Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sarlax 02-15-05, 02:37 AM	How much money does the typical worker earn? On the DMG p.139 under "Coinage," it states that a "common laborer earns 1 sp a day." The Craft and Profession skills in the PHB, however, state that you earn half your skill check in gold pieces per week (the Craft skill then notes agained that "untrained" laborers get 1 sp per day). If you have ranks, you should be earning about 1 GP per day (4 ranks, no ability modifier, Take 10 for 14, half that is 7 GP for one week of work). So what is it? Even the Int 3 half-orc has 4 skill points to throw around at first level. Any commoner is going to have at least one rank in Craft or Profession. Why the disparity? Moving beyond that question to the broader question: given the costs of items in D&D, what is a reasonable amount of money for the average person to earn to sustain themselves?
Lina_Inverse 02-15-05, 03:03 AM	1/2 profession check per week.it seems most reasonable.enough with the prices you can survive,and small enough to make adventureing the truly best option.
Callahan 02-15-05, 03:07 AM	Sorry but peasants can't afford to be trained, as a result they have to take the: Untrained: Untrained labourers and assistants (that is, characters without any ranks in Profession) earn an average of 1 silver piece per day. So unfortunately they have to settle for the most meagre jobs that they could find. Peasants that can afford to have apprenticeships are either very rare (and high level) or are no longer peasants thanks to their cash income. Peasants get by with 1silver a day with just enough to feed themselves and a child and can save up to buy the most basic items like clothing and simple tools. Most can't however and have to settle for hand me downs.
Thorak 02-15-05, 08:02 AM	Not every commoner will have 1 point in Craft or Profession, simply. Other skills they might easily have; Bluff, Climb, Diplomacy, Handle Animal, Heal, Intimidate, Knowledge (especially Local), Perform, Ride, Sense Motive, Survival, Swim, and Use Rope. As an example, Ugly Joe. He's nasty and mean-tempered with people, but surprisingly good with animals who don't seem to care about his appearance, so he makes a living catching and taming animals for people. He's not good enough or adventurous enough to go far, so he doesn't get exotic creatures that people will pay a lot of money for, but he gets by. Skills; Handle Animal, Intimidate, Knowledge: Nature, Survival. And that's if he spreads them out, he could devote 3 skill points to any one skill.
Edymnion 02-15-05, 10:26 AM	Yes, you forget that most peasants are going to be spending their skillpoints in things like Survival, Knowledge (Local), even Hide and Move Silent (for hunters). Craft skills are not useful in any way to day to day surviving. All that time you spend learning to craft is time you don't spend growing food to eat, which means someone else has to support you. Sure, once you master your craft, you'll make lots of money (comparitevly speaking), but until then, you're a lousy good for nothing. So, most peasants are untrained workers, and make 1 sp per day for their troubles. Really, look at it like going to college. While you're in college, you can't really be in a career either. Most college students I know are just barely scraping by after rent and utilities are paid for. As opposed to the unskilled labor thats working at warehouses and fast food joints for $6-$10 an hour. However, once they graduate, those college students are far more likely to get the good jobs than the highschool dropouts are. Same with the peasants. Most can't afford to "go to college" to learn craft and profession skills, they just have to get by with what they can get normally.
Sarlax 02-15-05, 10:55 AM	Yes, you forget that most peasants are going to be spending their skillpoints in things like Survival, Knowledge (Local), even Hide and Move Silent (for hunters). Craft skills are not useful in any way to day to day surviving. All that time you spend learning to craft is time you don't spend growing food to eat, which means someone else has to support you. There is a problem with this conception: How do they grow food if they don't have any ranks in Profession (Farmer)? How do they hunt without Profession (Hunter)? Raise livestock without Profession (Herder)? The commoner’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Jump (Str), Listen (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Spot (Wis), Swim (Str), and Use Rope (Dex). It makes very little sense for peasants to spend skills (cross-class) on thing like Survival, Hide, etc. They have a perfectly viable skill set. If they can't spare time to learn to be a farmer, how can they possibly spend twice as much time learning Survival or Move Silently?
Vharuck 02-15-05, 12:05 PM	Because you don't need ranks to do something. Ranks are above-average skill levels. If you have a rank in blacksmithing, you're a pretty good blacksmith. If you have a rank in farming, you probably own the farm. If not, you still till the soil and harvest the crops.
e-z0r 02-15-05, 02:00 PM	You guys are mixing peasant and labourer together. A peasant is a farmworker, a labourer is someone who has a craft like basketweaving or smithing or whatever. Perhaps the 1 sp/day comes from the varied incomes of labourers. A smith might make a gp/day or even more, but the smith's apprentice makes a flat 0. As in, he receives food, lodging and training. He does chores for people so he can have the tailor fix his clothes with the coppers he recieves from this. And besides, the daily income doesn't so much depend on the skill of the worker but rather on the market. I mean, you don't have to make excellent coffee and tarts if your coffee shop is smack in the middle of the city where hundreds of people walk by the shop every day. I mean, look at McDonalds. Judging by the money they make they should have a catering rank of Craploads. But the food they serve is crap: It's malnutritious, bad for your health and doesn't taste good. Yet they are the most widespread food chain in the world, I believe. If on the other hand you put a master armorsmith in a smithy high up the spine of the world there's not going to be much market since nobody comes there and he can't really advertise effecively. Then there's the matter of taxes and fees which could be city-, country- or countydependant, plus employees wages and so on and so on.
Sarlax 02-15-05, 02:13 PM	Because you don't need ranks to do something. Ranks are above-average skill levels. If you have a rank in blacksmithing, you're a pretty good blacksmith. If you have a rank in farming, you probably own the farm. If not, you still till the soil and harvest the crops. Then why do commoners receive any skill points at all? Does a single rank of Profession (Farming) really represent outstanding skill at farming (enough to earn 10 times as much if you didn't have it)? If we're talking about a human 1st-level commoner, he has skill points to burn (8 with Int 10). Most of the population of humans is sedentary, not hunter-gatherers. They don't need Survival, Spot, or Move Silently. Where are all his skill points going if not into Craft (X) or Profession (Y)?
Lina_Inverse 02-15-05, 02:45 PM	ill say it again.use the rules printed in the phb.look over the prices,you cannot survive on one silver a week. and every commoner has 4 ranks in profession(something).that is BASIC LEVEL OF SKILL in farming.no ranks=no skill.additionally they very likely have skill focus.
Keenath 02-15-05, 03:45 PM	Partially, this depends on how you figure your commoners. I've always felt that NPCs deserve to have levels, where the DMG states that most people are just level 1 commoners. I figure you should gain 1000 XP per year spent in an NPC class, or something like that. Anyway, Profession, to me, doesn't seem to fit the 'farmer' idiom. A farmer doesn't get paid weekly wages based on his work. Profession seems to me to be more of a service job where you have customers who come in and get served. A tailor is a profession. A farmer isn't, because a farmer can't make money by the week -- it's a full season or nothing! Maybe you could make an argument for some sort of 'agricultural engineer' who comes in and designs planting diagrams and crop rotation charts for the guy who actually owns the land, or perhaps for some sort of overseer who directs hordes of workers on where to work and what to do, but your basic dirt farmer isn't going to have levels in Profession.
Sarlax 02-15-05, 05:14 PM	Anyway, Profession, to me, doesn't seem to fit the 'farmer' idiom. A farmer doesn't get paid weekly wages based on his work. Profession seems to me to be more of a service job where you have customers who come in and get served. A tailor is a profession. A farmer isn't, because a farmer can't make money by the week -- it's a full season or nothing! The rules have something other to say, though. Farmer, Herder, and Hunter are all Profession skills. I think that's reasonable, too. All of those tasks are really a collection of various small skills.
Sarlax 02-15-05, 05:23 PM	ill say it again.use the rules printed in the phb.look over the prices,you cannot survive on one silver a week. Actually, the DMG states one silver per day (and the PHB agrees under the Craft and Profession skills) when it comes to the "untrained." Your point is valid, though. Ignoring things like swords, even basic goods are extremely expensive, especially when you consider that the typical commoner has a family to feed. The PHB lists a "Poor Meal" as 1 SP! Half a pound of meat is 3 SP. By D&D economics, untrained laborers should all starve to death or die of exposure - they can't possibly afford food for themselves and have a home. If you have more children than parents, you're doubly in trouble. I'm beginning to think that "untrained" people must not exist in D&D. Really, can a person be an adult and have no skill in either service, agriculture, or crafting? I'm still not yet decided, but I think the 1 SP per day bit is unsustainable in both the mechanics (all commoners should have at least 1 rank of Craft or Profession) and in the logic of the world (1 SP per day can't keep someone alive).
Thanatos02 02-15-05, 05:33 PM	As I remember it, the 1 sp gained from unskilled labor is supplimented by other members of the family (even the kids work), begging, odd-jobs, barter, making your own stuff, and scavanging. Which makes it barely sustainable. Which, I believe, is the point.
11d7 02-15-05, 05:42 PM	Actually, the DMG states one silver per day (and the PHB agrees under the Craft and Profession skills) when it comes to the "untrained." Your point is valid, though. Ignoring things like swords, even basic goods are extremely expensive, especially when you consider that the typical commoner has a family to feed. The PHB lists a "Poor Meal" as 1 SP! Half a pound of meat is 3 SP. By D&D economics, untrained laborers should all starve to death or die of exposure - they can't possibly afford food for themselves and have a home. If you have more children than parents, you're doubly in trouble. I'm beginning to think that "untrained" people must not exist in D&D. Really, can a person be an adult and have no skill in either service, agriculture, or crafting? I'm still not yet decided, but I think the 1 SP per day bit is unsustainable in both the mechanics (all commoners should have at least 1 rank of Craft or Profession) and in the logic of the world (1 SP per day can't keep someone alive). Sarlax is right, almost all commoners will likly have 4 ranks in a Craft or Profession. The reason I think that everything is so unbalenced is becuase the game is 'balenced' for the PCs, not every other person living in the world, something I correct in my games.
e-z0r 02-15-05, 09:30 PM	Skill points aren't above average levels. It takes a DC10 balance check to be able to run down stairs. Most of us averagers can do it easily, and not half the time.
Lina_Inverse 02-15-05, 09:53 PM	Partially, this depends on how you figure your commoners. I've always felt that NPCs deserve to have levels, where the DMG states that most people are just level 1 commoners. I figure you should gain 1000 XP per year spent in an NPC class, or something like that. i certinly agree with that rate for humans..... lets not talk about elves.my general inclination is to change ageing anyways(elves in my world live 200 years and take but 20 to mature) Anyway, Profession, to me, doesn't seem to fit the 'farmer' idiom. A farmer doesn't get paid weekly wages based on his work. Profession seems to me to be more of a service job where you have customers who come in and get served. A tailor is a profession. A farmer isn't, because a farmer can't make money by the week -- it's a full season or nothing! simple fix,as you said full season or nothing.but he generates. average proffession check/2*time.per harvest.simple. since he only gets paycheck once per harvest multiply the value times the time it takes to harvest.the end result is the same.
Lord Gwydion 02-15-05, 10:36 PM	I think some people are missing the point. The 1sp per day for an unskilled laborer is when they are doing "unskilled labor" like dragging rocks for the new castle wall or scooping out horse manure at the stables. A character (even a mere Commoner 1) who has ranks in Profession (farmer) is not an unskilled laborer, and should make money off of the skill (selling seasonal vegetables, dairy products, etc. when not in the normal harvest season). A peasant without ranks in Craft or Profession ekes out a living removing rocks from fields so the other peasants with ranks in Prof. (farming) can make money in that field. He and his family also probably do a lot of foraging, begging, or stealing to suplement that extremely low income.
Edymnion 02-15-05, 11:05 PM	There is a problem with this conception: How do they grow food if they don't have any ranks in Profession (Farmer)? How do they hunt without Profession (Hunter)? Raise livestock without Profession (Herder)?You forget, Profession skills represent your ability to make a living doing something. As in, you do it, you get paid for it, and you then spend that money for your food and lodging. For just plain sustinance farming, aka growing enough to feed yourself and your family, and thats it, that doesn't really require much in the way of professional training. Its not like those are Trained Only skills, and given that they can just Take 10 on it. I doubt growing enough food to keep from starving to death is more than a DC 10 check, especially when its only a DC 10 survival check to scavange up enough food from the wild to survive on, while still moving at half your normal speed towards your location. And there is a big differance between growing just enough food to feed your family, and growing enough food on the same plot of land to feed your family and still have enough left over to sell to other people.
Sarlax 02-15-05, 11:54 PM	I doubt growing enough food to keep from starving to death is more than a DC 10 check, especially when its only a DC 10 survival check to scavange up enough food from the wild to survive on, while still moving at half your normal speed towards your location. Foraging in the wild isn't a valid model. Hunting and gathering won't sustain a significant part of the population, which is exactly why farming populations vastly outnumber gatherers. Given your view that commoners get "Survival, Knowledge (Local), even Hide and Move Silent (for hunters)," why do you believe they have Craft and Profession as class skills, or any of the skills that are listed, if not to take them?
Edymnion 02-16-05, 12:23 AM	why do you believe they have Craft and Profession as class skills, or any of the skills that are listed, if not to take them?Because, unlike the PCs, peasants are not experts in their fields. They are more of JoATs that pick up some of everything they need to get by. Just surviving takes up most of a peasant's time, so they can't really specialize in anything. And when they do specialize in something (aka take ranks in it), they are equally likely to do so in a more generic fashion. A farmer that whittles his own eating utensils out of wood and keeps up with the local gossip. Thats a rank in Farmer, Woodworking, and Knowledge Local right there. And if he's using oxen to pull his plow, thats likely a rank in Handle Animal as well. Thats his 4 skill points right there. Point is that its rather unrealistic to think that all of those peasants are specializing in only one thing. Specialization only comes about in a society that can support it. A painter can only paint when he isn't having to grow his own food and whittle his own cups and plates. And really, real life example, are you or I built with any form of sound mechanical base? No, we (or at least I) have a rather broad array of things I like to know and do. I love 80's toons, and I can go toe to toe with anyone on these boards about 80's toon trivia, and I would most likely win. I'm also a semester away from a software engineering degree. Also find theoretical physics to be fun, and I do both virtual graphic design and sculpting/painting miniatures as a hobby. Not to mention knowing D&D like the back of my hand, and being a good writer (if I do say so myself). I'm spread out across the board. I mean, thats gotta be ranks in 3 unrelated knowledge skills, a rank or two in a profession skill, ranks in multiple crafting skills... If I focused all of that into one skill to totally max it out, yeah, I could be making money off some of it. But I don't. Real people spread their skills out, and its a bit unrealistic to think that D&D peasants don't do the same, instead of making min/max power-farmer builds out of themselves.
Sarlax 02-16-05, 12:57 AM	Point is that its rather unrealistic to think that all of those peasants are specializing in only one thing. I'm not following you. Are you suggesting that a single rank of Profession (Farmer) represents specialization? That's all that it takes to be making 5 gold pieces a week. In my first post, I said, "Any commoner is going to have at least one rank in Craft or Profession. Why the disparity?" I'm not conceiving of peasants as farming specialists. I don't picture them putting all their ranks in Profession (Farmer). I bet the typical peasant probably has 1 rank in Farmer, 1 in Handle Animal, and the other 2 ranks in skills of his choice, with humans have a lot more room to play with. I'm spread out across the board. I mean, thats gotta be ranks in 3 unrelated knowledge skills, a rank or two in a profession skill, ranks in multiple crafting skills... Of course. I see almost all people that way. And, unless you have never had a job, you probably have at least one rank in Profession, whether it be Retail Cashier, Waiter, Writer, Mechanic, or whatever work you might have done. For people who don't work, they truly don't need any Craft or Profession skills. But peasants do need to work. It has nothing to do with them being specialists in farming; it's about them having at least a basic level of understanding of farming (that is, 1 rank).
Callahan 02-16-05, 02:34 AM	I'm not following you. Are you suggesting that a single rank of Profession (Farmer) represents specialization? That's all that it takes to be making 5 gold pieces a week. In my first post, I said, "Any commoner is going to have at least one rank in Craft or Profession. Why the disparity?" You can't farm if you don't first have the land. Traditionally farmers inherited the land on which they farm from their parents, they couldn't just pick a spot of land and farm. The land owners represented a very small percentage of the peasant community and all other peasants were employed to work as assistants to farm on the land. Other peasants are nothing more then slaves and worked for scraps.
e-z0r 02-16-05, 07:00 AM	For just plain sustinance farming, aka growing enough to feed yourself and your family, and thats it, that doesn't really require much in the way of professional training. Its not like those are Trained Only skills, and given that they can just Take 10 on it. I doubt growing enough food to keep from starving to death is more than a DC 10 check, especially when its only a DC 10 survival check to scavange up enough food from the wild to survive on, while still moving at half your normal speed towards your location. I don't quite agree with you. Have you ever practiced farming? I would predict that it's quite more complicated than you might think.
Sarlax 02-16-05, 07:06 AM	I don't quite agree with you. Have you ever practiced farming? I would predict that it's quite more complicated than you might think. On top of that, the D&D rules for foraging are probably unrealistic, too. The average city dweller simply dropped into the wilderness far from communities would very likely die; I doubt "taking 10" would do him much good.
Sarlax 02-16-05, 07:10 AM	You can't farm if you don't first have the land. Traditionally farmers inherited the land on which they farm from their parents, they couldn't just pick a spot of land and farm. The land owners represented a very small percentage of the peasant community and all other peasants were employed to work as assistants to farm on the land. Other peasants are nothing more then slaves and worked for scraps. How does that affect their skill level? I agree that that's a good explanation for why peasants won't have good income from farming (or whatever task), but the D&D rules don't say that. The rules say that if you have 1 rank, you make 5 or 6 GP per week instead of 1 SP per day. Since, in D&D, income is derived from skill, all peasants should earn more. Whether or not someone works on the land as the owner or the slave, they should have 1 rank in Profession (Farming). How can you perform a task like that for years without learning anything about how to do it?
J Milburn 02-16-05, 09:10 AM	Ofcourse everyone has a rank in a profession, its just there isnt enough money going around to pay them all- basically, they are over-qualified. There is the point that generally the profession skills represent how much someone is being payed, not how much they are making. Plus, someone actually needs the resources. To use my example from anothrer, similar thread, (here) (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=375779) You have 5 kobolds each mining, with a human slave driver equivilant leading them. He is the one being payed for his skill check, (as the PHB says someone with a profession can also lead) whereas the kobolds, probably more skilled and also the ones actually doing the work, will be payed a measly amount. Ofcourse, this is in a time of predudice, slavery, unfair pay and no workers unions, and people work where they are told/can, so they may not even have the appropriate profession! Its like modern day to the extreme- the land owners get the money when the workers are, as the name suggests, doing the work. The sytem works if you just think about it. EDIT-FORGOT TO PUT IN THE LINK!
Callahan 02-16-05, 12:41 PM	How does that affect their skill level? I agree that that's a good explanation for why peasants won't have good income from farming (or whatever task), but the D&D rules don't say that. The rules say that if you have 1 rank, you make 5 or 6 GP per week instead of 1 SP per day. Since, in D&D, income is derived from skill, all peasants should earn more. Whether or not someone works on the land as the owner or the slave, they should have 1 rank in Profession (Farming). How can you perform a task like that for years without learning anything about how to do it? this just reflects the fact that most peasents have no training in carreers or crafts. It takes money to make money.