The ol' Dawn of the Emperors gaz states that:
"First level clerics - who do not know how to cast a spell but who belong to a clerical order - are treated as Gentry"
"Aristocrats are people who can use spells, regardless of their personal wealth or background. The daughter of a slave, if she has the ability to to use magic and can be taught a spell, is automatically elevated to the rank of Aristocrat...Aristocrats are treated as equals - "one of us" - by other aristocrats of Alphatia".
But in 3E D&D when rangers, paladins, bards and even some prestige classes such as the Assassin may also cast spells - what then?
Should there be a limit to clerics, wizards and sorcerors?
Should there be a minimum requirement to be able to cast level 1 or even level 3 spells to "keep out the rabble"??
:-) Jesper
Now, mind you that the character can still be a penniless aristocrat with no influence whatsoever, just as the non-caster can be the wealthiest person around, as it states later in the text you are quoting from. Spellcasting simply grants the character in question better rights than a non-spellcaster under Alphatian law. It does not make them nobility.
This is something that occurred to me for original D&D, anyone with the potential to become a paladin will almost certainly become a cleric. In a civilization where the laws vary greatly based on your status, but it is surprisingly easy to get a higher status for your children, just about everyone will be a spell-caster at level 1 if they have any aptitude for it at all.
Imagine a young child who is growing up to the following stats Str 16, Dex 12, Con 16, Int 11, Wis 10, Cha 9 - the chances are as good as the parent can make them that at level 1 they will be some form of wizard, admittedly they may become a fighter afterwards, but level 1 is time to make it into the aristocracy.
In my planned future for the KW after WOTI I have most of the ex-Alphatians in Karemeikos attempt a coup to put magic back in power "where it belongs". (Note most of the elves left for the Sylvan Realm, Wendar and other places - why stay where you are not that welcome.) This revolt was stopped mainly by the Order of the Griffon, becuase the mages involved never considered paladins - they neutralized the clerics, but regard the 'fighters' as safe to ignore, never having encountered paladins and avengers in Alphatia, a few silence spells later and the paladins won the war. (Upshot is magic is slightly less common than in AC1000, and not totally trusted, though enough mages stayed loyal that it was never banned.)
Admittedly with 3E multiclassing it is a lot easier for people to become paladins, druids etc afterwards, but I still believe that it will be truely rare for anyone witht he aptitude to become a caster not to do so at level 1. Remember though that level-based stat gains an change things, and the Mystara supports the concept of people with reasonable Int and Wis being completely unable to cast spells (e.g. King Ericall of Norwold). I hold adventurers as unusual individuals so (presumably) they all have the potential (unless the player does not want it), but by having that potential it should be decidely odd for them not to go spellcaster at level 1. Of course, if for whatever reason, someone does not gain casting until higher level (e.g. paladin, ranger or multiclass) they become an aristocrat unless they conceal the ability.
That means only high level Rangers and Paladins will be accepted and that wizards and clerics need also some training before becoming noble.
That also discourages multiclassing only to become a noble.
Admittedly with 3E multiclassing it is a lot easier for people to become paladins, druids etc afterwards, but I still believe that it will be truely rare for anyone witht he aptitude to become a caster not to do so at level 1. Remember though that level-based stat gains an change things, and the Mystara supports the concept of people with reasonable Int and Wis being completely unable to cast spells (e.g. King Ericall of Norwold).
Very true. But the Alphatia gaz states that in old Alphatia 99% could cast spells. By the time they reached Mystara that was down to 50%. And in 1000 AC it is closer to 20%. Those without the potential are "outbreeding" the spellcasters of purer blood.
But we cannot believe that 80% of the Alphatian population has an intelligence and a wisdom below 10, thus rendering them unable to cast even 0-level spells?
I think setting a limit for "magical aptitude" at casting 2nd level spells. It would require some effort on behalf of those wanting to become aristocrats and would keep out a greater part of the population. And those able to cast 0-level and 1-level spells might still be considered Gentry but not Aristocrats?
:-) Jesper
But we cannot believe that 80% of the Alphatian population has an intelligence and a wisdom below 10, thus rendering them unable to cast even 0-level spells?
Nooooo!!!!
The point I was trying to make is that while any PC with an Int or Wis over 10 can cast spells, the same is not true for NPCs. Take King Ericall - according to CM1 he is Int 14 Wis 13 (and 28th level so adjusting to 3E there's a fair bit of level adjustments to add). He is the son of General Zaar (iirc) and it was clearely stated that neither Zaar nor any of his children could cast spells. This means that Ericall can't go Paladin (OD&D) or cross-class (3E) and gain spells. If I wanted to develop him as an NPC I would be limited to classes that don't grant spellcasting, and if they grant it later he does not take those levels.
As the son of the Empress of Alphatia if there was any way by mortal magic to make him a spellcaster he would be one, but there isn't despite his statistics - he cannot cast and is therefore Gentry.
This still means that the late-casting classes are very rare - the people who can take them and gain spells would already be an early casting class, the others, regardless of characteristics, can't cast spells no matter what class they are regardless of characteristics. About the only exceptions will be immigrants and people from very deprived backgrounds who had the aptitude but were never tested.
The game rules only state that minimum mental scores are required to cast spells. This is merely part of the game mechanics involved in spellcasting. In roleplay, however, you could say that in addition to the high mental attribute(s), the character must also possess a sort of natural pre-disposition towards magic use that can be detected via testing in the Mystara campaign.
In Alphatia, children are tested to see if they have "the Gift." Some have It - the majority of these train to become spellcasters at 1st level. Some don't have It, regardless of what their mental stats may be (as evidenced by the example of King Ericall). If they don't have "the Gift," they usually pursue the rout of fighter or rogue or some other non-casting class. The above pretty much covers 99% of the NPCs you will meet in Alphatia, and fits with the campaign canon that only 20% of the population or whatever has proficiency with spells.
Wealthy gentry probably send their children to special arcane "prep schools" in the hopes of better results on thier "Magical Aptitude Tests." Does this work? I don't know, I just made it up! Those that still score poorly on their MATs might still become fighters or rogues, but if they only failed by a small margin, then perhaps it is these students who pursue careers as paladins or rangers (this explains why the magic comes to them so much later than level 1).
Of course, remember that these restrictions should only apply to NPCs, as already suggested. PCs are the stuff of legend, after all. They should be allowed to multiclass as desired.
Just my thoughts, your milage may vary.
Now, what does Aristocrat mean in Alphatia? Which special benefits and/or obligations come with it?
Simply put, if you are an Aristocrat, you may be judged by the law under the Aristocrats' law, which is usually better than Commoners' law. And that's it. You've got no other major rights nor obligations.
So if you never break the law or never sue somebody, you will never really experience the benefits of being an Aristocrat.
What about being considered a Peer by other Aristocrats? Does this give you special access to some restricted places or groups?
Actually, by the info we get from DotE, it is clear that not all spellcasters are on the same level. To paraphrase Orwell:
"All Aristocrats are equal... but some Aristocrats are more equal than others" ;)
Generally, Arcane Spellcasters consider themselves above all other Aristocrats, and in fact Divine Spellcasters are viewed with a mix of contempt and haughtiness by the Arcanes. This is because Arcane Magic has always been at the hub of Alphatian politics and imperial power, so arcane spellcasters consider themselves more important than any other. This means that generally divine spellcasters are not considered peers even among Aristocrats: they have always to prove their wisdom, strength and capacities, whereas arcane spellcasters take this for granted wherever they go.
There is also another strain of racism even among Arcane spellcasters. Alphatian purebloods consider themselves better than Common Alphatian spellcasters or foreigners who can wield arcane magic, so there are clearly some groups that do not accept non-Purebloods among them (and these are probably some of the most influential political groups in Alphatia, a minority who is trying to defend their privileged positions in every possible way).
Finally, on the subject of the percentage of the total Alphatian population who is born with magic, I will give you my personal opinion.
Obviously the fact that we use one rules system or another cannot change what is commonly referred to as "campaign background", so we must reason with this in mind: if, before 3E came to the fore, only 20% of Alphatians were born with innate magic on Mystara, it must stay the same even after 3E adaptation of Classic D&D rules.
IMHO this can be explained by saying that the reference we find in DotE refers only to those who are born with a natural knack for magic. IN 3E, it means Sorcerers.
So, in Mystara you cannot simply choose to become a Sorcerer, but you must have a certain prerequisite, that is being related to a magical race which has innate magic in its soul (elves, fey, dragons or Alphatians).
Even if you are related to one of these races because of your heritage, there is only a certain probability that you will inherit the Gift (sorcery, or innate magic). For Alphatians it has been clearly stated to be 20% of the cases.
This doesn't mean that nowadays in Alphatia only 20% of the population can wield magic, but only that 20% of Alphatians have the chance to develop spontaneous casting and become sorcerers. Obviously this chance may never be exploited if it's not discovered, but normally it is, because it's a sign of greatness and because of all the surveys that the Alphatian Govt takes on babies.
IMO Old Alphatia was probably (as WotI states) an outer plane dominated by the Sphere of Energy. This plane was so much filled with Energy, that almost all of its inhabitants had the potential of becoming spellcasters (99% could become sorcerers). When the Alphatians moved to Mystara after the destruction of their world, magic worked differently, and it started to thin in their blood and soul. This is shown by the 50% percentage attributed to Alphatians born with innate magic abilities after their landfall. The fact that nowadays (in AC1000) the percentage is only 20% is just a natural evolution of the Alphatian race in a world like Mystara (where the magic-draining side effect of the Nucleus of the Spheres might have worked against the diffusion of magic in the world).
When the Alphatians understood that their innate magics were dwindling, they obviously re-evaluated the importance of wizards and academic magic, so the majority of them also became wizards.
I would say that in Alphatia a Sorcerer is on the higher tier of nobility, with a Wizard closely behind, and all other Arcane classes after them. Divine spellcasters are obviously on the third tier of nobility (or Second Class Aristocrats).
;)
And that's my take on it
I would say that in Alphatia a Sorcerer is on the higher tier of nobility, with a Wizard closely behind, and all other Arcane classes after them. Divine spellcasters are obviously on the third tier of nobility (or Second Class Aristocrats).
I had also considered this for my own campaign (but as my game is not currently based in Alphatia, it never came up). Great minds think alike …
:D