Shouldn't every person in his right mind try to get at least 1 Adept level?

[Conradine]

I was thinking...
let's rule out getting level of wizard or cleric as being to difficult, but shouldn't every person with an inch of brain in a classical d&d world try his best to get a level as Adept? Life become so much easier and comfy.

Let's talk about a miserable Wisdom 10 adept who can only cast cantrips:

create water - No more having to walk perhaps miles to the nearest water weel or river. The weel is near? No more need to exit home during a thunderstorm, an hailstorm, or a scorching hot summer afternoon. Not to mention the very, very pratical use as toilet hygienizer in a time when these luxuries were unknown.

purify food and drink - Ever played Oregon Trail? No more death for disentery, no more food poisoning which in the past was far more common. And that without taking in consideration more serious issues like cholera. A life saver.

light - Less impressive than other cantrips, but it means needing no more candles, which for a poor family is a big gain.

mending - Broken furnitures, worn clothes - expecially the shoes - and even more serious things like mending cart wheels ( who can mean avoid an unexpected night out in the wild ).

cure minor wounds - This alone would be worth the effort becoming an adept. A relative or friend is dying with grievous wound? That single life point healed is enough to stop the bleeding and save his life. The atrocious pain of cavities? Cure minor wounds, done. Arthritis, rheumatism and countless other sources of suffering? It can't mend them, but at least it makes the pain go away.


Not to mention even the village fool ( Wisdom 8 ) will someday be able to cast these cantrips ( when he gets old ) and even level 1 spells ( if he reaches venerable age ). So, most people would be able to be an adept, getting older and Wiser.

And about those level 1 spells:

endure elements - Never again suffering the scorching heat or the freezing cold of winter. Things who cost the life of countless people back in the ancient times. And even today, in some places.

sleep - As an insomniac, I would gladly spend 10 years studying just to get that spell.

cure light wound - And now we get serious. Strained sinews, broken bones, serious burns: not only the wound is healed, there is no scar tissue ( which can be as painful as the wound itself ).




---


So, given half a chance, shouldn't every commoner try to get his hands on an Adept level?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Don't forget about the relatively huge amount of money made off of spellcasting services.

No, supply and demand don't exist in D&D.
https://i.imgflip.com/1x4dzk.jpg

[Bavarian itP]

Well, if you play in a setting where every NPC can choose their classes freely ...
but don't forget that the word "Adept" means they were initiated by someone. There might be a restriction here.

[Conradine]

Well, being a commoner means being, at least intellectually, lazy. It's people who never try to improve themselves.
One can be everything else, from expert to adept to warrior, and still doing farmer work.

[the_david]

It's either that, or maxing out profession for a whopping 9 gp per week.

[Conradine]

Or both, why not.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Well, being a commoner means being, at least intellectually, lazy. It's people who never try to improve themselves.
One can be everything else, from expert to adept to warrior, and still doing farmer work.Just be a druid. Nature gives you everything, so you don't have to do much studying (assuming no skill points in Knowledge: Knature), and you can use the spells to water, plant, grow, and harvest your crops. If nothing else, you can summon burrowing animals to aerate, till, and fertilize the soil, and critters to help you harvest them, too. And even if you have a low Wisdom score, you still get a pet to help you do the work.

[liquidformat]

I think the key there is 'given half a chance', though it isn't always straight up stated it is heavily implied that learning any magic is pretty restricted in most settings. With that said it has always bugged me that the noble class is mundane and has no magic, it is completely ridiculous to think that the ruling class of a country would waste their time with a class that provides no magical support. Sure commoner, warrior, and expert are just fine for the masses but the ruling class hasn't figured out the importance of magic enough to specifically train in it? come on give me a break.

On a side note, Night Haunt is am amazing feat for any commoner, the power and versatility of Prestidigitation and unseen servant in conjunction with 1 hour duration make this feat incredibly powerful for your average person in any setting.


Well, being a commoner means being, at least intellectually, lazy. It's people who never try to improve themselves.
One can be everything else, from expert to adept to warrior, and still doing farmer work.

This implies everyone gets to choose their class which is very debatable. Granted it bothers me that commoner is the default when it is worse than taking humanoid rhd, why did the developers even create humanoid rhd if they were going to make commoner the default.

[Conradine]

This implies everyone gets to choose their class which is very debatable.

Commoner means learning as little as possible. I guess most commoner spend their little free time in drunken stupor.
Experts? They spend their time trying to improve their trade.
Warriors? Push ups, individual combat drill and the like.
Adepts? Meditation, plus some experimentation.

Not at PC level but these classes at least try.

[liquidformat]

Commoner means learning as little as possible. I guess most commoner spend their little free time in drunken stupor.
Experts? They spend their time trying to improve their trade.
Warriors? Push ups, individual combat drill and the like.
Adepts? Meditation, plus some experimentation.

Not at PC level but these classes at least try.

You forgot magewright...

This is making the assumption that all it takes to become a different class is effort which isn't true. The rules straight out of the phb require training done by someone with the class that you are trying to enter. That in and of itself can be restrictive, if becoming a certain class requires apprenticeship or schooling then only those with the means to acquire said training will be able to get it.

[The Viscount]

Usually when I see discussions of this sort the answer is that in a D&D world where you seek to solve these sorts of problems, self-resetting traps of basic spells are how these problems are tackled rather than class levels.

As has been mentioned above, there's the definite implication that training or initiation is required, and there are often incentives to restrict who can receive what training.

There's also the fact that at certain points D&D doesn't well emulate life. Humanoids trade their first racial hit die for a class based hit die. This would suggest that there is a point before they become Commoners that young humans are rocking a d8 and simple weapon proficiencies, and then they just suddenly become weaker. Or if they begin in the class, they're doomed from birth to be commoners. Or they simply don't have stats before starting age, and are untouchable statless beings like the Lady of Pain.

[liquidformat]

Usually when I see discussions of this sort the answer is that in a D&D world where you seek to solve these sorts of problems, self-resetting traps of basic spells are how these problems are tackled rather than class levels.

As has been mentioned above, there's the definite implication that training or initiation is required, and there are often incentives to restrict who can receive what training.

There's also the fact that at certain points D&D doesn't well emulate life. Humanoids trade their first racial hit die for a class based hit die. This would suggest that there is a point before they become Commoners that young humans are rocking a d8 and simple weapon proficiencies, and then they just suddenly become weaker. Or if they begin in the class, they're doomed from birth to be commoners. Or they simply don't have stats before starting age, and are untouchable statless beings like the Lady of Pain.

In a setting I have been building I have made commoner the 'child' class, and just use humanoid as the default for adult human 'commoners'. It still isn't a great class but it plugs a lot of the dumb logic holes of d&d...

[icefractal]

I imagine that's how all those cults recruit the expendable members that the leader sends to (usually fail to) stall the PCs while he finishes the ritual.

"Hey you, want divine power? Want real magic like those priests with their golden armor?"
"Well yeah ..."
"Ever hear of Orcus?"
"... no?"
"That's fine! Come with me, put on this robe, and you'll have power in no time!"

[Biggus]

I was thinking...
let's rule out getting level of wizard or cleric as being to difficult, but shouldn't every person with an inch of brain in a classical d&d world try his best to get a level as Adept? Life become so much easier and comfy.

So, given half a chance, shouldn't every commoner try to get his hands on an Adept level?

An adept is defined as a "wise woman/ holy man" type figure, basically a tribal shaman/ medicine man/ woman type figure. It takes years of study to become one, even if you're able to do so full-time. A typical subsistence-farming village will only support one person who isn't producing food to do that training at any given time.

When PCs multiclass, DMs tend assume that they've been training for their new class in their spare time for a long time before they take their first level, but this is a hand-wave partly to keep the game fun and partly because PCs are assumed to be exceptional people who learn new skills more quickly than the average person. An average person would find it very difficult to do a full-time job and train as an adept in their spare time, and would take many years to "qualify" even if they could.

Also, this knowledge is typically not given to just anybody, the shaman/ka tends to select a single student they consider worthy of passing it on to. This may be to safeguard their own position, but it may also be out of genuine concern for the harm magical knowledge could do in the hands of the selfish or careless, or not wanting to waste their time teaching those too lazy or lacking in talent to ever make much progress.


Well, being a commoner means being, at least intellectually, lazy. It's people who never try to improve themselves.
One can be everything else, from expert to adept to warrior, and still doing farmer work.

No. This is a gross oversimplification. Laziness is only one of a large number of reasons that might prevent someone from studying to become another class as well as being a farmer. To mention just a few:

- many people are too tired at the end of their work day to do anything nonessential. By definition, half the population has below-average Constitution, and one of the effects of that is getting tired easily.

- mental health conditions may prevent someone from achieving their full potential. At any given time, about 5% of the population suffers from depression, and 25% of people will suffer mental illness of diagnosable severity at some point in their life.

- a large number of people have sick or elderly relatives to care for, which takes up any spare time and energy they have.

- the opportunities to train in other classes may not be available, especially in isolated communities, and as I mentioned above, the local adept may not be willing to share their knowledge with just anyone.

To say that all Commoners never improve themselves because they're just lazy is to completely fail to understand the reality of a typical Commoner's life.

[the_david]

I imagine that's how all those cults recruit the expendable members that the leader sends to (usually fail to) stall the PCs while he finishes the ritual.

"Hey you, want divine power? Want real magic like those priests with their golden armor?"
"Well yeah ..."
"Ever hear of Orcus?"
"... no?"
"That's fine! Come with me, put on this robe, and you'll have power in no time!"

Yeah, and then a party of murderhobos comes along and kills all the cultists. Being a commoner is just a safe way of not getting killed.

[liquidformat]

I would agree with Biggus, lets take a community adept for example. It most likely takes years of focused effort for them to train an apprentice so even if they aren't purposely being miserly and hording information they are going to focus their time and effort on promising youngsters not on anyone who comes asking.

On a bit of a side note, we can take random starting age per class as an indication of how long it takes to train/apprentice someone in a particular class.

[Conradine]

An average person would find it very difficult to do a full-time job and train as an adept in their spare time, and would take many years to "qualify" even if they could.

I agree. But I also think the prize is more than worth the effort.



- the opportunities to train in other classes may not be available, especially in isolated communities,

The Player's Handbook says some Fighters are self taught, so I think that the Warrior class is accessible to anyone who's strong enough to lift a weapon and spends enough time exercising with it, even alone.

About being an expert, is a matter of observation, to pick skills where you can find them as often as formal training. Learn a bit of this, a bit of that from the elders.



A typical subsistence-farming village will only support one person who isn't producing food to do that training at any given time.


Only if oppressed by heavy taxation and near-slavery indentured serviture.
All it takes to survive is an handful of Survival points and half day spent hunting / fishing / gathering. Many hermits did that in several times and locations.

[liquidformat]

The Player's Handbook says some Fighters are self taught, so I think that the Warrior class is accessible to anyone who's strong enough to lift a weapon and spends enough time exercising with it, even alone.

So looking at the random starting age for a human fighter we can say training takes 1-6 years past 'adulthood' so if we assume most humans start their schooling around 10 years old that is 6 to 11 years of training to make a fighter. Given the above we can say 11 years for self taught fighters. I think it is fair to go with barbarian/rogue/ sorcerer age range for warriors so 6-9 years of training for a warrior, 9 for self taught.
Doing some googlefu most apprenticeships in medieval times were 7-10 years so the fighter 1d6 roll is probably appropriate for experts too and adepts and magewrights probably fall between bard and cleric so maybe 2d4 would be good? Either way it seems like expert, magewright, and adept are not available for self taught...

Anyways that is quite the commitment in time and resources even when focusing your effort full time. A lot of people are not able to drop everything and run off into the woods to teach themselves to be warriors due to family responsibilities. And even of those hermits a large majority of them are going to die before they succeed on their training, there is more than just gathering food you have to worry about if you go full hermit.


Only if oppressed by heavy taxation and near-slavery indentured serviture.
All it takes to survive is an handful of Survival points and half day spent hunting / fishing / gathering. Many hermits did that in several times and locations.

That also assumes climate/weather conditions are favorable, for example those same survival checks should be substantially increased during winter in a cold climate, the desert, and so forth. Though in a temperate rain forest or hot jungle those checks can be assumed to be very stable.
Besides gathering food as a hermit, you have to worry about shelter, self protection, and dealing with disease and injuries so no it takes more than just a handful of survival points to make it.

[JNAProductions]

Just a reminder-D&D does a crap job modeling reality.

Using the rules as physics of the worlds leads to weirdness at best.

[Venger]

I imagine that's how all those cults recruit the expendable members that the leader sends to (usually fail to) stall the PCs while he finishes the ritual.

"Hey you, want divine power? Want real magic like those priests with their golden armor?"
"Well yeah ..."
"Ever hear of Orcus?"
"... no?"
"That's fine! Come with me, put on this robe, and you'll have power in no time!"

It's not their fault commoners don't have religion as a class skill. Your dialogue is actually explicitly canon, and is how the bulk of recruiting for evil gods is done as detailed in FC2

As far as this kind of thing goes, my default assumption is that people in D&D don't choose their classes themselves because classes don't exist as in-universe constructs. I know that this kind of isn't true, since there's lore on various prestige classes and whatnot, but there's just no way anyone would choose to be a commoner when other any other option was available.

As far as why they don't choose adept specifically, again, I assume a person on Oerth doesn't assign their own ability scores, so they might just have a crap wisdom and be incapable of doing anything as an adept, so even if they could choose their class, they would be unable to excel at it.

[Maat Mons]

Permitting commoners to better themselves would allow them to obtain some measure of power. If commoners had power, they'd be more difficult to exploit. And less exploitation of commoners is bad for everyone ... except the commoners. So, obviously, the resources necessary for self-improvement are not made available to commoners.

I mean, imagine if you had a self-driving car, and the car asked you to install software that would permit it to do things other than drive you from place to place, you'd have to be stupid to agree. That's clearly step one towards the car not driving you wherever you want to go. And that's what a self-driving car is for.

[ayvango]

- many people are too tired at the end of their work day to do anything nonessential.
Take 1 level of druid and you would have all essentials you need in a rural setting.

[Braininthejar2]

The people need to seize the means of spellcasting!

[Crake]

Are people just going to straight up ignore the fact that divine spellcasters need an incredible amount of faith and dedication that the average person doesnt have?

Arcane casting and feat-based SLAs i can back, but everyone with divine casting? Yeah, nah.

[Mechalich]

It's worth noting that, at some point, there's enough low-level magic going around it becomes largely redundant, and the standard D&D demographic assumptions are actually quite close to that point (in Pathfinder, with infinite orsions, they absolutely are). Every hamlet of at least 80 people is almost guaranteed to have at least an adept, cleric, or druid, and probably more than that. The 'typical' D&D 200 person hamlet given in the DMG has 5 divine casters: a 1st level adept, 1st level druid, 2 1st level clerics, and a 3rd level cleric. In this situation, divine casters are fully 2.5% of the rural population, and arcane casters are another 1% (the typical hamlet hosts a 1st level bard and a 1st level wizard).

There are already a lot of low-level casters in 3.5, arguably way too many. No need for more.

[Inchhighguy]

Well, that is not the way people work.

It's like saying ''why would not every person choose not to be fit and healthy?" Should not everyone be in peak health and peak physical condition for thier whole life? It makes sense to do it, right?

"Why does not every person get a good education?" Why does not everyone take up an art form? Why does not everyone take up music? Why does not everyone take a martial art? Why does not everyone take self defence training? Why does not everyone learn how to use a weapon?

[Venger]

Are people just going to straight up ignore the fact that divine spellcasters need an incredible amount of faith and dedication that the average person doesnt have?

Arcane casting and feat-based SLAs i can back, but everyone with divine casting? Yeah, nah.
No they don't. In forgotten realms, the gods demonstrably exist in the same way rocks and trees do, and even if you can't find one you like, you can just get your powers from abstract concepts you think are cool. In eberron, the gods don't exist at all, and you get your powers from the placebo effect. Either way, faith doesn't play into it. If classes are assigned randomly at birth, there'd be just as many of them as arcane casters, and if you can choose classes in-universe, there would also be no barrier to entry. If anything, they'd be more common, since poor people wouldn't need to spend money on knowing spells like wizards.


Well, that is not the way people work.

It's like saying ''why would not every person choose not to be fit and healthy?" Should not everyone be in peak health and peak physical condition for thier whole life? It makes sense to do it, right?

"Why does not every person get a good education?" Why does not everyone take up an art form? Why does not everyone take up music? Why does not everyone take a martial art? Why does not everyone take self defence training? Why does not everyone learn how to use a weapon?
There seems to be a pretty clear split: people who assume people choose classes say npcs should pick good classes, and people who don't don't.

[StevenC21]

I, for one, firmly believe that all commoners should trade their class levels and become sorcerers. You get free arcane magic from the woz/sorc list (the best magic by the way).

Not to mention gobs of slots.

No special intelligence needed. Read Dale Carnegie and you're set for life.

[Blackhawk748]

I see all these people calling Farmers Commoners. Farmers (and anyone else with a job that requires any actual level of skill) are Experts in my games. Commoner is reserved for the lowest of untrained labor, beggars and children.

As for why, my guess would be time, or the fact that the Devs didn't really think about it and so they just assumed that everyone would be mundane and boring except for the town priest even though that makes no real sense in a setting that has learnable magic that is easily abused to make a post-scarcity society.

[White Blade]

I was thinking...
let's rule out getting level of wizard or cleric as being to difficult, but shouldn't every person with an inch of brain in a classical d&d world try his best to get a level as Adept? Life become so much easier and comfy.

Let's talk about a miserable Wisdom 10 adept who can only cast cantrips:

create water - No more having to walk perhaps miles to the nearest water weel or river. The weel is near? No more need to exit home during a thunderstorm, an hailstorm, or a scorching hot summer afternoon. Not to mention the very, very pratical use as toilet hygienizer in a time when these luxuries were unknown.

purify food and drink - Ever played Oregon Trail? No more death for disentery, no more food poisoning which in the past was far more common. And that without taking in consideration more serious issues like cholera. A life saver.

light - Less impressive than other cantrips, but it means needing no more candles, which for a poor family is a big gain.

mending - Broken furnitures, worn clothes - expecially the shoes - and even more serious things like mending cart wheels ( who can mean avoid an unexpected night out in the wild ).

cure minor wounds - This alone would be worth the effort becoming an adept. A relative or friend is dying with grievous wound? That single life point healed is enough to stop the bleeding and save his life. The atrocious pain of cavities? Cure minor wounds, done. Arthritis, rheumatism and countless other sources of suffering? It can't mend them, but at least it makes the pain go away.


Not to mention even the village fool ( Wisdom 8 ) will someday be able to cast these cantrips ( when he gets old ) and even level 1 spells ( if he reaches venerable age ). So, most people would be able to be an adept, getting older and Wiser.

And about those level 1 spells:

endure elements - Never again suffering the scorching heat or the freezing cold of winter. Things who cost the life of countless people back in the ancient times. And even today, in some places.

sleep - As an insomniac, I would gladly spend 10 years studying just to get that spell.

cure light wound - And now we get serious. Strained sinews, broken bones, serious burns: not only the wound is healed, there is no scar tissue ( which can be as painful as the wound itself ).

---

So, given half a chance, shouldn't every commoner try to get his hands on an Adept level?
A level one expert is sufficient to keep an entire village healthy at all times. Players tend to forget it because it's not equal to spells, but the heal skill is absolutely bonkers - Skill Focus (Heal), a healer's kit, and four ranks will get you a +9 with a Wisdom of 10 and you can take ten so of course you do. That's every disease in the SRD cured except mummy rot, ten minutes a piece, and it's not even steep investment. If you get damage, ability points or hit points, long-term care is a fifteen DC. So that's most injuries, except limb loss which the Adept 1 can't address anyway. A human commoner could do the same thing taking self-sufficient and cross-class ranks.

Why would you invest in these spells? Light to free you from candles? Mending to fix your broken objects? Candles cost 1 CP and you have Profession AND Craft as class skills, you can get fifty copper pieces for trying either of those skills for a week without ranks. The annual income of an average Commoner who maxes one at first level is 286 Gold Pieces.

Where you've gone wrong is assuming that the D&D rules are simulationist. But if you were right in that assumption, you just got it flat wrong - The D&D world is not a feudal society because it is low income and low-tech. Commoners are not poor. They're rich, their medicine is better than ours, and most people have a fair range of useful competencies that help their daily life. It is a feudal society because only a narrow class of talented knights, clergy, and wizards are competent enough to handle the monsters that live at the edge of civilization and are threatening to burst in and kill you in your sleep.

[Kalkra]

A level one expert is sufficient to keep an entire village healthy at all times. Players tend to forget it because it's not equal to spells, but the heal skill is absolutely bonkers - Skill Focus (Heal), a healer's kit, and four ranks will get you a +9 with a Wisdom of 10 and you can take ten so of course you do. That's every disease in the SRD cured except mummy rot, ten minutes a piece, and it's not even steep investment. If you get damage, ability points or hit points, long-term care is a fifteen DC. So that's most injuries, except limb loss which the Adept 1 can't address anyway. A human commoner could do the same thing taking self-sufficient and cross-class ranks.

Why would you invest in these spells? Light to free you from candles? Mending to fix your broken objects? Candles cost 1 CP and you have Profession AND Craft as class skills, you can get fifty copper pieces for trying either of those skills for a week without ranks. The annual income of an average Commoner who maxes one at first level is 286 Gold Pieces.

Where you've gone wrong is assuming that the D&D rules are simulationist. But if you were right in that assumption, you just got it flat wrong - The D&D world is not a feudal society because it is low income and low-tech. Commoners are not poor. They're rich, their medicine is better than ours, and most people have a fair range of useful competencies that help their daily life. It is a feudal society because only a narrow class of talented knights, clergy, and wizards are competent enough to handle the monsters that live at the edge of civilization and are threatening to burst in and kill you in your sleep.

Don't forget the insane power of aid another, both for Heal, and especially for any Craft skill. Just gather up all the commoners, and have them all aid one guy with ranks in Craft to craft expensive things extra fast.

[Endarire]

This thread's premise seems very similar to my recent thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?592797-What-mundane-household-tasks-become-much-easier-more-pleasant-as-a-Wizard1) on Wizard1.

[Conradine]

The R.A. Salvatore novels do not describe such an happy reality for commoners.

[TalonOfAnathrax]

The R.A. Salvatore novels do not describe such an happy reality for commoners.
This means that Forgotten Realms isn't a very well-designed setting. What a surprise!

I don't suppose you could elaborate though? I don't remember Salvatore depicting extreme poverty anywhere except Luscan, and Luscan was a ****hole living under "rule of the strong" so the local poverty can probably just be explained by enormous tithes and racketeering.
Indeed, while most peasants are ill-educated and weak in combat, I can't remember any of them seeming especially poor. They had clothes, tools and candles as needed. They seemed to eat well enough. They suffered from monster attacks and whatnot, but that's a normal part of D&D settings regardless of peasant wealth.

[Jack_Simth]

Hmm.

Suppose for a moment that NPC classes had a feature not listed on their DMG entries:
They gain a small amount of XP automatically over time, provided they stay pure-classed NPC's.

Something like...
Adept: 1 xp every 4 days
Expert: 1 xp every 3 days
Aristocrat / Warrior: 1 xp every 2 days
Commoner: 1 xp every day

Possibly modified by expected lifespan of the base race (so elves get less, kobolds get more). Would that make Adept as attractive? The commoner will hit level 3 in 3,000 days (about 8 years), at which point the adept will not yet have hit level 2.

[Zombimode]

So, given half a chance, shouldn't every commoner try to get his hands on an Adept level?

The same way every person should get the best education possible. You can see for yourself how well this works out.


The thing is "taking a level" is not something you can just do. The player can but a person in the gameworld can't. Bob the Dirtfarmer is a level 3 Commoner not because Bob himself was thinking "This Commoner class looks mighty fine. I think I will take as many levels I can", but because considering the collective experiences, traits and abilities of Bob, his standign and place in the world as well as his personal outlook, Commoner 3 is an adequat description of Bob in the language we are using (D&D 3.5/PF) for the description layer.

[Conradine]

I don't suppose you could elaborate though? I don't remember Salvatore depicting extreme poverty anywhere except Luscan, and Luscan was a ****hole living under "rule of the strong" so the local poverty can probably just be explained by enormous tithes and racketeering.

In The Spine of the World peasants are described living fairly poor, although not excruciatingly poor, lives.
For sure they don't get to gain more or less 300 gp in a year.

[White Blade]

In The Spine of the World peasants are described living fairly poor, although not excruciatingly poor, lives.
For sure they don't get to gain more or less 300 gp in a year.

1) I cannot help the fact that D&D is not simulationist and therefore novels are not representative of such a setting.

2) If I were to try to explain this, which is of course unnecessary because you’re just reading the system wrong -
A) Feudal tax systems are notoriously regressive, so it’s easy to say it got taxed out of them.
B) Money economies don’t really penetrate villages, so the peasants aren’t passing gold pieces around but their stock of favors in the village - Non-monetary societies don’t do this in an “attempt to break even”, they just maintain pools of good will. In this interpretation, commoners ARE getting gold pieces worth of services. The village has pooled its resources and bought a Well of Prestidigiation to clean clothes with, Everglowing Lamps, Hallowed ground to bury their dead on (locked down with protection from Evil), scrolls of useful spells for the local 1st level wizard to transcribe, maintaining a dwarven architect to help with the local barn raising/mining operations, paying for the local guards, and so forth. As individuals, they’re also clean, healthy, and well-fed - If they need amusement, they can go down to the square and listen to the bard or a sermon from the cleric or playing rough games like rugby knowing the village healers can patch them up.

[Willie the Duck]

Well, that is not the way people work.

It's like saying ''why would not every person choose not to be fit and healthy?" Should not everyone be in peak health and peak physical condition for thier whole life? It makes sense to do it, right?

Since these are effectively careers, I think a better analogy would be that self-satisfied friend/uncle they see at holidays who doesn't understand why everyone doesn't do whatever career they did that worked out so well for them. That of course ignores that society only needs so many software engineers or car salesmen (or whatever), and absolutely does need a lot more grocery store clerks and ditch diggers.


As for why, my guess would be time, or the fact that the Devs didn't really think about it and so they just assumed that everyone would be mundane and boring except for the town priest even though that makes no real sense in a setting that has learnable magic that is easily abused to make a post-scarcity society.

D&D has a long and storied history of having a gamist and PC-facing rules structure that didn't really care about how the rules played out outside of how it makes things work for the PCs. The D&D world isn't a post-scarcity society because you want to play your dungeon-crawling elfgame in a world that looks like Renaissance Fair-informed pseudo late middle ages/feudal Europe (but with monsters), and where that contradicts with the rules structures, the answer has always been, effectively, 'well, that's how it works for PCs, but for the rest of the world, it doesn't.' D&D 3e kinda puts a wrench in those works by trying to make the rest of the world make sense (what with NPC classes, actual demographics, bonified stats for hardness and hit points of walls and doors and such, monsters having attributes and even levelling-up in a vaguely PC-like fashion, and so on and so forth), but it only does so in half-measures. As to the Devs not thinking about it, I think we can't know, but I'd hazard that the Devs didn't think we'd care about it, so didn't think they needed to have it all fit together seamlessly. Commoners are commoners because the DM uses them when they need a character representing a peasant and doesn't need to have any specific skill or ability. If they were an adept or an expert, well then they wouldn't be a commoner and now they don't fill the role you were looking for them to fill.

[Conradine]

The same way every person should get the best education possible. You can see for yourself how well this works out.

A very good education doesn't spare you cavities, headaches, reumathisms, arthritis and countless other pains.
The prize of magic is way more appealing.

[White Blade]

A very good education doesn't spare you cavities, headaches, reumathisms, arthritis and countless other pains.
The prize of magic is way more appealing.

Magic doesn’t do meaningfully better than the Heal skill in D&D though. This is literally a simulationist fact. Any level 1 expert could treat anyone with long-term care and treat those problems as well as adept 1.

[Conradine]

Long term care which is often painful.

[liquidformat]

There seems to be a pretty clear split: people who assume people choose classes say npcs should pick good classes, and people who don't don't.

You are missing a group. While everyone is 'free' to choose their class, only commoner can be obtained without any training. Fighter and Warrior can be self trained but require an exorbitant amount of time to do so and the rest require an apprenticeship or schooling and is cost restrictive to most commoners. Simply, easy, and seems to be RAW.

[White Blade]

Long term care which is often painful.

Absolutely nothing implies that. Even if true, which again no evidence, there’s always the village adept to treat it.

[The Viscount]

I see all these people calling Farmers Commoners. Farmers (and anyone else with a job that requires any actual level of skill) are Experts in my games. Commoner is reserved for the lowest of untrained labor, beggars and children.


I'm curious, what skills do your farmers need that they don't get from Commoner?

[tiercel]

As far as I can tell, this whole discussion/phenomenon is less about “why not take at least one level of X?” and more about “why does anyone take any levels of Commoner?” (much less any other NPC class, really).

The very existence of Commoner and other NPC classes seems to imply that “regular” NPCs don’t really get a choice, per se, about their classes: they are literally stuck in their pseudo-feudal roles. Only characters who attain actual agency / are swept up by circumstance and wind up in the crazy daring lifestyle of an adventurer wind up in adventuring, i.e. PC, classes.

(Yes, there are exceptions insofar as there are non-adventuring NPC wizards, clerics, et al., but if the DMG is anything to go by, these are genuinely somehow exceptional persons who have PC levels because of their unusual roles.)

[liquidformat]

I'm curious, what skills do your farmers need that they don't get from Commoner?

as far as I can tell they just need profession (farmer) and if they are really fancy maybe cross class knowledge (Nature).

Comically a commoner can have profession (blacksmith) without any smithing craft skills and still perform well as a blacksmith which I find comical...

[Bohandas]

My headcanon is that even with the prerequisite spellcasting scores not everyone has what it takes to learn magic within a human lifespan and still deal with the day to day rigors of life while learning it. And that the reason why elves, gnomes, and dwarves are seen as magical is that they have a disproportionately high concentration of adepts, magewrights (and - for those without the wisdom or intelligence to be spellcasters - experts and aristocrats) Because they have the time to learn these vocations things without devoting all of their time to it. Indeed, an elven childhood is long enough to learn it without even devoting much time to it. The adept class in particular is also why they seem to have a closer connection with their gods. It also explains how elves can live in more luxury yet use less developed land.


The very existence of Commoner and other NPC classes seems to imply that “regular” NPCs don’t really get a choice, per se, about their classes: they are literally stuck in their pseudo-feudal roles. Only characters who attain actual agency / are swept up by circumstance and wind up in the crazy daring lifestyle of an adventurer wind up in adventuring, i.e. PC, classes.

Yes, but the Adept is an NPC class, as is the Magewright

[MaxiDuRaritry]

<snip> those without the wisdom or intelligence to be spellcasters <snip> ...aristocrats)That makes waaay too much sense.

[liquidformat]

My headcanon is that even with the prerequisite spellcasting scores not everyone has what it takes to learn magic within a human lifespan and still deal with the day to day rigors of life while learning it. And that the reason why elves, gnomes, and dwarves are seen as magical is that they have a disproportionately high concentration of adepts, magewrights (and - for those without the wisdom or intelligence to be spellcasters - experts and aristocrats) Because they have the time to learn these vocations things without devoting all of their time to it. Indeed, an elven childhood is long enough to learn it without even devoting much time to it. The adept class in particular is also why they seem to have a closer connection with their gods. It also explains how elves can live in more luxury yet use less developed land.



Yes, but the Adept is an NPC class, as is the Magewright

That is actually a pretty cool idea and would explain the discrepancy in starting age between races. Only the true savants of man and half-orc kind are taught; whereas, most anyone with even a modicum of potential will have a caster level or two in elven society. Also although I am not sure about gnome or dwarves I know elves are in many settings presented as having few children and possibly struggle with reproduction compared with humans. If that is true then you would expect society to focus more and put more resources into each child than human/orc society.

[Conradine]

The thief class, skill monkey definitive, is self taught too most of the times.

[Blackhawk748]

I'm curious, what skills do your farmers need that they don't get from Commoner?

Its not the particular skills, its the number. Commoner gives only 2 skills which one will be used on a Profession or a Craft. that leaves one skill which goes gods know where. Every farmer I know would have a rank or two in a few Crafts, Profession Farmer, Knowledge Nature and probably Knowledge Local. Expert does this far easier than Commoner.

[Psionic Dog]

My headcanon says in addition to the 10% Elite/90% Non-elite stat distribution there is a 20% ambitious / 80% complacent split.

2% of the population are elite-ambitious with PC levels. Those with wisdom are going to to be Clerics/Druids/Paladins/Rangers, not Adepts.

72% of the population are non-elite-complacent: commoners or racial-HD-only types. Some own small half-competent dirt farms they inherited: others are day-laborers carrying heavy stuff or making aid-another checks. Half of them might dream of being an adept, but it doesn't come easy and they aren't willing to put in the effort/commitment to learn.

8% are those talented kids who goofed off and still got above average grades. They haven't made the effort to be PCs, but with raw talent, a tutor, and easy access to equipment becoming an Adept, Aristocrat, or like just happened.

The last 18% followed the OPs advice, worked hard, stayed focused, and managed to become an Adept/Export/Warrior or otherwise not-a-commoner despite average stats and limited opportunities.

[Ramza00]

I am now imagining "a cult of clean living" where it is a cult, but this cult also has everyone have some adept levelsthe cult teaches the mystic arts to other members of the cult so the cult member's life is actually better than the traditional commoners, yet at the same time they are a cult.

Something something happens and now the low level cult members are trying to kill your super low level party.

[Blackhawk748]

I am now imagining "a cult of clean living" where it is a cult, but this cult also has everyone have some adept levelsthe cult teaches the mystic arts to other members of the cult so the cult member's life is actually better than the traditional commoners, yet at the same time they are a cult.

Something something happens and now the low level cult members are trying to kill your super low level party.

the PCs didn't wipe their feet when they came into the tavern

[Morty]

It's a bit hard to argue with the OP, given that he's mostly using non-sequiturs that have a loose connection to other posters' counter-points. There are three main conclusions to be had from this discussion and those like it, though:

A) The class system designed for adventuring PCs can't represent civilians going through their life. NPC classes are therefore of questionable necessity, at least past the fifth level.

B) Most D&D settings don't properly account for the presence of magic. Some people can roll with it and others don't. But pointing it out is stating the obvious and trying to analyse it is largely purposeless.

C) The Commoner class is based on ideas about history rooted largely in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Only that film actually had a medieval historian onboard.

[Blue Jay]

A level one expert is sufficient to keep an entire village healthy at all times. Players tend to forget it because it's not equal to spells, but the heal skill is absolutely bonkers - Skill Focus (Heal), a healer's kit, and four ranks will get you a +9 with a Wisdom of 10 and you can take ten so of course you do. That's every disease in the SRD cured except mummy rot, ten minutes a piece, and it's not even steep investment...

Yeah, the skill system is too easy to abuse in 3.5.

But, you can't actually cure a disease in 10 minutes. What you can do in 10 minutes is make one Heal check to replace one saving throw your patient has to make against a disease that they've already contracted. Completely overcoming a disease takes two successful saving throws, 24 hours apart. Devil chills takes 3 saves. So, even with the Heal skill, your patient still has to suffer the symptoms of the disease for at least 24 hours.

It's really not all that absurd.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I'm thinking most people are like the townsfolk in Beauty and the Beast (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTUZswZHsWQ). They don't have the mental processes that highly educated people do. It's not that they're not clever or smart; they just weren't raised with ideas that condition the brain to think in certain ways, so they find ideas difficult to comprehend. Like, language is extremely important to a developing mind. At a certain level of language, most minds find concepts that can't be described by the relatively simple words they know to be almost impossible to think about, and they find thinking about new concepts incredibly strange and difficult. The minds that pioneer new areas of thought are very rare and unusual, and if human history (and human nature) has taught me anything, it's that such minds tend to be underappreciated and even shunned in their own lifetimes, only to be fully appreciated centuries later, once such language and ideas are more widespread.

[White Blade]

Yeah, the skill system is too easy to abuse in 3.5.

But, you can't actually cure a disease in 10 minutes. What you can do in 10 minutes is make one Heal check to replace one saving throw your patient has to make against a disease that they've already contracted. Completely overcoming a disease takes two successful saving throws, 24 hours apart. Devil chills takes 3 saves. So, even with the Heal skill, your patient still has to suffer the symptoms of the disease for at least 24 hours.

It's really not all that absurd.

You can still treat them for the ability damage as they’re laid up in bed, so Devil’s chills sufferers can still be relatively active and such. It’s still excellent medical care, though, which was really my point - Heal is actually probably better than modern medical care.

[calam]

yeah, I have to agree its all in getting that half a chance in the first place. I don't know if there were any stated numbers in 3.5 for cost of living but in pathfinder we're probably looking at anywhere between 3 to 10 gold a month depending on if they are living with relatives but helping out with money and chores or if they are living by themselves.

Assuming that adept (and probably expert if I think about it) are considered self taught we're talking about 3 and a half years of training on average for a human where they are either doing double shifts every day like most students dread (and that if this is being done by people before they became adults this will probably be untrained work) or they're being economically supported by someone else.

For the cost of living if you assume that the training itself is free because your would be adept has free access to the books, experimental materials or whatever else is needed to learn how to become an adept this will still be either be 126gp for someone who is getting some family aid or 420gp if we're talking about someone who's pausing a couple years of harvests so they can learn to be an adept. Of course this is all assuming no medieval style taxation, banditry or any other sudden expenses.

This of course does not necessarily mean it can't be common in your setting. In your world there might be subsidized access to magical learning materials, the expenses aren't much higher than the assumed level in pathfinder and one or both parents take home the roughly 8 gold a week earned by a reasonably trained worker with masterwork tools according to the profession rules which would ensure that parents can get a training fund for every child to become an adept or any other self trained class.

edit:just realized that my original post ignored how there can be both practical (there are no adepts to borrow books from) and legal (banning people from learning above their station) as well

[smetzger]

A more interesting question is... if my campaign world had adepts as the default class instead of commoner, what would it look like?

[Ramza00]

the PCs didn't wipe their feet when they came into the tavern

A Prestidigitation and being mindful enough to use the Cantrip would solve this problem. Yet Prestidigitation is not on the Adept List, so we need to create cult rituals around wiping one's feet, or else we kill you :smalltongue:

(Maybe Prestidigitation is on one of those variant Adepts list for there are variant Adepts in the various splat books out there saying Adding X spells such as domain spells and so on to your Adept list.)

[lord_khaine]

I'm thinking most people are like the townsfolk in Beauty and the Beast. They don't have the mental processes that highly educated people do. It's not that they're not clever or smart; they just weren't raised with ideas that condition the brain to think in certain ways, so they find ideas difficult to comprehend. Like, language is extremely important to a developing mind. At a certain level of language, most minds find concepts that can't be described by the relatively simple words they know to be almost impossible to think about, and they find thinking about new concepts incredibly strange and difficult. The minds that pioneer new areas of thought are very rare and unusual, and if human history (and human nature) has taught me anything, it's that such minds tend to be underappreciated and even shunned in their own lifetimes, only to be fully appreciated centuries later, once such language and ideas are more widespread.

Thats actually a really important point.
I found the youtube video i saw on the subject.
Among other things, it explains why out average IQ level has steadily been increasing the last century or so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vpqilhW9uI

Do watch it, the examples it brings are kinda shocking, about what sort of abstract thinking we takes for granted, that was hard in old days.
Like the people who had trouble with "The Bears are White in greenland, Nuuk is a town in greenland. What color does the bears have in Nuuk?"

[liquidformat]

A Prestidigitation and being mindful enough to use the Cantrip would solve this problem. Yet Prestidigitation is not on the Adept List, so we need to create cult rituals around wiping one's feet, or else we kill you :smalltongue:

(Maybe Prestidigitation is on one of those variant Adepts list for there are variant Adepts in the various splat books out there saying Adding X spells such as domain spells and so on to your Adept list.)

Like I said on page one that is why all npcs should take Night Haunt feat at level 1. It gives 1/day prestidigitation and invisible servant for an hour; both of which are super powerful for low level npc in their daily life and have no requirements to take.


A more interesting question is... if my campaign world had adepts as the default class instead of commoner, what would it look like?

It would be a world of zealot religious fanatics where their god was central to all aspects of life...


Its not the particular skills, its the number. Commoner gives only 2 skills which one will be used on a Profession or a Craft. that leaves one skill which goes gods know where. Every farmer I know would have a rank or two in a few Crafts, Profession Farmer, Knowledge Nature and probably Knowledge Local. Expert does this far easier than Commoner.

I mean that makes sense and would be true for the farm owner and farm managers but not all the farm hands that they employ nor a large majority of the people renting their land to farm.


The thief class, skill monkey definitive, is self taught too most of the times.

I am not sure if I can get behind that, sure most of them won't have a standardized apprenticeship or schooling unless they are part of something like the shadow thieves but they aren't learning most things on their own either. They are picking up how to pick pockets from butterfingers McGuffey and to pick a lock spot and disable a trap from old three fingers, how to talk their way out of every situation from Silver Tongue Larry and so on. That in and of itself is as good as schooling just under a different name.

[John05]

A more interesting question is... if my campaign world had adepts as the default class instead of commoner, what would it look like?

Hmm, I'd list the most obvious effects first. I'll do that under the assumption that "default class" implies that adepts are *more common* than commoners. I.e. majority of people will be adepts.

1. It would only be meaningful to become an adept if someone had 10+ wisdom to be able to even cast cantrips. So let's assume most people would have at least average wisdom or above. That's a very conscientious world!

a. Considering that very low wisdom or wisdom damage being associated with mental illness in D&D, then rates of mental illness would be lower.
2. Adepts get faith not through study or prep but through prayer and meditation. Alongside with Wisdom being their primary stat, it seems like the world is rife with cleric candidates. I'd assume clerics and other divine casters are also a lot more common.
3. Almost free access to clean water, curing of minor wounds. Even curing of diseases isn't hard to find. We're very likely looking at a world almost completely free of disease.
4. Undead in general are going to have a hard time in this world, when we consider how many people can damage them or cast protection from evil. Think of how much more common clerics are likely to be too. It may be true that adepts can also "create undead" and "cause contagion", but considering the lower level spells (which have cure wounds but not cause wounds), and the utility of curing (you can cure minor wounds to yourself) vs harming, I'd still assume that it's overall much worse for undead.
5. Exploration and science/tech would be much simpler since many more people will be self-sufficient in almost any environment/situation. Major creation for instance allows for the creation of practically any material. Sure it's not permanent, but some rare materials are used as focus / catalysts rather than as reagents / components themselves. E.g. To start a temporary fire you need vegetable matter and some flint. You don't need the material to last forever.

[Blackhawk748]

I mean that makes sense and would be true for the farm owner and farm managers but not all the farm hands that they employ nor a large majority of the people renting their land to farm.

Do...do you know how a medieval farm would work? It works like a family farm, as in, there probably aren't any farmhands and the manager is dad or mom. Also, noone would 'rent' their land, the land would be owned by a Baron or other Noble and them the lower classes would be beholden to farm X amount and give X amount to their immediate Noble.

With all that in mind, they need Profession Farmer at rank 1 minimum, probably a craft skill to help patch up their tools, some Handle Animal to help control their draft animal (if they have one, which they probably do), Knowledge Nature to help predict the weather, and Knowledge Nobility and Royalty to reflect their knowledge of their local legal codes, as that would be rather important for them to know.

[lord_khaine]

Like I said on page one that is why all npcs should take Night Haunt feat at level 1. It gives 1/day prestidigitation and invisible servant for an hour; both of which are super powerful for low level npc in their daily life and have no requirements to take.

And that still only works if you assume you just magically get your feats out of thin air.
Instead of having to do some sort of specific training to get them.

[Blackhawk748]

And that still only works if you assume you just magically get your feats out of thin air.
Instead of having to do some sort of specific training to get them.

How would you even train to get an SLA? Also that would mean things like Power Attack (ie HITTING STUPID HARD) would need training when...they shouldn't

[Elvensilver]

Its not the particular skills, its the number. Commoner gives only 2 skills which one will be used on a Profession or a Craft. that leaves one skill which goes gods know where. Every farmer I know would have a rank or two in a few Crafts, Profession Farmer, Knowledge Nature and probably Knowledge Local. Expert does this far easier than Commoner.

I think most peasants may very well look like untrained noobs (lvl 1 commoners) to an adventurers eye. But most of the civilian skills are (as I try to rationalise this unfair rule) not available for the PC races. While peasants may only have 1D4, profiency with one simple weapon, and 1 point in Profession (farmer) one in Handle Animal (a really lifesaver, because of cats), these are just their combatant stats. They also have 3 Points in Lore (local gossip), 3 Points in Hide (but only from local monsters), 3 Points in Craft (Cookies), and some Points in Parenting as well as the NPC only feat Tool Focus(Cross Cut Saw).
I suggest experience is earned on two axes, one for civilian usage, one for classical adventuring. Thus, NPCs can be good at what they are doing, while still needing PCs to protect them from the dangers.


Shouldn't every person in his right mind try to get at least 1 Adept level?
Back on topic: I think adepts are like these extremly busy charitable people, that volunteer in 5 different organisations and have a strong conviction for any religion or belief. Most people just aren't like that. And they won't bend over backwards and change their personality for cantrips, if they can just pay someone to cast them.

[Maat Mons]

There isn't really any need for ranks in Craft. It's not a "trained only" skill. And as long as you don't have an Int penalty, you auto-succeed on the checks to craft simple and common items just by taking 10.

Predicting the weather is a function of the Survival skill, not Knowledge (Nature). Unfortunately, without a Wis bonus, no 1st-level character can guaranteed success on that roll without spending a feat.

Knowing the basic laws you need to abide by and who your lord is probably falls within the DC 10 "common knowledge" that you don't need ranks for. And, again, assuming no Int penalty, you'll make that check every time by taking 10 even without ranks.



Middle-Aged Human Commoner 1

Str 11 -1 = 10
Dex 10 -1 = 9
Con 10 -1 = 9
Int 10 +1 = 11
Wis 11 +1 = 12
Cha 11 +1 = 12

Feats: Open-Minded, Self Sufficient

Skills

Handle Animal 4
Heal 2
Profession (Farmer) 4
Survival 2
Use Rope 1

Result when taking 10

Craft (all of them) 10: Enough to craft or repair any simple or common item
Handle Animal 15: Enough to train most tricks, and more than enough to utilize an animal that's already been trained
Heal 15: Enough to provide first aid and long-term care
Knowledge (all of them) 10: Enough to know all "common knowledge"
Profession (farmer) 15: That's 7.5 gp per week
Ride 9: More than enough to guide a mount with his knees and stay in the saddle if the mount bolts
Survival 15: Enough to predict the weather 24 hours in advance
Use Rope 10: You can tie a knot! Woo hoo!

[rel]

I think this approach to modelling NPC's is a bit backwards; The NPC's should function in a way that supports the world looking a particular way, which itself supports the themes, tone and so forth of the game you want to play.

So when building or choosing the world for your campaign you ask what it should look and feel like then select the level, class and race demographics to achieve that.

And all this happens before refluffing, which I have been finding can change things entirely if you bake it into your setting from the ground up.

[calam]

A more interesting question is... if my campaign world had adepts as the default class instead of commoner, what would it look like?

well looking at the adept spell list the OP already mentioned basically all the societal important spells at early levels but to theorize how they'd affect society:

-create water: this of course does a lot since water is kind of important to keep people alive. It would make logistics easier for military and trade since water doesn't have to be accounted for and a level 1 adept can provide water for about four people per casting since google assures me that you need about 2 litres/ a half a gallon per person. It wouldn't significantly change where people can live though since they can't make enough water for their crops or animals but people could now live in any place that had water that isn't potable for humans but can be used for crops. This will probably also massively reduce illness rates since people are no longer ingesting water full of the fecal runoff of any upstream settlement.

-purify water: This is very similar to create water in a lot of ways with some notable exceptions. Firstly it works on four times as much water so it can be used to support more animals as well as yourself. Secondly it works on food which can extend the lifespan of food to an amount that depends on whether the purification removes the rot or "unrots" it. It would also make uncooked food a lot less dangerous so things like steak tartare would be much more common.

Also depending on if purifying water includes desalination it can open basically any location for settling, moreso if you can afford some sort of purify food and water enchanted water pump for your village it would also cut out water as an issue for arable land.

cure minor wounds: this makes first aid very easy since you'd be able to stop someone from dying in one standard action. This is probably one of the more minor changes since a society of experts would probably have a large proportion of people with the heal skill. This would probably also massively reduce war casualties since those are often caused by infection but that depends on how exactly cure minor wounds heals you.

light: would decimate most of the light producing industries like chandlers and would make evening work a bit more common however at level 1 you're only getting 10 minutes of light per cast so it won't cause societal change in the way artificial lighting did in the real world

mending: I agree with most people when they say that this is taken care of by a craft check so it would free up some time but that's it. It will probably save some of the time lost by you spending an hour to prepare spells every day.

at level 1 spells only cure light wounds and endure elements does anything significant for noncombatants. Since level 1 NPCs will probably have only one
level 1 spell endure elements only helps with travel if your animals are already immune to the weather and most of what cure light wounds does is similar to cure minor wounds. I can see the standard level 1 spell being cure light wounds since there's so many good level 0 non combat spells and you might as well take the better healing spell.

a notable exception to the spells available is continual flame which is out of the reach of most NPCs since you have to be minimum level 8 to cast it and even then you need a bonus spell. If the average NPC level in the setting allows continual flame to be a common enough spell though this would change the work day at least in the cities as the sun no longer dictates when you can work and make being a night watchman much easier since you can now see people on the street.

[Bohandas]

at level 1 spells only cure light wounds and endure elements does anything significant for noncombatants.

You're not thinking creatively. Burning Hands lights fires, Sleep cures insomnia, Detect Evil alerts one to neerdowells and d-bags, Obscuring Mist grants privacy and shade, Comprehend languages lets you communicate with foreigners and read foreign texts, and Bless helps with phobias as well as theoretically with any endevor where Object A must be swung into Object B

[tiercel]

You know, counterpoint: perhaps commoners don’t bother with adept levels because they are part of the underestimated Great Commoner Illuminati Conspiracy (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?232822-The-Commoner-Handbook) :tongue:

[John05]

I think this approach to modelling NPC's is a bit backwards; The NPC's should function in a way that supports the world looking a particular way, which itself supports the themes, tone and so forth of the game you want to play.

That's a really good point, rel. Perhaps we could also be coming up with a list of justifications for why commoner is more common than adept as a class.

Maybe I could "buff" commoners with some of PMElvensilver's ideas, like giving them class skills like "Craft (Cookies)". Those cookies are damned delicious. Those dumb Player Characters just can't appreciate commoner-baked fantasy cookies, that's why they pick PC classes. They just can't appreciate the hidden joys of NPC classes.

Plus, PCs don't actually suffer the pains of becoming PC classes or even certain NPC classes. It probably takes a tedious amount of praying to some minor god to just be an adept. Let's not even talk about something like... becoming a wizard. I heard some people don't leave wizarding school until they're 27 years old! That's average life expectancy right there! Not all of us are elitists who can afford to stay in school until half our lives are over (from aging or some random monster)! Some of us have siblings to feed.

[Crake]

No they don't. In forgotten realms, the gods demonstrably exist in the same way rocks and trees do, and even if you can't find one you like, you can just get your powers from abstract concepts you think are cool. In eberron, the gods don't exist at all, and you get your powers from the placebo effect. Either way, faith doesn't play into it.

Actually, faerun is quite the opposite. The normal rule is that you can gain your power from abstract concepts, but faerun says you must follow a deity if you want divine spells. As for whether faith plays into it at all? The PHB says this about divine spells:


divine spells: Spells of religious origin powered by faith or by a deity.

And say this about clerics (which is then inherited by druids, paladins and rangers by saying that they "prepare and cast spells as a cleric does", adepts themselves have an exact copy paste of this statement, rather than saying that they cast spells as a cleric does):


they meditate or pray for their spells, receiving them through their own strength of faith or as divine inspiration

So you either need to have such faith in your abstract concept that you can manage to recieve power from that faith alone, or you need to demonstrate enough dedication to a deity that they deem to grant you spells through divine inspiration, either way, divine spells require dedication and/or faith beyond what a normal person generally has in things.

[Bohandas]

Actually, faerun is quite the opposite. The normal rule is that you can gain your power from abstract concepts, but faerun says you must follow a deity if you want divine spells. As for whether faith plays into it at all? The PHB says this about divine spells:


"divine spells: Spells of religious origin powered by faith or by a deity"

And say this about clerics (which is then inherited by druids, paladins and rangers by saying that they "prepare and cast spells as a cleric does", adepts themselves have an exact copy paste of this statement, rather than saying that they cast spells as a cleric does):

"they meditate or pray for their spells, receiving them through their own strength of faith or as divine inspiration"

So you either need to have such faith in your abstract concept that you can manage to recieve power from that faith alone, or you need to demonstrate enough dedication to a deity that they deem to grant you spells through divine inspiration, either way, divine spells require dedication and/or faith beyond what a normal person generally has in things.

Note that the more of the population does it the easier it gets. As more of the population does it the more undeniable and spectacular it becomes.

(Also, please don't use quote boxes if you're not quoting a post. It messes up tne forum and forces me to manually copy-paste in the offending passages)

[Conradine]

In dungeons and dragons there is a link between faith and obsession?

[Crake]

Note that the more of the population does it the easier it gets. As more of the population does it the more undeniable and spectacular it becomes.

(Also, please don't use quote boxes if you're not quoting a post. It messes up tne forum and forces me to manually copy-paste in the offending passages)

That depends honestly though, when everyone can do it, and it becomes mundane, it actually becomes LESS spectacular, so there's an equilibrium to be met there, and I suspect that equilibrium would be quite a low portion of the populus. Not to mention sometimes some people just don't care enough to have enough faith. As another person noted, shouldn't everyone be in perfect health and fitness? Just because people can, doesn't mean they will.

[liquidformat]

And that still only works if you assume you just magically get your feats out of thin air.
Instead of having to do some sort of specific training to get them.

Yes they are call prerequisites and if the feat you are looking at has none it can be taken by anyone at any time. The idea of what training is involved in acquiring each feat is an abstract one and outside the scope of this thread. Though feel free to come up with some thematic ones if that is something you and your group are into. I believe the phb says it takes a month of training to gain your feats? (afb so not sure).


Do...do you know how a medieval farm would work? It works like a family farm, as in, there probably aren't any farmhands and the manager is dad or mom. Also, noone would 'rent' their land, the land would be owned by a Baron or other Noble and them the lower classes would be beholden to farm X amount and give X amount to their immediate Noble.

With all that in mind, they need Profession Farmer at rank 1 minimum, probably a craft skill to help patch up their tools, some Handle Animal to help control their draft animal (if they have one, which they probably do), Knowledge Nature to help predict the weather, and Knowledge Nobility and Royalty to reflect their knowledge of their local legal codes, as that would be rather important for them to know.

I am pretty sure a large majority of people working on any farm in the medieval times were serfs, and yes you are correct they cannot be compared with a farmhand they are more accurately compared with slaves. Either way most of the people on any given farm won't be considered skilled labor they are just labor. And if you want to compare a father or grandfather who is the head of the farm to his children then levels are probably a better way to represent the differences in skill between the young teens who are just now given full 'adult' responsibilities and the parents and grandparents then classes.

Given that ordinary wood objects are a craft dc 5 and iron ones are a craft dc 10 I am not seeing much of a need for investing points in crafting, your 8 level 1 points would primarily go into profession (farmer) and handle animal with maybe a point or two in other areas based on what exactly you are doing. And like Maat Mons said most of the stuff a peasant needs to know with regards to knowledge and survival checks are covered by dc 10 int/wis checks.

For example a herdsman would probably have profession (herding) 2, Spot 2, handle Animal 4, Use Rope 2 and then either prof (quarterstaff or sling) and maybe either alertness or self-sufficient feat (if not one to give him some SLAs)

[calam]

You're not thinking creatively. Burning Hands lights fires, Sleep cures insomnia, Detect Evil alerts one to neerdowells and d-bags, Obscuring Mist grants privacy and shade, Comprehend languages lets you communicate with foreigners and read foreign texts, and Bless helps with phobias as well as theoretically with any endevor where Object A must be swung into Object B

While you can set fire with burning hands I don't think using your probably only level 1 spell slot on something that can be replaced with a 1 gold item will be common enough to change society, I mean the only efficiency boost is that lighting a fire with magic is a standard action instead of a full round one.

since sleep has a duration wouldn't you just wake up after a minute?

obscuring mist only lasts for a minute per level so I don't know what you are doing to need such immediate short term privacy especially since you can't see that well in it and cooling off is much better done with endure elements.

Comprehend language is one I forgot since I was almost certain that it was a minute per level instead of ten per level (one can imagine what minute 9 of a negotiation would be like though! Stalling a negotiation so someone's comprehend language wears off could even become a tactic). I also forgot that bless gives a small fear bonus but a +1 for a minute probably won't fix too many problems fear wise.

detect (alignment) is probably the most transformative one I missed. People might get profiled for crimes because they are chaotic or evil aligned and these alignments might become procecutable on their own. Neutral jerks might also get ignored since they are not detected by the alignment in the same way that polygraphs used to give people false certainty in the real world.

One that we both forgot is detect magic which might be important considering all the magic that's now being thrown around.

[Blackhawk748]

I am pretty sure a large majority of people working on any farm in the medieval times were serfs, and yes you are correct they cannot be compared with a farmhand they are more accurately compared with slaves. Either way most of the people on any given farm won't be considered skilled labor they are just labor. And if you want to compare a father or grandfather who is the head of the farm to his children then levels are probably a better way to represent the differences in skill between the young teens who are just now given full 'adult' responsibilities and the parents and grandparents then classes.

Given that ordinary wood objects are a craft dc 5 and iron ones are a craft dc 10 I am not seeing much of a need for investing points in crafting, your 8 level 1 points would primarily go into profession (farmer) and handle animal with maybe a point or two in other areas based on what exactly you are doing. And like Maat Mons said most of the stuff a peasant needs to know with regards to knowledge and survival checks are covered by dc 10 int/wis checks.

For example a herdsman would probably have profession (herding) 2, Spot 2, handle Animal 4, Use Rope 2 and then either prof (quarterstaff or sling) and maybe either alertness or self-sufficient feat (if not one to give him some SLAs)

Medieval Peasants aren't slaves and comparing them to slaves is very inaccurate. While this depends on location and particular time period, peasants had rights and these rights had to be respected by the landowner or else they ran the risk of the peasant in question going over their head to the guy who they owed fealty to.

Anyway, I forgot that the weather thing is Survival, but they do need to know that. It doesn't matter if they can't guarantee success with it, just having it is useful as it helps them with crop planting. And yes, you can totally do untrained Craft checks, but having ranks in Carpentry helps you repair your house much faster than not having it, and farmers are very busy people.

[Maat Mons]

I mean, yes an Expert would be better at farming than a Commoner. I don't think anyone's saying that's not true. But I believe the Commoner I outlined earlier is good enough. He can do all the things he needs to do (even though others might be able to do them better). And I built him with the minimum assumptions, the Non-Elite array, only one character level, and the worst class that exists. The point I'm trying to make here, is that farmers don't have to be Experts (though they can be). It's possible to make do with surprisingly little.

I was complaining about the DC for predicting the weather. But the example character I presented actually succeeds 100% of the time. It's kind of annoying that, in order to achieve that, I had to give up on my original plan of giving the character either two instances of the open Minded feat (+10 skill points) or the Able Learner feat (cross-class skill ranks cost 1 point each) and one copy of Open Minded (+5 skill points).

If your games use flaws, you can just give all your farmers two of them that won't make the slightest difference to non-adventurers. So a human Commoner could start with Able Learner and three copies of Open Minded. That's 27 skill points for an Int-10 character at 1st level (factoring in human's bonus skill points). And since he has Able Learner, he's pretty darn free in how he can spend them. Yes, most of the skills he could take would only go up to 2 ranks, but 2 ranks each in 13 arbitrary skills is actually pretty darn good, by non-adventurer standards.

Yes, the human Expert gets 28 skill points and then can do the Open Minded feats on top of that. But I'm not trying to say that Experts aren't better than Commoners. They are. At everything. I'm just trying to say that you can do more than you'd think even with a base as restricted as Commoner.

[liquidformat]

Medieval Peasants aren't slaves and comparing them to slaves is very inaccurate. While this depends on location and particular time period, peasants had rights and these rights had to be respected by the landowner or else they ran the risk of the peasant in question going over their head to the guy who they owed fealty to.

Anyway, I forgot that the weather thing is Survival, but they do need to know that. It doesn't matter if they can't guarantee success with it, just having it is useful as it helps them with crop planting. And yes, you can totally do untrained Craft checks, but having ranks in Carpentry helps you repair your house much faster than not having it, and farmers are very busy people.

I would suggest you do some reading into serfdom and what it means to be a serf, yes serfs aren't slaves but they are pretty close to it, they were the lowest cast of people (assuming no one had actual slaves), could be bought and sold with the land they worked and lived on, their owners were free to abuse them, and they could only marry with their lord's permission. That is very close to being a slave, and very little distinguishes them from slaves.

You are also very much incorrect with the assertion that 'peasant in question going over their head to the guy who they owed fealty to.' While a free peasant might be able to bring a case up to a lord that their town governor broke the law, and even these cases were very rare due to how the system in most medieval countries worked a serf has no such right and serfs made up the majority of farmers.

Also you are putting way too much weight into a farmers need and competence in weather prediction. Most of it came down to I know I plow, plant, harvest, and whatever other steps I left out in these certain months each year. When exactly depends on what the weather has been like recently.

Also an important aspect you are missing in this debate is not everyone has to be an expert at every single thing in order to successfully run a farm. You only need one per who is a good carpenter, one who has a better handle on predicting weather, ect. And since many farms have 20+ people having one commoner who has self-sufficient and maybe a point in survival isn't hard and another with some craft points and so forth. Or even having the lord or a manager who is an expert, from their aid another goes into effect.

[Bohandas]

I am pretty sure a large majority of people working on any farm in the medieval times were serfs, and yes you are correct they cannot be compared with a farmhand they are more accurately compared with slaves.

My understanding is that they were somewhere in between. They weren't allowed to leave, but were allowed to anything they produced beyond the required tribute to their leige lord and the crown

[Blackhawk748]

I would suggest you do some reading into serfdom and what it means to be a serf, yes serfs aren't slaves but they are pretty close to it, they were the lowest cast of people (assuming no one had actual slaves), could be bought and sold with the land they worked and lived on, their owners were free to abuse them, and they could only marry with their lord's permission. That is very close to being a slave, and very little distinguishes them from slaves.

The only time I know it was that bad consistently was in Absolutist France. Britain was radically different which is why I said depending on location and time period. And there's a reason I didn't say Serf, I said Peasant.


You are also very much incorrect with the assertion that 'peasant in question going over their head to the guy who they owed fealty to.' While a free peasant might be able to bring a case up to a lord that their town governor broke the law, and even these cases were very rare due to how the system in most medieval countries worked a serf has no such right and serfs made up the majority of farmers.

Not in Britain or the Nordic countries. Again, depends on location. My fantasy settings don't typically have serfs as it makes having Adventurers even more of a stretch as now the pool is even smaller.


Also you are putting way too much weight into a farmers need and competence in weather prediction. Most of it came down to I know I plow, plant, harvest, and whatever other steps I left out in these certain months each year. When exactly depends on what the weather has been like recently.

I live with farmers. They very much need to predict the weather in order to not get screwed by weird frosts or insane rainstroms. Like what just happened around here in spring.




Also an important aspect you are missing in this debate is not everyone has to be an expert at every single thing in order to successfully run a farm. You only need one per who is a good carpenter, one who has a better handle on predicting weather, ect. And since many farms have 20+ people having one commoner who has self-sufficient and maybe a point in survival isn't hard and another with some craft points and so forth. Or even having the lord or a manager who is an expert, from their aid another goes into effect.

What farm has 20+ people on it? Ever farm i've ever heard of in the medieval period was small farmers tending their alotted acerage and then giving a share to the lord who owned the land. I barely hear about large scale plantations and thats typically in talking about vinyards or large orchards, not a typical farm.


My understanding is that they were somewhere in between. They weren't allowed to leave, but were allowed to anything they produced beyond the required tribute to their leige lord and the crown

This is far closer to what I've heard, except that they couldn't leave without permission, unless they were a Freeman.

[Bohandas]

This is far closer to what I've heard, except that they couldn't leave without permission, unless they were a Freeman.

I already said they couldn't leave

[liquidformat]

The only time I know it was that bad consistently was in Absolutist France. Britain was radically different which is why I said depending on location and time period. And there's a reason I didn't say Serf, I said Peasant.



Not in Britain or the Nordic countries. Again, depends on location. My fantasy settings don't typically have serfs as it makes having Adventurers even more of a stretch as now the pool is even smaller.

Ya the Nords and Britians both had true slaves. But yes it does depend on which area and time frame you are talking about. The main fear a lord has with peasants isn't them talking to the guy above the lord, it is a peasant uprising...


I live with farmers. They very much need to predict the weather in order to not get screwed by weird frosts or insane rainstroms. Like what just happened around here in spring.

First off, the need for something doesn't equate the ability to do so. The fact is throughout history farmers weren't particularly good at forecasting weather and went through dramatic times of feast and famine and it is actually believed this made for stronger people. Heck even today we are pretty bad at accurately predicting weather and even if you can predict it doesn't mean you can do anything about it. For example this year in the breadbelt of the US were lots of crazy rains and floods and by the time things mellowed out many farmers were already screwed due to the loss of planting season.

Also Survival skill as written isn't particularly helpful for a farmer:
'15 Predict the weather up to 24 hours in advance. For every 5 points by which your Survival check result exceeds 15, you can predict the weather for one additional day in advance.'

In general a level 1 character might know the weather for a day, two if they are lucky. Which isn't exactly that useful for a farmer, to really do much planning for when to plant for example you need to approximate the weather for at least a couple weeks which is a DC 80 survival check which is beyond the scope of any character in most villages... They are better off not wasting their time and just utilizing a cleric or druid every couple of months for divine assistance.


What farm has 20+ people on it? Ever farm i've ever heard of in the medieval period was small farmers tending their alotted acerage and then giving a share to the lord who owned the land. I barely hear about large scale plantations and thats typically in talking about vinyards or large orchards, not a typical farm.

It depends on how you are looking at a farm. The agricultural population under feudalism in northern Europe was typically organized into manors consisting of several hundred or more acres of land presided over by a Lord of the Manor, with a Roman Catholic church and priest. Most of the people living on the manor were peasant farmers or serfs who grew crops for themselves and either labored for the lord and church or paid rent for their land. Most 'villages' were centered around the lord's house the church and the peasants/serfs housing then a large area that was a mix of farming and wooded area. The land was divided into 3 huge fields. Each year 2 were sown with crops while one was left fallow (unused) to allow it to recover. Each peasant had some strips of land in each field. Villages often pooled money together to get beats of burden for tilling since they were very expensive.

So it really depends on what you are talking about, most villages could be called a farm, and there were often acreage owned by the lord that all peasants were required to work. In such a village or farm it seems reasonable that not everyone is an expert and completely self-sufficient, so you would be relying on your neighbors and working with each other.

[Conradine]

I think the standard 3.5 Dungeons and Dragons world is quite different from real world medieval age.

That kind of serfsdom - being bought and sold and require permission to marry - would find room only under the domain of Hextor's tyrants ( or similar deities ).
The D&D morality as described in Vile Darkness and Exalted Deeds is quite modern, and slavery is capital Evil, even partial slavery as serfsdom. The kind of evil not even Neutral deities could tolerate, not on regular basis.

Paladins , Avengers and Chaotic Good clerics would literally storm a country which tried to apply real medieval serfsdom.
I always imagined Lawful Evil tyrannies as small, insular and over-oppressive autarchies.



The main fear a lord has with peasants isn't them talking to the guy above the lord, it is a peasant uprising...

In a world where the majority of humans venerate a Neutral Good sun deity, the main fear of an oppressive lord acting in an average area is to receive a very unpleasant visit from angry Angels.

[AlexanderRM]

I think most peasants may very well look like untrained noobs (lvl 1 commoners) to an adventurers eye. But most of the civilian skills are (as I try to rationalise this unfair rule) not available for the PC races. While peasants may only have 1D4, profiency with one simple weapon, and 1 point in Profession (farmer) one in Handle Animal (a really lifesaver, because of cats), these are just their combatant stats. They also have 3 Points in Lore (local gossip), 3 Points in Hide (but only from local monsters), 3 Points in Craft (Cookies), and some Points in Parenting as well as the NPC only feat Tool Focus(Cross Cut Saw).
I suggest experience is earned on two axes, one for civilian usage, one for classical adventuring. Thus, NPCs can be good at what they are doing, while still needing PCs to protect them from the dangers.


This definitely, but on top of those not-relevant-to-PCs abilities the average farmer should have at least 4 ranks in Profession: Farmer and probably Skill Focus: Profession: Farming in their regular statblock.

Part of the reason they don't have PC or better NPC classes is lack of opportunity to learn, lack of skill (low int/wis for instance), lack of less quantifiable forms of talent, and yes also lack of work ethic (becoming a wizard requires years of study before you can cast your first 0th-level spell, and maybe studying to be a wizard is something most people find so incredibly boring that trying to force yourself feels like having acute ADHD even if there are few distractions), but also because they've been spending their time farming and learning how to farm. The real unrealistic part of the setting is that a Commoner who's been farming for decades is no better at farming than a PC who's spent their time learning magic and then killing a few monsters and decided on a whim to put ranks in Profession (Farming)- in a simulationist system Commoners should have a bonus to Profession skills and PC classes might not even get them as class skills.

That said, in something like a Tippyverse where everyone has free food and more leisure time + magic is absolutely essential to having any social status, a lot more people should be at least trying hard to become casters or anything else.

[John05]

I don't think "free food and free leisure leads to enlightened population" should be taken for granted. How many of these food generators are there and how long do they take to set up? The lower classes would still be living farther away from convenient areas to pick up food.

If food isn't scarce then prime real estate still could be. Poorer people would need to spend more of their day getting food and transporting it back home, and that would mean less free time to practice magic.

If we can take any hints from reality, then I doubt high or even mid level magic would be so common. Food is actually extremely cheap in the real world if you spend the time/effort, and there actually is quite a lot of leisure time. And yet people with prestige occupations/professions certainly are not the majority of the population. A lot of people don't care or don't think it's worth the effort.

IME, I've seen evidence of factors that actually work against the idea of prestige being a draw for people to study or work harder. E.g. in poorer countries, people tend to apply themselves to fields that they expect to provide more income to them. In wealthier countries, people start gravitating more towards passion fields, regardless of wealth / power.

[Bohandas]

If we can take any hints from reality, then I doubt high or even mid level magic would be so common.

Well I mean you're not wromg

[liquidformat]

This definitely, but on top of those not-relevant-to-PCs abilities the average farmer should have at least 4 ranks in Profession: Farmer and probably Skill Focus: Profession: Farming in their regular statblock.

Part of the reason they don't have PC or better NPC classes is lack of opportunity to learn, lack of skill (low int/wis for instance), lack of less quantifiable forms of talent, and yes also lack of work ethic (becoming a wizard requires years of study before you can cast your first 0th-level spell, and maybe studying to be a wizard is something most people find so incredibly boring that trying to force yourself feels like having acute ADHD even if there are few distractions), but also because they've been spending their time farming and learning how to farm. The real unrealistic part of the setting is that a Commoner who's been farming for decades is no better at farming than a PC who's spent their time learning magic and then killing a few monsters and decided on a whim to put ranks in Profession (Farming)- in a simulationist system Commoners should have a bonus to Profession skills and PC classes might not even get them as class skills.

That said, in something like a Tippyverse where everyone has free food and more leisure time + magic is absolutely essential to having any social status, a lot more people should be at least trying hard to become casters or anything else.

I think the link to the TED talk that lord_khaine gives pretty important ideas to keep in mind in this type of example. Intelligence tends to be based around what you are exposed to so even if you are smart you are only so capable as what you have been exposed to and your understanding of abstractions is similarly limited to what you deal with. Furthermore, magic is should be quite abstract probably similar to becoming a computer programmer in our modern era if not more so. So for a person who was not exposed to the type of learning required to become a magic user from a very young age they are going to have a huge gap in their ability to learn and understand the intricate information surrounding the study of magic compared to someone who group up with it. It is similar with computer programming it isn't just something that most people can say 'oh I want to become a computer programmer.' one day in there 30s and be successful in a short amount of time if ever.

[HouseRules]

It is a stronger argument to swap Monk and Adept to be Non-Player Character (NPC) Class and Player Character (PC) Class respectively.
We know the Tier 4 Adept would be better than the Tier 5 Monk in any game.
Also, Monk means someone who wants to stay away from social interaction, so it makes no sense for them to be Player Character.

[calam]

It is a stronger argument to swap Monk and Adept to be Non-Player Character (NPC) Class and Player Character (PC) Class respectively.
We know the Tier 4 Adept would be better than the Tier 5 Monk in any game.
Also, Monk means someone who wants to stay away from social interaction, so it makes no sense for them to be Player Character.

I'd argue that generally speaking NPC vs PC class divide is more based on mechanical complexity than power or utility. Adepts only have a handful of spells that can be cast in combat and while the monk is probably one of the most simple classes in 3.5 they still have exclusive feats and get at least one ability change per level.

[HouseRules]

I'd argue that generally speaking NPC vs PC class divide is more based on mechanical complexity than power or utility. Adepts only have a handful of spells that can be cast in combat and while the monk is probably one of the most simple classes in 3.5 they still have exclusive feats and get at least one ability change per level.

That's the same argument that Sorcerers have 19 empty levels.

[calam]

That's the same argument that Sorcerers have 19 empty levels.

not exactly since sorcerers have a pretty big spell list while adepts chose between like 10 per level, they also get to choose multiple spells and have greater combat complexity.

[AlexanderRM]

If we can take any hints from reality, then I doubt high or even mid level magic would be so common. Food is actually extremely cheap in the real world if you spend the time/effort, and there actually is quite a lot of leisure time. And yet people with prestige occupations/professions certainly are not the majority of the population. A lot of people don't care or don't think it's worth the effort.

IME, I've seen evidence of factors that actually work against the idea of prestige being a draw for people to study or work harder. E.g. in poorer countries, people tend to apply themselves to fields that they expect to provide more income to them. In wealthier countries, people start gravitating more towards passion fields, regardless of wealth / power.

In the real world people still need to work to eat and not everyone can be in a prestigious occupation/profession (by definition, otherwise they wouldn't be prestigious) yet since we still need people to make things, grow food, plunge toilets etc. That said certainly not everyone would be a spellcaster- for one thing I'd argue the capability to be one at all is more restrictive than just the minimum ability score, even if you're able and willing to get a teacher and put in the years of study (iirc Wizard starting age is 2d6 past adulthood but you probably start before being an adult, so that's longer than a master's degree), I'm just saying it would definitely be more than in a standard medieval setting. Especially as even a 3rd level caster with Craft Wondrous Item would also be making more money than nearly all noncasters.




I'd argue that generally speaking NPC vs PC class divide is more based on mechanical complexity than power or utility. Adepts only have a handful of spells that can be cast in combat and while the monk is probably one of the most simple classes in 3.5 they still have exclusive feats and get at least one ability change per level.

It's actually supposed to be power, it's just that WOTC thought Monks were more powerful than Adepts, because they didn't realize full casters are literally more than twice as powerful as Monks at mid to higher levels.