
PTSD? Yep. There's a spell for that.

[Spuddles]

To answer your question, slipperychicken, look at the number of divine casters in a population, given DMG numbers. It's like 4%. And look at how many gods there. Half of all divine casters will probably be evil. They aren't going to cure anything, not unless there's payment. Then neutral ones want payment. You think the town drunk can afford a remove anything?

Then think about the rate at which disease and crippling occur naturally. You think a relative handful of clerics can cure that? They won't be able to travel fast enough from population center to the next. And then there's all those *******s out there using contagion....

[Endarire]

What breaks a world?

That depends on your world.

The rules imply that a Tippyverse should exist in some fashion, because a Tippyverse takes the rules to their logical extreme. If you're going for something that isn't 'Magitech,' like Medieval Europe with Magic, expect a world more broken.

[deuxhero]

Create spring is a level 2 spell that creates an spring with endless water anywhere, with an Instantaneous permanent duration.

Source of this spell?

[demigodus]

To answer your question, slipperychicken, look at the number of divine casters in a population, given DMG numbers. It's like 4%. And look at how many gods there. Half of all divine casters will probably be evil. They aren't going to cure anything, not unless there's payment. Then neutral ones want payment. You think the town drunk can afford a remove anything?

Then think about the rate at which disease and crippling occur naturally. You think a relative handful of clerics can cure that? They won't be able to travel fast enough from population center to the next. And then there's all those *******s out there using contagion....

Lets say 1/4 of clerics (1% of population) are good. Now lets say only half of those are the "help others for free" type of good. Don't have DMG up right now, so lets say only a half of THOSE can cast those spells.

That leaves you with 1 cleric for every 400 people, that is freely helping them. He can fix multiple of those issues per day. If every person, on average, caught 1 of those ailments every year (which is NO WHERE NEAR realistic unless you have people actively finding and crippling/blinding innocents for ****s and giggles), those clerics would still be able to take care of all of them.

About the only place where such problems could exist would be small hamlets or such where clerics actively fixing people aren't guaranteed to live.


Source of this spell?

Oriental Adventure, makes 6 gallons of water per hour.

So, you would need at least tens of thousands before you can consider eliminating a desert in a life time? I don't know, it is too late for me to do the math right now. But that rate isn't exactly desert ending...

[Alienist]

Worldbreaking actions lead to the creation of a Tippyverse. Gamebreaking leads to automatic DM caveats.

This.

In order of descending vileness:
Resetting magic traps.
Custom magic items.
Anything that breaks the economy. (Wall of salt etc)

I maintain that high level wizards would not in fact spend all their xp making permanent teleportation circles, the proposed benefit is specious (win at commerce??? Why bother, since I already did that, 10 levels earlier, and with a much larger profit)


----

As for the proportion of the population that is a divine caster....

based on published numbers only 20% of population have class levels, half of them pc levels and half npc levels. I'm not sure how many npc classes there are (there is another one, the magewright in Eberron). But of the total population maybe 2% will have at least one level of adept. A much smaller percentage will have cleric levels.

Although that then raises the question of whether the distribution is uniform or not. For instance, how many other classes are based off wisdom? If the distribution is skewed towards 'aptitude' then you might say that at least 50% of the eligible portion of the population (those with highest stat wisdom) will probably be clerics. Call it 1% of the total population. Some smaller portion of that 1% is good/evil. Some much smaller portion of that fraction of 1% is actually motivated to get out there and mess with the world instead of staying home and engaging in petty villainy/good deeds.

[Alienist]

That leaves you with 1 cleric for every 400 people, that is freely helping them. He can fix multiple of those issues per day. If every person, on average, caught 1 of those ailments every year (which is NO WHERE NEAR realistic unless you have people actively finding and crippling/blinding innocents for ****s and giggles), those clerics would still be able to take care of all of them.

About the only place where such problems could exist would be small hamlets or such where clerics actively fixing people aren't guaranteed to live.


In at least one earlier version of D&D spellcaster gained xp everytime they cast a spell 'meaningfully' (e.g. not just using fireballs to swat mosquitoes). A cleric looking after a small hamlet under that scheme could hit level 6 inside of about a month simply with their normal allotment of healing and curative spells.

What's worse is that because you get spells bigger and faster than the xp cost rises your levelling accelerates the higher you go.

[2xMachina]

To answer your question, slipperychicken, look at the number of divine casters in a population, given DMG numbers. It's like 4%. And look at how many gods there. Half of all divine casters will probably be evil. They aren't going to cure anything, not unless there's payment. Then neutral ones want payment. You think the town drunk can afford a remove anything?

Then think about the rate at which disease and crippling occur naturally. You think a relative handful of clerics can cure that? They won't be able to travel fast enough from population center to the next. And then there's all those *******s out there using contagion....

Eh, they could give it for "free", in exchange for being a worshipper of God X. Attend 1 year of temple of God X, get 1 free healing spell of your choice.

[Slipperychicken]

To answer your question, slipperychicken, look at the number of divine casters in a population, given DMG numbers. It's like 4%. And look at how many gods there. Half of all divine casters will probably be evil. They aren't going to cure anything, not unless there's payment. Then neutral ones want payment. You think the town drunk can afford a remove anything?

Then think about the rate at which disease and crippling occur naturally. You think a relative handful of clerics can cure that? They won't be able to travel fast enough from population center to the next. And then there's all those *******s out there using contagion....

The US has roughly 1 doctor for every ~414 people. Basically, you're quadrupling the number of medical professionals (assuming 1% Cleric figure is right. If 1/400 figure is right, it's the same number. If 4% figure it's right, more like.. a lot more.. 16 times as many?), and turning every one into cost-free, instant-healing machines fueled by God.

If that doesn't cure damn near every disease in the world, I don't know what would.

(Also, if you don't at least heal your congregation for free or near-free, especially when it costs you nothing, you're a stinking pile of **** who deserves to rot in hell. Or whatever equivalent your setting has.) For payment, perhaps the church is supported by the state (free land, upkeep, wages, food, tax-exemption, etc.) and given the standard 10% tithe by citizens in exchange for free access to their services.

[irbaboon]

any SoD that affects an area when cast by a dm can wreck things. lol prime example but different situations. was playing a gladiator campaign my party defeated the challenge. the DM said roll a preform to see how the crowd reacts
4 of the 5 players rolled a nat 1 on their preform check. imagine if that had been a save for an SoD.

[Coidzor]

Personally, I've come to accept that any Knowledge check above 30 is equivalent to asking the DM in real life.

If he doesn't know, your character doesn't either.
If he wants to tell you, he will.
If he doesn't want to tell you, or it's important to the plot that you don't know, he won't.

And still relying on the tired old cliche of an old man at the bar is somehow magically acceptable.

[Slipperychicken]

And still relying on the tired old cliche of an old man at the bar is somehow magically acceptable.

It's more that I've resigned to the fact that my DMs thusfar totally suck and will resort to any length of dishonesty, shenanigans, or fiat to get the story they want.

I can throw rules at them all day, but they just bat it aside and say "It happens because I'm the DM and I do what I want".

[Knaight]

To answer your question, slipperychicken, look at the number of divine casters in a population, given DMG numbers. It's like 4%. And look at how many gods there. Half of all divine casters will probably be evil. They aren't going to cure anything, not unless there's payment. Then neutral ones want payment. You think the town drunk can afford a remove anything?


Approximately .03% of the U.S. population are general practitioners, and only .3% are doctors at all. D&D has this beat with divine casters by an order of magnitude, and moreover divine casting is far less resource and time intensive. A surgery to save someone who is gradually dying takes hours, in D&D it takes 6 seconds and one spell. Therapies for addiction, PTSD, and other psychiatric disorders take years, and even then success rates are not great, and success is management of said psychiatric disorder, not removal of it. In D&D? Six seconds, one spell. Somehow, I suspect things are going to be much, much cheaper in D&D world.

This is without getting into stuff that D&D has that we simply don't have an equivalent for. Modern prostheses can be fairly impressive, particularly the high end stuff that is currently being developed, but none of it is as generally good as simply reattaching a limb*, and we generally can't do that. If the limb has been gone for some time, we can't do that as all. In D&D? Six seconds, one spell. Then, of course, there's resurrection, but that at least is expensive in D&D.

Moreover, every single cleric with access to one of the reasonably high level healing spells has access to every single healing spell at that level or lower. The guy who can reattach limbs can also cure addiction, cure PTSD, bring someone to full health from the brink of death in an instant, restore lost senses, and instantly cure any poison or disease.

*There are some specialized prostheses better at some very specific tasks, but that's about it.

[Slipperychicken]

This is without getting into stuff that D&D has that we simply don't have an equivalent for. Modern prostheses can be fairly impressive, particularly the high end stuff that is currently being developed, but none of it is as generally good as simply reattaching a limb*, and we generally can't do that. If the limb has been gone for some time, we can't do that as all. In D&D? Six seconds, one spell. Then, of course, there's resurrection, but that at least is expensive in D&D.

That actually reminds me of my idea of how D&D-world functions at all; almost every mortal ailment is cured by magic, so the only real impediment to humanoid civilization is the countless monsters that can effortlessly depopulate villages. The lack of safety/stability is why civilization is stuck in Medieval Stasis. It also explains why "adventuring" is so popular, and why adventurers are paid so handsomely: They're doing the one job which low-level magic can't do.

[Gamer Girl]

World-Breaking
It's sad how pretty much every ailment in D&D 3.5 can be taken care of with 3rd level Cleric spells, and how much tension this removes from the game when adequately thought-through. So many character concepts simply become obsolete when these spells are in the setting. Why do drunkards and crackheads exist when every 5th level Cleric can cast Remove Addiction? Why is insanity a problem with Heart's Ease in play? Why is anyone still blind? It's not like advanced medical technology, every damn Cleric 5th level and higher can cast these spells for free. Multiple times every day if they want to. And their religions often compel them to aid the sick/wounded/etc, so you don't even have apathy as an excuse like you do for Wizards.


This is only true if your playing an Optimized game, and all ready bending the rules. The problem is everyone things that normal D&D is automatically optimized.

In a normal, basic game world..that is not optimized..all 5th level clerics can't cast every spell to cure all. And the why is easy enough: they don't have high enough wisdom scores. Now an optimized player will absolutely demand that they have a cleric with at least an 18 in wisdom or ''they can't have fun''. But that is not true of every single cleric in the world. It's not like every single cleric in the world has a minimum wisdom of 18 and maybe as high as 20. In fact, there will be more low wisdom clerics then high wisdom clerics.

Remember that 10/11 is average for an ability score. So that means that a lot of clerics have wisdoms of 10/11. And guess what: if your a 5th level cleric with a wisdom of 11, then you get no second and third level spells! And that is just the average clerics , as some will be below average too.

And this applies to wizards too. You can be a 10th level wizard with an intelligence of 12 and not have higher level spells.

And don't forget the evil clerics that cause bad things, plus all the monsters.

And for a final bit of common sense: 3X is very, very, very whitewashed and Disney safe. So 'nothing bad' happens to all the people, by default. But a world that was not so 'kid friendly' would have lots and lots of more problems.

[Knaight]

In a normal, basic game world..that is not optimized..all 5th level clerics can't cast every spell to cure all. And the why is easy enough: they don't have high enough wisdom scores. Now an optimized player will absolutely demand that they have a cleric with at least an 18 in wisdom or ''they can't have fun''. But that is not true of every single cleric in the world. It's not like every single cleric in the world has a minimum wisdom of 18 and maybe as high as 20. In fact, there will be more low wisdom clerics then high wisdom clerics.

When performing the equivalent of medical procedures involving several specialists, years of therapy, and a lot of specialized equipment takes one guy six seconds, you don't need that many 5th level clerics. Also, they need all of 13 wisdom to cast 3rd level spells, which is achievable with a non-elite array, and represents a marginally higher wisdom than average. If you assume that clerics, as a group, are marginally wiser than the typical person, that much is pretty much a shoe in, particularly as there is the whole "+1 to any attribute at 4th level" detail.

Lets assume a cleric starts at 11 Wisdom at level 1. They're average. At level 4, their wisdom increases to 12, as spending their life with the church in contemplation increases that sort of thing. Now, they need to heal someone, so they cast Owl's Wisdom, a 2nd level spell on themselves. Their wisdom is now effectively 16, which is enough to cure just about any ailment. It lasts for four minutes too, which means that in a situation where there are a lot of sick and injured people gathered in one place (e.g a hospital) they can go around curing them until they run out of spells.

Also, your 10-11 average point is nonsense to begin with. The default is the non-elite array, which is 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8. Somehow, it seems likely that the people who are in general wiser end up clerics, just like it seems likely that it is the people who are in general smarter end up wizards. Given that everyone who ends up with one of the best 3 scores in Wisdom can cure ailments as if they were a small, mobile hospital in a society with a significantly stronger technological base than the real world, this should basically end illness, at least in areas that aren't remote and inaccessible.

[Eldan]

Then don't forget you can get up to +3 wisdom from age.

[Yora]

Knowledge skills and Bardic Knowledge can be a problem as well, as it can be difficult to accept a character failing a 50+ knowledge roll while the old guy in the bar still has the information you need.
Well, I know where I put my keys yesterday, but there is no way in the world that this information is something that anyone else would know because of his education and good connections, regardless of how high a roll a character would have.

[demigodus]

This is only true if your playing an Optimized game, and all ready bending the rules. The problem is everyone things that normal D&D is automatically optimized.

Now you are just exaggerating. I have never played in a game so low-optimized that primary casters couldn't cast their spells at all. If completely beginner players automatically do that minimum level of optimization, that isn't really an optimized game. If that IS considered an optimized game, then yes, in my experience, normal D&D is optimized.


In a normal, basic game world..that is not optimized..all 5th level clerics can't cast every spell to cure all. And the why is easy enough: they don't have high enough wisdom scores.

In a normal, basic DnD world, those clerics have 9,000gp to spend on items of their choice. A periapt of wisdom +2, is not really an optimization choice. It is a pretty blantly obvious choice and says that they DO have a sufficient wisdom score.


Now an optimized player will absolutely demand that they have a cleric with at least an 18 in wisdom or ''they can't have fun''.

Um, what? I really don't see what that has to do with an optimizer. An optimizer is someone who takes the resources available to do (possibly requires that the resources available, as well as the rules, be clearly defined during char gen), and pumps out a powerful character using those. An optimizer doesn't demand an 18 in wisdom for a cleric if for some reason the game isn't allowing 18's in ability scores. An optimizer can take a cleric with 14 wis at lvl 1, (or even 12 wis if there is some semblance of a magic mart and players are getting any gold at all), and still win the game.

Anyone who demands an 18 starting wis with a cleric is decidedly NOT an optimizer.


Remember that 10/11 is average for an ability score. So that means that a lot of clerics have wisdoms of 10/11.

Just because 10.5 is the average for a set, doesn't mean it is the average for every sub-set of that set. Your statement requires the assumption that people just randomly toss dice to decide what profession they pick, rather then picking a profession remotely suited to their talents. That everyone has an equal chance of becoming a cleric, including the guy who's abilities are perfect for being a cleric and nothing else, and the guy who's abilities are perfect for being a wizard, but couldn't cast a divine spell if his soul depended on it.

This same logic would dictate that if 1/3rd of the world is of the evil alignment, 1/3 of the clerics of a good god are of evil alignment, and so can't tap into their god's powers.


And guess what: if your a 5th level cleric with a wisdom of 11, then you get no second and third level spells! And that is just the average clerics , as some will be below average too.

12 starting at level 4. 14 once I put on my periapt of wisdom +2.

[Jack_Simth]

This is only true if your playing an Optimized game, and all ready bending the rules. The problem is everyone things that normal D&D is automatically optimized.

In a normal, basic game world..that is not optimized..all 5th level clerics can't cast every spell to cure all. And the why is easy enough: they don't have high enough wisdom scores. Now an optimized player will absolutely demand that they have a cleric with at least an 18 in wisdom or ''they can't have fun''. But that is not true of every single cleric in the world. It's not like every single cleric in the world has a minimum wisdom of 18 and maybe as high as 20. In fact, there will be more low wisdom clerics then high wisdom clerics.

Remember that 10/11 is average for an ability score. So that means that a lot of clerics have wisdoms of 10/11. And guess what: if your a 5th level cleric with a wisdom of 11, then you get no second and third level spells! And that is just the average clerics , as some will be below average too.
Slight problem: People without moderate/high wisdom scores simply don't become clerics. There's a LOT of other classes, even in a core game. If you stop and look at the DMG recommendations for building NPC's, anything with PC classes gets the elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8). The highest level Cleric is 1d6+Community modifier - so while a tiny little Thorp or Hamlet won't have a 5th level cleric, a Village has a 1 in 6 chance of getting one, a small town a 2 in 6 chance, a Large Town will almost certainly have one (5 in 6), and a Small City or larger flat-out WILL have at least a 7th level Cleric running around somewhere.

Plus, of course, wealth, level, and age modifiers. A Cleric-5 with a base 11 Wisdom has 13 Wisdom with a 4,000 gp item (within 5th level NPC Wealth-by-level - barely), or will have a 13 by putting his 4th level boost into Wis, and going Middle aged. Do both, and that base Wisdom could be 9 while still getting 3rd level spells.

You really don't have to be optimal to get there. This probably isn't the route you want to argue. Ditto for Wizards or any other caster.



And don't forget the evil clerics that cause bad things, plus all the monsters.

Now this one is a much more effective route for it... as would be pointing out the proportion of 5th level clerics to the rest of the population (the clerics of a city will not be able to feed the city with Create Food and Water without going for "Traps" of Create Food and Water... or maybe the Everful Larder from the 3.0 Stronghold Builder's Guide, if you demand something specifically published).


And for a final bit of common sense: 3X is very, very, very whitewashed and Disney safe. So 'nothing bad' happens to all the people, by default. But a world that was not so 'kid friendly' would have lots and lots of more problems.
That is also true.

[Mithril Leaf]

Something to point out: Not all D&D worlds are the whitewashed Disney safe ones. Place like Eberron and Darksun are explicitly not so.

[Slipperychicken]

And this applies to wizards too. You can be a 10th level wizard with an intelligence of 12 and not have higher level spells.


That's kind of like saying you can have an Olympic runner who's also a wheelchair-bound paraplegic.

People decide their class based on what they're good at. If you can't cast 1st level spells (Int 10 or less), you aren't taking your first level in Wizard. I could see an 11 Int guy becoming a very mediocre trade-wizard and staying at level 1, because he can actually cast the spells he's supposed to. Even starting at 11 Int, you can absolutely cast the spells you're supposed to via level bonuses, age bonuses, casting Owl's Wisdom, or stat boosting items.

If only 1% if the population is going to be Clerics, it's going to be people with above-average Wisdom.

[Yora]

I'm working on a setting that caps at 10th level, and it's quite interesting what kinds of builds become viable when you can have access to all spells as a full caster starting with a 13 in your primary ability.

"15 plus all your Ability advancements" really only applies in 3rd Edition, if your character is actually going to reach 17th level. Which from what most people seem to share, does not happen very often at all. And even if you are level 15 wizard with access to 8th level spells but only 17 in Intelligence, you don't get that one 8th level spell per day. That's not really a problem considering your three 7th level and three 6th level spells.

[urandom]

I've wondered why infectious undead are not more of a problem. Consider for example bodaks. Fortitude save or die gaze. Anything killed by the gaze comes back as a bodak. One bodak gets into one town of commoners and shortly you have 1000 bodaks. That happens a few more times and you've got a true apocalypse. High level characters can shrug off a death gaze, but eventually they will fail a save. /world

[Mithril Leaf]

I've wondered why infectious undead are not more of a problem. Consider for example bodaks. Fortitude save or die gaze. Anything killed by the gaze comes back as a bodak. One bodak gets into one town of commoners and shortly you have 1000 bodaks. That happens a few more times and you've got a true apocalypse. High level characters can shrug off a death gaze, but eventually they will fail a save. /world


Vulnerability to Sunlight (Ex)

Bodaks loathe sunlight, for its merest touch burns their impure flesh. Each round of exposure to the direct rays of the sun deals 1 point of damage to the creature.

10 minutes isn't enough for a world conquest. Doesn't explain why wightpocolypses and shadowpocolypses don't occur though.

[Yora]

Why would the wights and shadows want to turn everyone in the world?

[Mithril Leaf]

Why would the wights and shadows want to turn everyone in the world?

How do you figure reproduction works for them? Same reason as normal things mate.

[Gamer Girl]

Lets assume a cleric starts at 11 Wisdom at level 1. They're average. At level 4, their wisdom increases to 12, as spending their life with the church in contemplation increases that sort of thing.

The problem here is your again assuming the optimized world. And that every cleric is a ''Coolz Gamerz'' and wants a high wisdom. What if that 4th level cleric put that plus one to an ability score into any of her other scores? Then she would still have a wisdom of 11 at 4th level.





Also, your 10-11 average point is nonsense to begin with. The default is the non-elite array, which is 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8. Somehow, it seems likely that the people who are in general wiser end up clerics, just like it seems likely that it is the people who are in general smarter end up wizards.

10/11 for an average ability score is right from the SRD, Players Handbook and such. Just pointing out what the rules say.

Note that the 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8 is the elite array, not the non-elite array. At least in my Players Handbook. Note that 'elite' is not 'common', and every cleric in the world can't be 'elite'. And it's nice to think that only people with perfectly made characters for a class would take that class, but again, this is optimization. A non optimizer character might have a wisdom of 8 and still want to be a cleric.


Now you are just exaggerating. I have never played in a game so low-optimized that primary casters couldn't cast their spells at all.

I'm sure you have not too. But in the days before 'You Must Optimize To Have Fun' 3X, it was very, very common.



In a normal, basic DnD world, those clerics have 9,000gp to spend on items of their choice. A periapt of wisdom +2, is not really an optimization choice. It is a pretty blantly obvious choice and says that they DO have a sufficient wisdom score.

It's the optimized choice, and it's only obvious to the optimized player type. A non-optimizing player might well by anything else, as they are not obsessed with 'getting high numbers in everything' to roll play awesome.



Anyone who demands an 18 starting wis with a cleric is decidedly NOT an optimizer.

Oh but they are, and almost the worst kind...second only to the cheating optimizers.



Your statement requires the assumption that people just randomly toss dice to decide what profession they pick, rather then picking a profession remotely suited to their talents.

Maybe, maybe half of the folks might see that they are wise at an early age and then become a cleric. Maybe half, though I'd guess less. The rest of the people become stuff more at random.



Slight problem: People without moderate/high wisdom scores simply don't become clerics.

If they don't, there will be less clerics in the world, and then they won't be around to heal anyway.

I shudder to use a real world example: but does anyone here have a job? Ok, now think of all your co-workers. Would you say that all of your co-workers have the perfect ability scores to do the job? Does every single construction worker have a STR of 18? Does every single actor have a CHR of 18?


That's kind of like saying you can have an Olympic runner who's also a wheelchair-bound paraplegic.

It's a bit more like saying that every single kid on a high school swim team is not an Olympic Swimmer. Or very few kids that were 'so great' at football in high school play football in collage and only like one in a billion makes it to the NFL.




People decide their class based on what they're good at. If you can't cast 1st level spells (Int 10 or less), you aren't taking your first level in Wizard.

Ever meet someone who was bad at there job? Ever meet someone who was absolutely horrible at their job? Well, guess what....they exist just about everywhere.

So yes, the average temple is full of bad clerics. By optimized game standards. Around half of the clerics of any temple could not even cast spells much(with 10/11 as average, remember some people would be less then that).

And in a non-optimized world every single cleric can not go to Magic Mart and buy a +2 wisdom item as soon as they save up the money for it. It's kinda silly to think the world would have hundreds and hundreds of ability boosting items so that every single person in the world would have one(or heck, why not all six?)

[nedz]

10/11 for an average ability score is right from the SRD, Players Handbook and such. Just pointing out what the rules say.

Note that the 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8 is the elite array, not the non-elite array. At least in my Players Handbook.

MM p290
Elite Array
15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8

Nonelite Array
13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8

[MukkTB]

What? The idea that there wouldn't be any clerics capable of casting 3rd level spells is incredible. A wisdom of 13 is not an outrageous requirement. Especially since they only have to start their career with a wisdom of 12 and pick up one more wisdom at lvl 4. Its ridiculous to claim that clerics would rather have a wisdom less than 13 and 1 more point of strength or something when that extra wisdom could make them more efficient healers than all of our modern technology combined.


Even if you don't let NPCs ever start with stats above 11 then they just have to make lvl 8 and/or use simple wisdom boosting magic to be able to cast 3rd level spells. And where are your villains coming from if no non player characters are allowed a stat above 11? How did the local wizards create say 4th level spells if no NPC can have a stat above 11? Why isn't it reasonable to scatter people with the elite array through a population?


Anyway screw that argument. By RAW a D&D world should be a Tippyverse, not a pseudo medieval fantasy setting.

[Eldan]

We are not saying that they need 18s in anything. But a 13 is not unreasonable. If you assume the population rolls their stats on 3d6, the chances of them rolling 13 or more in wisdom are about 26%. The chances for 11s and 12 are vastly higher. They don't need items.

And again: why would anyone with an 8 wisdom become a cleric?

Why would anyone think of them as clerics, even? They would be not much better than commoners, with none of the abilities that distinguish someone as a cleric. They'd have 3/4 BAB and a good will save. That doesn't make someone a cleric.

And I simply don't believe that anyone would play a cleric with a wisdom of 8, except maybe on a dare or as a joke. Why would you? Even the fighter is better than that. It simply offers nothing.

[Hitaro9]

We are not saying that they need 18s in anything. But a 13 is not unreasonable. If you assume the population rolls their stats on 3d6, the chances of them rolling 13 or more in wisdom are about 26%. The chances for 11s and 12 are vastly higher. They don't need items.

And again: why would anyone with an 8 wisdom become a cleric?

Why would anyone think of them as clerics, even? They would be not much better than commoners, with none of the abilities that distinguish someone as a cleric. They'd have 3/4 BAB and a good will save. That doesn't make someone a cleric.

And I simply don't believe that anyone would play a cleric with a wisdom of 8, except maybe on a dare or as a joke. Why would you? Even the fighter is better than that. It simply offers nothing.

I'm fairly certain they're talking about NPCs, who may not make the most obvious choice. A very unwise person may have idolized a cleric and want to be just like them, and thus, despite having a wisdom of 8, trained themselves to be a cleric.

[Blisstake]

Maybe people with low wisdom want to be a cleric because they don't have the wisdom to realize it's a bad idea.

Wait... :smallconfused:

[jaybird]

It's the optimized choice, and it's only obvious to the optimized player type. A non-optimizing player might well by anything else, as they are not obsessed with 'getting high numbers in everything' to roll play awesome.


What? That's so wrong I'm not even sure where to start...

I bet you any sum of money if I went out and asked someone "what attribute do you think characterizes Conan the Barbarian", I'll get two answers, Str and Con. Guess what, because it's OBVIOUS that a physical fighter should be strong and tough. Common sense is not optimization. Wanting to be good at what your character does is not roll play.

Repeat after me: Stormwind.


EDIT: consider also the possibility of entrance exams. You know, things like the LSAT and the MCAT. I'm pretty certain there's not a lot of people with an INT score below 10 in law or medicine. It's not unreasonable at all to assume that temples would also screen candidates for, well...WIS, especially not in a world like D&D where it's extremely easy in-character to know things like your character level and your stats.

[Gamer Girl]

What? The idea that there wouldn't be any clerics capable of casting 3rd level spells is incredible. A wisdom of 13 is not an outrageous requirement. Especially since they only have to start their career with a wisdom of 12 and pick up one more wisdom at lvl 4. Its ridiculous to claim that clerics would rather have a wisdom less than 13 and 1 more point of strength or something when that extra wisdom could make them more efficient healers than all of our modern technology combined.





Anyway screw that argument. By RAW a D&D world should be a Tippyverse, not a pseudo medieval fantasy setting.

You can only have a Tippyverse if you optimize.

I'm not saying that there would be no clerics that can cast high level spells, my point is that there would only be a few. You would not have dozens of clerics running around everywhere healing everything. You would only have a couple.


The tricky thing here is you have to stop thinking about it as 'just a game' and think of it as more 'a living breathing fantasy world.' Now if you don't want too, fine, nothing more needs to be said.

But if you can look beyond the game, you can see and understand my point. A 'real' cleric living in the world does not think like a gamer sitting at a table. It's easy for the gamer to say ''oh all the clerics have high wisdoms and they all save up and buy wisdom boosting items''. But that is not so easy when you must live your life everyday.

The idea that a single cleric has something like 9,000 gold coins is silly(what would they have, a rented warehouse?) But lets say they have saved up enough 'credit' or such and one Monday they now have 9,000 gold coins. Well it's easy for the gamer to sit back and drink a Mt. Dew and say ''Derr the Cleric goes and buys a wisdom boost item to be more awesomely powerful! Peww! Peww!''. But what would that person want to buy really? There are tons of things that people need to buy more then a stat boosting item.

And even if they want to all buy wisdom boost items, is the shelf at magic mart endless? Are there enough items for everyone? Of course there is not! It's just silly to think that the store is automatically stocked with whatever people want to buy. Remember there would be few spellcasters to make items.


So, look, if you want to throw up your hands and say ''The Tippyverse'' happens automatically in your world and it can't be stopped...then fine. Say that. But you can't say it's ''in the rules'' or that it ''must'' happen.

[Eldan]

See, that is not actually silly.

Or rather, it is only silly if you want to build a particular kind of world.

But if we go by the rules, NPCs in the game, once they gain a few class levels, are supposed to have a few thousand gold in personal items. If we go strictly by the rules, they do have that. IT doesn't necessarily have to be a periapt of wisdom, but many items are much worse.

And why, please, is it thinking in game terms if a cleric in a living, breathing world, wants to heal people? With his healing magic?

People without divine spells aren't clerics. They are weirdly built experts, or something.

[Gamer Girl]

But if we go by the rules, NPCs in the game, once they gain a few class levels, are supposed to have a few thousand gold in personal items.

And why, please, is it thinking in game terms if a cleric in a living, breathing world, wants to heal people? With his healing magic?

People without divine spells aren't clerics. They are weirdly built experts, or something.

Hummm, this did creep into the 3X rules: DMG pg. 146. Some characters are average characters, with average ability scores.

Note that NPC's get a lot less gold then PCs. It's also not like a lump sum payment. You don't get a 5,000 gold reward for going up a level. And saying a 5th level cleric has 4,300 gold worth of items is not the same as saying every single cleric has a wisdom boosting item.

Well, of course good clerics want to heal people. That's not the issue. It's more can they do it. And most of them can't. The cleric might have a heart of gold, but she only has a wisdom of 9. Or she spent some of her money on something else. Or got a rain check from Magic Mart.

[Eldan]

Hm. Okay, this plays back into what I said in the other thread. But: I just think that you aren't just born with your stats and they never change. People who want to be soldiers train. People who want ot be wizards read. People who want to be clerics meditate. This would be, in my opinion, be represented in the game as higher ability scores in their important stats. Some would be, of course, totally incompetent in their chosen area, but those would be a minority.

I think a 13 is not at all unreasonable. If you look at people in real life, most are a bit above average in some areas, and a bit below average in others. Or in D&D terms, they'd probably have a +1 modifier in some stats, and a -1 in others. If you check the monster manual, humanoid warriors of all races are given an array with a 13 and an 8 by default.

And yes, as I edited in above, those clerics wouldn't automatically have periapts of wisdom. But most other magical items they could buy with that money aren't much better. Potions are probably the cheapest, and they multiply the amount of magic they have available at any given time. What else could they buy that helps your average village priest? Wands? Save items? Quite a lot of this has an influence on how the world would look.

I'm not saying that this is a good thing, necessarily. Going by those rules exactly (and one probably never should) ruins a lot of story concepts. Put as it stands, 3.5 makes certain assumptions.

[Knaight]

The problem here is your again assuming the optimized world. And that every cleric is a ''Coolz Gamerz'' and wants a high wisdom. What if that 4th level cleric put that plus one to an ability score into any of her other scores? Then she would still have a wisdom of 11 at 4th level.
Given that they can start with a score of 8, and still have those spells as soon as they start getting older (up to 11 with age, 12 with level, 16 with Owl's Wisdom), this doesn't hold. Also, would you care to explain how it is, exactly, that the subset of the population that spends their time in prayer and contemplation doesn't somehow end up with higher wisdom? Also, your "most clerics" claim is absurd, given that 50% of the stats are 11 or higher, and 11 is all it actually takes while still young. That would be half the clerics of the level, and that number just goes up once you take age variance into account, and up again once you take into account that, just maybe, the people who spend their time cultivating wisdom are a bit wiser than average.

Oh, and 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8 is the nonelite array (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm), and it averages 10 and 11.

[Mithril Leaf]

Hummm, this did creep into the 3X rules: DMG pg. 146. Some characters are average characters, with average ability scores.

Note that NPC's get a lot less gold then PCs. It's also not like a lump sum payment. You don't get a 5,000 gold reward for going up a level. And saying a 5th level cleric has 4,300 gold worth of items is not the same as saying every single cleric has a wisdom boosting item.

Well, of course good clerics want to heal people. That's not the issue. It's more can they do it. And most of them can't. The cleric might have a heart of gold, but she only has a wisdom of 9. Or she spent some of her money on something else. Or got a rain check from Magic Mart.

Is it too much to ask that a cleric have a wisdom of 11? That's like saying that most lawyers have an intelligence of 11 and that most professional athletes have a strength of 11. Now, let's assume that at level 4 they place their attribute increase in wisdom because logically being a cleric would facilitate that. How old would you say the typical NPC would be at the point they've attained level 5. Since that's a fairly decent accomplishment for non-adventurers, it's not unreasonable to assume they've some years under their belt. They're likely close to or already middle aged. That's a 13 wisdom without having to buy a single item.

[Coidzor]

It's more that I've resigned to the fact that my DMs thusfar totally suck and will resort to any length of dishonesty, shenanigans, or fiat to get the story they want.

I can throw rules at them all day, but they just bat it aside and say "It happens because I'm the DM and I do what I want".

When life gives you lemons, you call them on their expletive shenanigans and DM yourself if you can't get one who can find a story with both hands. You're not supposed to put up with being treated like you're 8 and the rest of us shouldn't be expected to either.

[TypoNinja]

Everyone seems to have forgotten something important.

The real limiting factor on many high level NPC's is XP.

When's the last time the resident cleric from Random Thorp A wandered off to a dungeon crawl so he could level up?

PC's shoot up the levels, but an NPC might go months or years between combats unless they live somewhere rather nasty. Even an army at war does orders of magnitude more marching than fighting.

If you assume that an NPC graduates from 'magic school' when they demonstrate the ability to cast 1st level spells (trading their humanoid HD for a class level), then a random village is going to get a first level graduate.

If were going to be generous and say he gets the NPC equivalent of 'story awards' whenever he's doing his job, its still going to take him a long time to level up unless he's in the middle of a plague or something.

[Eldan]

Except that we are discussing the rules here, and those rules explicitly state that every last hamlet has a cleric, and that larger downs have mid to high level clerics. They exist, they aren't uncommon, and we have the statistics. They can and do go up to level 20.

Somehow they got their XP. That is not actually explained.

[Coidzor]

The rules admit that you can get XP for things other than traps and fights, IIRC, but are rather nebulous on anything further than that. And simply silent outright about NPCs and leveling.

[Mithril Leaf]

The rules admit that you can get XP for things other than traps and fights, IIRC, but are rather nebulous on anything further than that. And simply silent outright about NPCs and leveling.

Except for commoners which level for becoming more common. :smalltongue:

[DaOldeWolf]

Hm. Okay, this plays back into what I said in the other thread. But: I just think that you aren't just born with your stats and they never change. People who want to be soldiers train. People who want ot be wizards read. People who want to be clerics meditate. This would be, in my opinion, be represented in the game as higher ability scores in their important stats. Some would be, of course, totally incompetent in their chosen area, but those would be a minority.


I agree with Gamer Girl, here. Just take a look at our world. There are people with no talent for directing movies and yet that wont stop them from becoming directors (bad directors but directors never the less). Just the same with people with great voices for singing who can prefer to do something else with their lives because it just doesnt fulfill them.

Also, you have to remember there is bound to be mistakes (or they will be gods). People try to be the best they could be and there can be many misjugdments and bad decisions in their way. Maybe they chose the wrong feat but they though it would be a good compliment, who knows?

Add to that, people arent robots, they have faults. Many people out there want to be fit, still most of them are too lazy to improve themselves. And there are also the circunstances. If people are in constant fear of a threat, they could end up building themselves to counter the threat to assure their survival, for example.

Finally, just like in our world, there are few successful ones who either by luck, wits, strenght, DNA, etc., had managed their way through life. Not everyone can be great or even average. Sad but true.

[lsfreak]

I agree with Gamer Girl, here. Just take a look at our world. There are people with no talent for directing movies and yet that wont stop them from becoming directors (bad directors but directors never the less). Just the same with people with great voices for singing who can prefer to do something else with their lives because it just doesnt fulfill them.

Well, clearly someone does think they're a good director, or they wouldn't be a director any more. They wouldn't be able to survive. They'd have to adapt, either becoming passable or picking up something else to support themselves. When you're talking about professions where your physical wellbeing is actually at risk - as is the case with adventurers (and in the modern world, soldiers, professional sports players, etc) - someone poor at it won't even get to that point. They'll realize they're unable to cope with the pressures, or they'll be injured probably in training or the equivalent, or just killed when they finally face a dangerous situation.

[Slipperychicken]

When life gives you lemons, you call them on their expletive shenanigans and DM yourself if you can't get one who can find a story with both hands. You're not supposed to put up with being treated like you're 8 and the rest of us shouldn't be expected to either.

Amen! Already gone through two awful DMs myself. Here's hoping the 3rd is better.

[Coidzor]

I agree with Gamer Girl, here. Just take a look at our world. There are people with no talent for directing movies and yet that wont stop them from becoming directors (bad directors but directors never the less). Just the same with people with great voices for singing who can prefer to do something else with their lives because it just doesnt fulfill them.

Also, you have to remember there is bound to be mistakes (or they will be gods). People try to be the best they could be and there can be many misjugdments and bad decisions in their way. Maybe they chose the wrong feat but they though it would be a good compliment, who knows?

Add to that, people arent robots, they have faults. Many people out there want to be fit, still most of them are too lazy to improve themselves. And there are also the circunstances. If people are in constant fear of a threat, they could end up building themselves to counter the threat to assure their survival, for example.

Finally, just like in our world, there are few successful ones who either by luck, wits, strenght, DNA, etc., had managed their way through life. Not everyone can be great or even average. Sad but true.

Nepotism is the age-old exception, and being such a trainwreck that people rubberneck is sometimes so bad it's good.

[DaOldeWolf]

Well, clearly someone does think they're a good director, or they wouldn't be a director any more.

Possibly or they could be lying to themselves. Still, thinking they are good doesnt have to mean that they are.


They wouldn't be able to survive. They'd have to adapt, either becoming passable or picking up something else to support themselves.

Dependant on the circumstances, like I said. They could have a big heritage to sustain themselves or maybe somebody else provides for him/her.


When you're talking about professions where your physical wellbeing is actually at risk - as is the case with adventurers (and in the modern world, soldiers, professional sports players, etc) - someone poor at it won't even get to that point. They'll realize they're unable to cope with the pressures, or they'll be injured probably in training or the equivalent, or just killed when they finally face a dangerous situation.

To be fair, most NPCs dont have to deal with as much pressure as PCs. Most of them probably live an average life with fewer worries and so optimization seems less important. Still, these last points dont take into account the possibility of mistake or luck. I am sure companies out there always try to get competent people to work for them but that has never stopped the entrance of bad workers either because of misjudgement or by need of human resources. Sometimes, they get fired, sometimes they dont. Also, this doesnt even consider the possibility of coercion or even cheating their way in.

The most important thing to remember is that despite being NPCs, there are all different individuals with different values, different views, different background and will live in whatever way they can. Opening the possibility of being amazing to incredibly bad.


Nepotism is the age-old exception, and being such a trainwreck that people rubberneck is sometimes so bad it's good.
^Agreed

[JCarter426]

I agree with Gamer Girl, here. Just take a look at our world. There are people with no talent for directing movies and yet that wont stop them from becoming directors (bad directors but directors never the less).
People who make bad movies are still well trained in their field; they are very good at making movies, just not at all good at making good movies. Does the act of directing explicitly require a high wisdom score? I wouldn't say so.

[Knaight]

I agree with Gamer Girl, here. Just take a look at our world. There are people with no talent for directing movies and yet that wont stop them from becoming directors (bad directors but directors never the less). Just the same with people with great voices for singing who can prefer to do something else with their lives because it just doesnt fulfill them.

However, we are talking about trends. Sure, you get the occasional Uwe Boll, but if you look at directors as a group he's a clear statistical outlier in a situation where, generally speaking, directors at better at the skills needed to direct than most. The existence of outliers has little to do with the relative placements of the median, and the general statistical distribution of ability, as well as how that relates with the general statistical distribution of ability within another group. The thing about, say, offset bell curves is that there is going to be some level of overlap, particularly if the offset is only a standard deviation or two.

Put simply: The group of 8-13, uniform distribution has a lower average than the group of 12-17, uniform distribution. There are still 13s in the first group who are better than 12s in the second group, and this is assuming a much larger deviation than between clerics and the general populace.

Added to that, the thing about Uwe Boll types is that they are highly visible. Outliers stand out, and they are inevitably a far smaller proportion in actual data than they appear to be based on gut instinct.

[TypoNinja]

Except that we are discussing the rules here, and those rules explicitly state that every last hamlet has a cleric, and that larger downs have mid to high level clerics. They exist, they aren't uncommon, and we have the statistics. They can and do go up to level 20.

Somehow they got their XP. That is not actually explained.

I was flipping around and couldn't find it, where does it say what levels of what should live in a town (by size presumably?).

[Jack_Simth]

I shudder to use a real world example: but does anyone here have a job? Ok, now think of all your co-workers. Would you say that all of your co-workers have the perfect ability scores to do the job? Does every single construction worker have a STR of 18? Does every single actor have a CHR of 18?

18's? No, absolutely not. But we're not talking about 18's (0.46% for any given stat on 3d6). We're talking about 13's or better (25.93% for any given stat on 3d6). So yes, the 25% that have a Wis score of 13 or higher become Clerics if that's their highest score. The ones for whom that's Strength become Fighters. Int, Wizards. Charisma, Sorcerers. Dex, Rogues. My coworkers probably do have around 13's or better in the highest stat for what they're hired for. And really, 11 (50%) + Middle Age + Level 4 boost will get there.


And in a non-optimized world every single cleric can not go to Magic Mart and buy a +2 wisdom item as soon as they save up the money for it. It's kinda silly to think the world would have hundreds and hundreds of ability boosting items so that every single person in the world would have one(or heck, why not all six?)
Why not all six? Because they're expensive. But who doesn't arrange to have the tools for their job?

I was flipping around and couldn't find it, where does it say what levels of what should live in a town (by size presumably?).
Dungeon Master's Guide, starts on page 138. It's not very simple.

[DaOldeWolf]

People who make bad movies are still well trained in their field; they are very good at making movies, just not at all good at making good movies.
There are all kinds of bad when making a movie (plot, camera movement, etc). Anyway, the training goes to waste, if he doesnt have the skills or even improve. Still, it happens.


Knaight

The important detail here isnt just that there have to be bad ones just as there are good ones.

The point is that most clerics are more likely to fall into the average (or else it wouldnt be an average) or at least close to it. With really few exceptions far above or below it. That middle point being the one which separates the good clerics from the bad ones.

[Knaight]

The point is that most clerics are more likely to fall into the average (or else it wouldnt be an average) or at least close to it. With really few exceptions far above or below it. That middle point being the one which separates the good clerics from the bad ones.

Yes, most clerics have to be in the cleric average. That doesn't have to be the typical average, as the cleric average can be counterbalanced by another group where wisdom is generally lower than average, though in practice it's more that clerics are part of a general high wisdom group, and there's a general low wisdom group, and these two are part of the average and largely counteract each other, despite both being smaller than the average wisdom group.

Again, a real world analogy - The average person makes a certain amount of money. The average person of certain professions, nationalities, whatever, may well make a different amount of money, as the average of a set does not have to be the average of a subset, but the existence of those higher than average means that there are also those lower than average (if there weren't, average would be higher).


18's? No, absolutely not. But we're not talking about 18's (0.46% for any given stat on 3d6). We're talking about 13's or better (25.93% for any given stat on 3d6). So yes, the 25% that have a Wis score of 13 or higher become Clerics if that's their highest score. The ones for whom that's Strength become Fighters. Int, Wizards. Charisma, Sorcerers. Dex, Rogues. My coworkers probably do have around 13's or better in the highest stat for what they're hired for. And really, 11 (50%) + Middle Age + Level 4 boost will get there.

Why not all six? Because they're expensive. But who doesn't arrange to have the tools for their job?
You only need 12, because of Owl's Wisdom - or 9, if you get somebody else to cast Owl's Wisdom on you. Which also limits the utility of wisdom increasing items as tools to some extent - they are potentially very useful, but on the other hand they cost as much as a house, and the latter is probably more useful in general. Still, generally being better than you otherwise would be mentally is incredibly valuable, even if you can already do so on a short term basis.

[JCarter426]

There are all kinds of bad when making a movie (plot, camera movement, etc). Anyway, the training goes to waste, if he doesnt have the skills or even improve. Still, it happens.
It's still a physical capability to perform a task, in contrast to a physical incapability to cast spells one is expected to cast.

Besides, people who fail upwards become producers. :smalltongue:

[demigodus]

To be fair, most NPCs dont have to deal with as much pressure as PCs. Most of them probably live an average life with fewer worries and so optimization seems less important. Still, these last points dont take into account the possibility of mistake or luck. I am sure companies out there always try to get competent people to work for them but that has never stopped the entrance of bad workers either because of misjudgement or by need of human resources. Sometimes, they get fired, sometimes they dont. Also, this doesnt even consider the possibility of coercion or even cheating their way in.

See, the tendency of clerics to have above average Wisdom doesn't require the the bolded in this analogy to be false.

For clerics to have an average wisdom of 10.5, requires (amongst other things) for the screening process to be as effective as tossing every resume in a box, shaking that box, and then pulling out a resume, and hiring the person with that resume.

Or, in the analogy, it requires that the efforts of the companies be utterly and completely worthless, and that the chances of being hired be utterly and completely independent of skill.

Not "there are some mistakes". Rather, (if we say that half the applicants aren't as qualified as the competition), that "half of all hirings are mistakes".

[Slipperychicken]

For clerics to have an average wisdom of 10.5, requires (amongst other things) for the screening process to be as effective as tossing every resume in a box, shaking that box, and then pulling out a resume, and hiring the person with that resume.

Worse than that, most people who apply for a job at least think they'll be good at it. It would be more like a company putting the names of every living US citizen into a hat, pulling one out at random, and deciding to employ that person.


If half the guys you hire are literally incapable of doing their jobs (in this case, casting spells), you will quickly fail, and hopefully a better employer will replace you. If everyone hired that poorly, all human organization would have been paralyzed by incompetence, to the point at no social structure could possibly function, because task allocation would not work.

[IncoherentEssay]

Setting-smashing things have exactly squat to do with optimisation* and more or less everything to do with the rules being written for a dungeoncrawling game with some other stuff as an afterthought. So we get things like Wall of Iron/Salt existing alongside iron/salt as trade goods, or Permanency'd Teleportation Circles alongside mundane trade routes. It's as if someone wrote the system based on what's cool/convenient for plot with no regard for internal consistency :smalltongue:.
I don't think it's all bad though. Let's take a look at the Wall of Iron issue. Obviously iron cannot be simultanously easily mass-producable and have a trade good, so one of the two has to give.

Wall of Iron wins: iron is cheaper than dirt (which is in limited supply, unlike iron). Iron goods still cost something due to labor required and might not be all that much cheaper due to taxation or other regulations (people in power might want to limit the amount of arms and armor lying around, how shocking). The only reason buildings aren't made of iron is the whole rusting issue (and because stone is just as spammable), and if alchemist can find a cheap solution to the rust, things might change. I haven't given enough thought to how overabudant iron might affect society to go into more detail than this though.

Natural iron wins: wall-iron is simply no good for anything other than the simple sheet it comes in. Maybe there's impurities** that make it terrible for tools and are expensive to remove. Or maybe it has a distorting effect on the weave due to being made with magic***, making it far harder to enchant (and a possible substitute/upgrade for/from lead for 'mundane' magical defenses).
Or maybe the issue is more long-term: extended exposure to magically created causes infertility/physical mutation of offspring. The odds are initially minimal, but they do built up over time and are passed on to descendants, eventually resulting in reproduction being 50/50 nothing/crime-vs-nature.
Other side effects are also possible, and it's equally applicable to any other form of society-wide application of magical conveniences such as conjured food or trivial use of teleportation. It also means any magical utopias have a built-in apocalypse in their future, providing a nice source of dungeons as well as justification for technological stasis in the cycling rise and fall of magocracies (magic trumps tech to become the dominant society before collapsing in on itself).
Do note that this is all effectively invisible on the adventurer's side of things. Wall of Iron is still a nice bit of battlefiels control and Create food & water a wonderful convenience, but no-one will buy them off you in bulk because everyone has heard the Legend of the Long-Dead-Civilisation-Here. No one *knows* for sure though, since it would take a long line of adventurers before the latest generation would start to reliably show the symptoms.

End result is that i either get a cool 'what if' to start brainstorming a different setting off of, or some interesting ideas for the inevitable dead civilisations in a more conventional setting.

It's probably obvious which one i went with :smallwink:. My point being, make the glitches work for you. Make houserules**** if necessary, few people object to written-down houserules. It's the "because I say so" fiats that ruffle feathers.


*sure, you could anti-optimize everyone to have max 9 for mental stats to handwave away the problem spells, but that makes for a pushover world. Settingwide incompetence solves nothing, and tends to lead to worse inconsistensies and oddities, as has been pointed out.
**fantasy world metals need not comform exactly to realworld metallurgy, as long as the exeptions are called out as being such. Magically created impurities being one such thing.
***'Instantenous' means it doesn't go away in antimagic/to dispelling, but doesn't mean it cannot have some magic-manipulating properties as a result of it's origins.
****preferrably additions instead of replacements. In the example above, the PHB text for Wall of Iron is still fully valid but how it interacts with the setting has been expanded upon.

[demigodus]

Wall of Iron is a level 6 spell.

My preferred explanation for why iron is still somewhat expensive is:
a) rarity of 11th level+ wizards, or 12th level+ sorcerers

combined with

b) not every arcane caster being interested in acquiring wealth in that manner. After all, they can't just make the walls. They need to turn it into easily transportable shapes, get someone to transport it (for a cost), etc. It is still more efficient then mining it, but some spell users might consider themselves above all this hassle.

that creates a limited increase of quantity. Throw in rust monsters, a lot of iron being made into weapons that either meet rust monster, or end up on corpses, rusting issue, and there isn't necessarily an increase in the supply of iron on the market.

[RFLS]

Wall of text ahead.


10/11 for an average ability score is right from the SRD, Players Handbook and such. Just pointing out what the rules say.

Okay, this is bothering the heck out of me. Math lesson time! Wall of text ahead.

Average (N): In this context, the arithmetic mean. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetic_mean#Definition) Basically, all the numbers in the set (which is 6) added together, then divided by the size of the set (6).

By this definition, anyone who has a set of scores that look like this [10, 10, 11, 11, 10-N, 11+N] meets the "average ability score" you mentioned.

"But that's silly!" Right? Well, okay, because that means you could have a set of [10, 10, 11, 11, 437, -412] and meet that criterion of "average."

Okay, then- let's use standard deviations. A standard deviation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation) is the square root of its variance. In practical terms, SDs give you a good idea of how far from the arithmetic mean a value can be expected to stray. (Side note- Sets are groups of numbers. Assuming everyone knew that, but I've had pickiness of definitions beaten into me).

Let's take those definitions and make Joe Commoner. Joe's an average...joe. Hardworking commoner, etc. HOWEVER, he really wants to be a cleric. His faith is strong and his heart is pure, yadda yadda. Joe's not the wisest guy around, but that doesn't stop him. He joins the local clergy.

Joe's stats look like this- [13 Str, 12 Con, 11 Wis, 10 Dex, 9 Cha, 8 Int].

The arithmetic mean of this set is 10.5. I'm assuming that's easy to do for everyone. The standard deviation for this set is 1.71 (If someone asks, I'll work it out in another post, but it's a LOT of math, and I'm already Wall of Texting here). If you assume a normal distribution, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution) that means that 68% of a normal population are within 1.71 points of the arithmetic mean (10.5). So, most guys have anywhere from 8.8 to 12.2 in an ability score. We'll call that somewhere between 9 and 12. Now, 95% of a population are within TWO SDs of the arithmetic mean (assuming a normal population). This means that 95% - 68% (27%) are, in fact, 2 SDs away (not one OR two, just two). Two SDs puts you anywhere from 7.1 to 13.9. We'll call that 7 to 14. An addition 4.7% of the population lies at 3 SDs from the arithmetic mean, but I'm assuming that they're too much of an outlier for your tastes.

Now, the second part of your argument, as I understood it, was that not everyone picks things suited to their abilities. I can accept that. People are the not brightest all the time. Lets say it's largely arbitrary what people pick (No one works to their strengths, but no one is working against their weaknesses, either). There's a 1/6 chance that someone'll match their strong suit to a profession suited to it.

I'm going to assume that scores are incremental based on SDs, because the math just gets way less muddied that way. Again, if anyone wants it, I can do the harder, more twisted stuff.

....that's a promise, not a threat :smallwink:

Anyway, and here's where I'm handwaving some math, we'll say that 1/6 represents the liklihood of someone picking a profession that their ONE +1 SD stat is in. That's 11.3% of the population picking something they're good at, and that is only with the +/- 1 SD group. Apply this again, and you get an extra 4.5% (27% * 1/6) picking a thing that they're good at, but this group is +2 SDs away from 10.5. We're once again going to pretend that the +3 SD group doesn't exist. This means that 15.8% of the population will pick a task that they're suited for, and that 27% of those have a score of 14 in that stat. If you really feel like going and doing the math, this number probably approaches (read as "Definitely") 16.6% of the population as a whole picking something they're good at ("good at" meaning being above the arithmetic mean).

Let's go back to Joe Commoner. He's joined the clergy, but they don't have much use for them. He's a cleric in name, but he's their de facto gardener. He works around the monastery or temple, and gets a little stronger. Now his set is [14 Str, 12 Con, 11 Wis, 10 Dex, 9 Cha, 8 Int]. Joe's still not very wise. However, he also hits that first age increment during this time, because life is slow in his temple. Now his set is [13 Str, 11 Con, 12 Wis, 9 Dex, 10 Cha, 9 Int]. Joe can cast 2nd level spells at level 4. Now we'll go one step further. Joe lives to be really, really old. He's a level 8 cleric at this point, and that's taken his all to get there. He's the head of the clergy now, but not for much longer, because he's going to die of old age soon. His set is [9 Str, 6 Con, 15 Wis, 4 Dex, 12 Cha, 11 Int]. He's not very mobile, and his health is poor, but he's retained the strength of his youth. He's also become much, much wiser in his old age. Now, at level 8, he gets to cast 5th level spells (if he could). So, with a long career, he can cast high-ish level spells, from a set entirely within the first SD, and no special adventuring or min-maxing. He's not optimized, but his scores kept up.

Now, for a more corner case. Let's say you get a person who picked right, and was unusual to begin with. They're within 2 SDs on two of their ability scores. We'll call this guy Joe Awesome. Joe Awesome's set looks like this- [10 Str, 11 Con, 14 Wis, 7 Dex, 11 Cha, 10 Int]. He's average except for being exceptionally clumsy and exceptionally wise. He goes out and beats monsters up in the name of his deity, and he hits level 4 before middle age. Well, Joe Awesome hates being clumsy, so...Oh, wait, that's not in character. Joe accepts his lot of clumsiness in life, and becomes all the wiser for it. Now Joe Awesome's set looks like this- [10 Str, 11 Con, 15 Wis, 7 Dex, 11 Cha, 10 Int]. By level 8, he's finally hit mid-life. He becomes even wiser. At level 8, in middle age, his set looks like this- [10 Str, 11 Con, 17 Wis, 7 Dex, 11 Cha, 10 Int]. Joe Awesome's pretty awesome.

My point, you ask? After that massive, rambling wall of text? What possible point could there be? My points are these- people do occasionally pick correctly. Those increments at 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20? Those are supposed to represent someone getting better at what they do. An "average" does not mean that every number of the set IS the average. Populations vary, and some people are really, really good at what they do. So, yes, the average commoner will not be good at much, but that doesn't mean his stats are 10, 11, 10, 11, 10, 11. It means that they average to 10.5. Don't confuse "average of" to mean "must be right at the average." That's a population of clones. [/rant]

Ignoring the math-induced rant above, yes, most people are close to average. That doesn't mean your player's characters are, or even should be. That, though, is a game design argument. It goes, roughly "Players should be able to be exceptional!" "But that breaks the verisimilitude of the game!" Essentially, you end up deciding what you want to play. Realistic game, or mild indulgence in empowering simulationism? Given that this is an RPG that thinks it's a tactical simulator....I'd say the game system makes an obvious choice, but it's doable to go for "realistic" within the rules. I'd also say that if you want realistic, you're probably a) missing the point of RPGs, and b) using the wrong system.


The problem here is your again assuming the optimized world. And that every cleric is a ''Coolz Gamerz'' and wants a high wisdom.
Ad Hominem. Please refrain.


I'm sure you have not too. But in the days before 'You Must Optimize To Have Fun' 3X, it was very, very common.
Are we talking 1e and AD&D and things of similar nature? To be clear, the games that didn't even have pretentions of being RPGs, and were just tactical simulators? I...have a very hard time believing you on that.

On point...things that break the game world, but are not game breaking. Well, Tippyverse hits most of that, but it's a bit of a shotgun blast at world and game breaking. Uhm...I believe water in deserts have been covered, as well as Wall of Iron/Stone. Pretty much any basic engineering knowledge would break the game, either because there'd be perpetual motion machines, or because the engineers' heads would explode in a shower of disbelief with enough force to crack the mantle :smalltongue: If you've got a group of Gnome mages around, permanencied alarms would be....irritating, to say the least, but maybe not world breaking. Proper application of shapeshifting+mind blank might do it, but I'm not actually sure about those rules interactions.

If you can convince your DM to let you set up permanent gates or portals to the Abyss...that'd do it. Infinite horde of demons invading the world. Fun stuff.

[Slipperychicken]

Wall of Iron is a level 6 spell.

My preferred explanation for why iron is still somewhat expensive is:
a) rarity of 11th level+ wizards, or 12th level+ sorcerers


If these Wizards are that shameless anyway, they could've all just bound Noble Djinni/Efreeti, started Wish loops, and thereby stopped giving a **** about money.

[Baalthazaq]

If... I'm reading this correctly.

As a computer scientist... my university class ranged from 10-11 for int...
Wait, no, they were ALL intelligent. Every last one. >100 students. Maybe 2 or 3 at 10 or less at a push. You need good grades, otherwise they don't let you in. If you do poorly later, they kick you out.

You're basically saying that if the average Wis for any group is X, that average must hold true for any subset. That's not true. That is demonstrable.

Surgeons(Expert or Cleric) average 13 points higher in IQ than removal men(Expert/Commoner). (Test the nation, largest IQ test ever conducted. August 2007)

That's equivalent to 11 vs 15 on a 3D6 roll when converted to percentiles.

This isn't a game, this is the real world. In the real world, what you have called optimizing, has occurred. That's just how a world with any modicum of rationality works.

I don't see why saying a Cleric would buy equipment to do his job has invited the word "optimizer" to be flung around like a slur. A cleric who wouldn't on the other hand should quite readily be subjected to quite serious repercussions from the villagers for incompetence, malpractice, misappropriation of funds, and application of any equivalent to good Samaritan laws.

The word you're looking for is rational, not optimized, and it's not a slur, it's how the world works.

[RFLS]

I don't see why saying a Cleric would buy equipment to do his job has invited the word "optimizer" to be flung around like a slur.

Hey, that construction worker with the hardhat? Optimizer. Thief with lockpicks? Optimizer. Knight with fullplate? Optimizer. Teacher with a blackboard? Definitely an optimizer.

On the other hand, if she wants to play a game with an "average" array of stats, go right ahead. I don't think D&D is the right ruleset for that, but w/e. Your choice. Telling us we're a bunch of no-good optimizers? That stinks of ice cream. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106111)

[KutuluKultist]

Given the sheer efficiency and ease of healing magic, one single 5th level cleric with an effective wisdom of 13 can service 2000-3000 people given normal incidence levels. The wretched might have to wait a bit while the powerful may get preferential treatment, but spend a few days in a hospital and eventually a cleric will find time for you.
The only situation where this changes is rapid epidemic outbreaks. But even these can be controlled if they are discovered early. Furthermore, a generally healthy population is much less likely to succumb to such an outbreak.

Magic in the d20 games is designed to serve the needs of a gaming group (easy healing to the point of resurrection, quick transport, vast riches on the level of high nobility within a few levels and enough offensive power to overcome horribly dangerous monsters) and not as an integral part of world design. These monsters also are often designed in such a way that they work well as enemies for PCs to beat up, but fit very badly in the world as imagined. The perfect example are the already mentioned spawning undead. And all of this doesn't even consider that "evil" has changed meaning from "bad stuff, to be avoided" to "just another faction, no better or worse than any other".

[edit]
Also, once people realize the entirely beneficent power of clerics, one might assume that there will be some kind of specialised training. The European middle ages had specialised institutions for the training of it's central jobs: cleric and knight.

[Urpriest]

A couple points to make:

First, having done the numbers last night, it looks like according to DMG demographics there is one 5th+ level Cleric per 3000-6000 or so people, with them being more common in bigger cities (with the odd exception of Metropoli, where they are rapidly swamped by commoners). So around as common as doctors, but with fewer dedicated to healing.

Second, Eberron makes it abundantly clear that if you want to stat a Cleric who can't cast spells, you use an Expert. Remember, D&D characters don't know that classes exist, and certainly don't choose them. A person in-setting goes out and learns certain skills, and those skills are modeled by the DM as a particular combination of classes. If someone can't cast spells above a certain level, then there is no reason to stat them as a Cleric that casts spells of that level, and they will instead be statted as an Adept or Expert.