Tucked in the back of TSR's Supplement II Blackmoor is a curious expansion on the sage NPC. It's curious because this section contains quite a bit of detailed information about an NPC type who's only function would be as a one off hire to research an answer to some obscure question the PC's might have once or twice in a campaign. None of the other specialist hirelings are treated this way, and there really is no practical reason any of them should be.
This detailed expansion of the Sage NPC is unusual, and seems even stranger when you consider that the sage's main function, researching obscure questions, is also well within the purview of Magic-users. Use of a sage must surely be rare in most campaigns, so why is the sage, and only the sage, singled out for a detailed write-up in the Blackmoor Supplement?
When discussing his work on Supplement II Blackmoor in his Dragonsfoote Q & A forum, editor Tim Kask reveals that he cut sections of the material Arneson had written ("I said to hell with that and threw most of the crap away"). Kask considered the discarded material to be redundant or non-conforming to the rules of D&D. Some other portions of Arneson's manuscript weren't discarded, but were reworked by Kask for the same reason. In particular, Kask has pointed to the Assassin and the Sage as being reworked in this regard.
Kask thought the Assassin was "more suited to be an NPC, but was overruled." With the Sage in Supplement II, however, he appears to have not been overruled.
Arneson considered "sage" to be a player character class, not just an NPC, at least in the case of the Special Interests section of the FFC. Notice the class list Arneson gives in th SI section:
Fighting-Man
Clerical
Magic-User
Ranger
Paladin
Assassin
Merchant
Sage
This list is particularly interesting regarding the dating of the Special Interests section. It is abundantly evident from the content throughout the piece that the section was written after the January 1974 publication of D&D, but exactly when is more difficult to ascertain. The class list however provides some solid ground to reason from. In addition to the three original classes, the list contains the Paladin from, Supplement I Greyhawk, (January 1975) and the Ranger (Strategic Review #2, Summer 1975). Tacked on to the end are the 3 "classes" associated with Blackmoor.
Setting those last 3 aside for the moment and looking specifically at Fighting man to Paladin in the SI list, we find what would be an up to date player character class list for the summer/fall of '75, except that the "Thief" from Supplement I is missing.
In his Corner of the Table newsletter for August of 1975, Arneson informs the readers that he has just completed months of work on Supplement II. Supplement II, of course contains 2 of the 3 "Blackmoor" classes on the end of the SI list - the Assassin and Sage - so only Merchant is missing from the material TSR published up to that time.
It seems quite probable, therefore, that the section containing the Special Interests piece was originally part of the material Arneson wrote that summer, which Kask subsequently considered unfit for publication in Supplement II. This isn't so surprising, as the SI section substantially changes the rules for experience points. Kask may well have thought it too rule-bending to be published as official material. It's unclear if Arneson had also submitted a piece on the Merchant class, but if so it seems to have likewise fallen victim to Kask's editorial process.
The fact that Thief is missing from Arneson's SI class list suggest that Arneson may have considered Thieves and Assassins to be equivalents, or perhaps he considered Theives to be a subclass of Assassin (instead of the reverse) or perhaps a replacement.
Whatever the case with Assassin and Merchant, the reason the Sage gets such oddly detailed treatment in Supplement II would seem to be that Kask took what was intended to be a class and turned it into an NPC because he didn't think it was a suitable class.
That means that, theoretically, one could cut away all the text specifically discussing the details of hiring a Sage, and be left, more or less, with the specifics unique to the class, to a greater or lesser degree as Arneson originally wrote it.
Before we begin this exercise, we should ask why Arneson created a sage class in the first place. The adventuring "Sage" isn't exactly an obvious literary archetype, unlike the Assassin (hello Assassins of Gor ) but, just as with the Cleric and the Merchant, we do have a well established character in play in pre D&D Blackmoor who could well have served as the model for a Sage character class. That character would be David Megarry's Scholaress.
The "Earl's Scholaress" began life as a pre-D&D character of what we would now think of as the Fighter class, being neither Priest or Wizard and being well armed. In one particular adventure the "Scholar" character used a magical bracelet to change into a basilisk (female), and much to his chagrin, found himself a herself upon changing back to human. Thereafter, the Scholaress increasingly researched and used magic.
At one point after the rules of D&D were available, Dave Arneson had the Scholaress progress as a Magic user for XP purposes, and allowed her use what David Megarry characterized as "non-weapon" spells, as shown in the illustration below from Mr. Megarry's chemistry notebook.
The Scholaress was a magic user, but she was a magic user who had a limited spell repertoire and who wore armor and used swords. The Scholaress, for all intents and purposes was a new subclass of MU.
Even though the connection appears quite obvious, at this point we can't, of course, know for certain if the Scholaress was really the inspiration for Arneson's Sage, but for now, let's assume so.
Making this assumption allows us to recreate the Blackmoor sage as a subclass of Magic-user, drawing on the information left in Supplement II when you cut a way all the NPC hiring details and just look at class specifics. This subclass has limited spells, but can wear armor - an idea that would seem to have some appeal. Have a look and feel free to comment:
The Blackmoor Sage
Sages are a type of Magic-user who are members of a very powerful Guild dedicated to the study of knowledge.
2. Supernatural and Metaphysical Things
3. The Physical Universe
Living
Things
|
Supernatural
|
Physical
|
Botany
|
Theology
|
Astronomy
|
Zoology
|
Metaphysics
|
Geography
|
Medicine
|
Philosophy
|
Geology
|
History
|
Ethics
|
Mineralogy
|
Biology
|
Legends
|
Chemistry
|
Sociology
|
Folklore
|
Physics
|
Sage Intelligence
|
Sage is
|
Chance
to Know Answer
|
7-8
|
below
average
|
20%
|
9-11
|
average
|
35%
|
12-14
|
exceptionally
knowledgeable
|
40%
|
12-14
|
average
with 2 categories
|
60%
|
15-17
|
exceptional
with 2 categories
|
86%
|
15-17
|
average
with 3 categories
|
65%
|
18
|
exceptional
with 3 categories
|
90%
|
For every 50,000 gold pieces spent in equipping a sage, from 1–10% will be added to his base score, subject to a maximum of 50%. Note that the referee will not reveal when this maximum is reached. For every 100,000 gold pieces spent on areas outside the sage’s basic category there is a 25% (cumulative) chance that he will be able to add the category to his knowledge; thus a sage can be brought to know all three categories with an expenditure of 800,000 gold pieces. There is a slight drawback other than cost, and doing so will raise the Sage's Intelligence score accordingly. The Sage must spend an average of one month of study time in order to assimilate/employ an investment expenditure of 10,000 gold pieces, either in order to increase his base score or the fields of knowledge.
3 comments:
Interestingly Craig VanGrasstek's rules to the game of dungeon includes a section on sages. My understanding is that he wrote those rules from his experiences in the Twin Cities gaming community.
Hi Daniel,
Just a quick question. On the “Chance to Know” table, I’m wondering if the results for INT scores of 12-14 have been inverted. It would seem, unless I’m completely misunderstanding something, that the Chance to Know Answer for a Sage with an INT of 12-14 should be as follows:
exceptionally knowledgeable: 60%
average with 2 categories: 40%
This would also harmonize with INT results of 15-17.
Regardless, I really love this character class!
That's an interesting question you pose Von. You could be right, however the percentages are the same as those given in Supplement II for those categories. The only difference is that where I assigned intelligence score ranges, the original just had a random percentile roll to determine whether your hired sage was average or exceptional or average in 2 categories and so forth. I take the percentages to be rough jumping off points really depending on how difficult the question is, but it does seem odd that a sage with exceptional knowledge would only be right 40% of the time. The changes you propose seem sensible enough to me.
Post a Comment