Scriptoria & Scribes

[MedievalMan]

That seems like a sound idea. When we get to that point I'll have to hit you up for ideas.

Yeah I would love to help. I am sure we could come up with a list of things when the time comes.

It was my Magic-User Options supplement. I've just put a candidate for the third release in the Project Feedback thread, if you want to take a look.

I just read it. Looks fine to me, heck I think I used an older version of it in one of my games before. The magic bolt for certain I used. I don't see any problem with "gameable material" with this version.

As a semi-related side note, I usually allow MU's to use any weapon. It just makes sense, base attack bonus is supposed to represent a characters combat ability, so limiting weapons seems silly to me. Why can't a mage use a sword exactly? Even if he uses one he won't be anywhere as good in combat as a fighter anyway.

[MedievalMan]

Something else to consider is that their retreat into the deeps may fall in line with the human trend towards city-dwelling - something possible due to improved agriculture and specialization - possibly giving way from either with dedicated valley-dwelling dwarven farmers to high trade volume to keep the deeps in mutton and barley.

You know this reminds me of the Mystara dwarves gazetteer. Which is quite possibly the best dwarf related thing ever written for D&D.

OH, now that I think about it, the Glantri gazetteer had all sorts of rules and information on magic schools and adventures while being a student. You might want to check that out SirBed.

[Joe the Rat]

I wonder how well bone works for making print blocks. It'd probably wear less on the parchment. Nice catch on the cuneiform - "something that carves well" seems a necessity for dwarven writings.

My first thought on bone would be that it isn't flat. You could still print with it if you rolled it across the paper, I guess. Parchment is pretty tough, though; a lot tougher than modern paper is, and if you've seen bone carvings, it doesn't carve as nicely as wood does, though it would certainly be easier than stone.

I was thinking more in terms of strips, or cut blocks for type-set (I still had that in mind)

There's probably an evolution of technology - dwarves seem to be the go to for industrious and material technologies (Like Smoot's stone or metal "blanks" for printing and minting). That said, another recurring trait is the importance of tradition, combined with longevity. The most valuable of texts - the oldest of texts - are probably still big stone blocks, or print from ancient and heavily stained stone presses.

I could see dwarven printing being done on metal as well, sort of like striking coins, but instead on to sheets or strips of metal in order to form very durable records that can be stored more compactly than stone blocks.... dwarves are industrious and clever with such stuff.

I like that, like those books that have metal pages that are stamped with letters? That sounds suitably dwarven, more so if they use gold for pages.

Also very dwarven.

Recovering a Lost Text of the Forge Lord would make for an adventuring hook - and give adventurers unexpected difficulties with said "small fragment" being a 200lb slab of marble, or a surprise when that web-encrusted magic shield they found is completely covered in dwarven script engravings...

[Hywaywolf]

As a semi-related side note, I usually allow MU's to use any weapon. It just makes sense, base attack bonus is supposed to represent a characters combat ability, so limiting weapons seems silly to me. Why can't a mage use a sword exactly? Even if he uses one he won't be anywhere as good in combat as a fighter anyway.

Do you allow Fighters to use spells from scrolls? A fighter trains for years to swing a sword just like a MU trains for years to use spells. Take any modern trained epee fighter and put him against a novice and the novice will never get a touch. Never. Being able to hold a sword isn't the same as being able to use one. So if a MU tries to use a sword they should get something like a -4 penalty to hit roles and at least a -2 to damage since its doubtful they will swing it nearly as hard.

[LibraryLass]

As a semi-related side note, I usually allow MU's to use any weapon. It just makes sense, base attack bonus is supposed to represent a characters combat ability, so limiting weapons seems silly to me. Why can't a mage use a sword exactly? Even if he uses one he won't be anywhere as good in combat as a fighter anyway.

Do you allow Fighters to use spells from scrolls? A fighter trains for years to swing a sword just like a MU trains for years to use spells. Take any modern trained epee fighter and put him against a novice and the novice will never get a touch. Never. Being able to hold a sword isn't the same as being able to use one. So if a MU tries to use a sword they should get something like a -4 penalty to hit roles and at least a -2 to damage since its doubtful they will swing it nearly as hard.

Yes, and that's what the fighter's much better attack progression represents.

If one uses a class based damage system, or even doesn't vary damage by weapon, then it's actually a pretty reasonable house rule.


As to metal... Can't metal blanks be used as a printing surface? I think that's what they use for minting money. That seems like something dwarves would appareciate. A permanent embossed copy on metal can easily have a paper facsimile made.

[Hywaywolf]

LL, I am not sure what you are agreeing to . M/U use a sword without the AB or MU using a sword with a -4 to hit? My thoughts on the fighters progression of the AB is that they get better than others because they fight more in campaigns, and not only because they train more. It does very little to distinguish between the years of sword training knights go through and the years of sword training MUs don't go through.

When a MU gains a level they get another spell. When the fighter gains a level they only get a slightly better AB. I know they get HPs and better saves,too but so does the MU I am only talking about things that one class gets that the other doesn't

[MedievalMan]

If one uses a class based damage system, or even doesn't vary damage by weapon, then it's actually a pretty reasonable house rule.

To expand on my comment when i do allow all classes to use all weapons, all also rule that all weapons deal 1d6 damage.

And that's the last I will speak of this.

~~~~~~~

So the more I think about it, the more making books with stamped gold pages make sense. For one, the gold is soft enough to be easily formed into sheets and then stamped with the relevant text. Two, gold doesn't suffer from corrosion the way other metals do, meaning it can last virtually forever. And three, being mostly subterranean I have a feeling dwarves would have access to a larger supply of soft metals like gold, rather than wood or animal skins. Making gold a good material choice.

[Joe the Rat]

Well, it is a bit heavy for transport, but I could see the most valuable (and centrally located) of writings etched on gold plates. One more reason to hate the goblins - they just melt them down.

[Hywaywolf]

To expand on my comment when i do allow all classes to use all weapons, all also rule that all weapons deal 1d6 damage.

And that's the last I will speak of this.

~~~~~~~

Well, if you are essentially doing away with the fighter then that makes sense. (and no, I am not expecting a response. I am just acknowledging that I can see why someone would do it this way.)

[MedievalMan]

Well, it is a bit heavy for transport, but I could see the most valuable (and centrally located) of writings etched on gold plates. One more reason to hate the goblins - they just melt them down.

That's a good point. Does anyone know if bronze is lighter weight than gold? I know bronze also stands corrosion well, and even though it is difficult to make in large quantities I could see dwarves using it.