The Canon article for the Irreprochable Order mentions a "Lore" skill for the Shield of Belsirasin sub-order. Specifically "Lore(etherials), Lore(Agrik) and Lore (Naveh)".



Where is the "Lore(x)" skill described? What is the skill base? etc.


I strongly approve of a "Lore(x)" skill, and already make use of it, but was curious about canon info, or even published fanon.

In my own Harn, ALL characters get a "Lore(Area where raised) SB4" skill, a "Lore(Parent's Profession)" skill, a Lore(Area where apprenticed) SB4 (or +2 SB if same as area where raised)" skill and a "Lore(Chosen Profession)" skill.

The two (Area) lores are just that, lores for an area.

The profession lores are NOT for doing the profession, but ABOUT the profession. (A typical guilds man KNOWS, no roll required, who his guild officers are, and probably more than a few details about them. The same guildsman KNOWS some basic info about neighboring regional guild officers, at least names of guild masters. Knowing guild officers is just for starters, but shows the sort of info covered).

I believe the idea of Lore skills started with the Tomes & Scrolls article. For most the the written works described, a table shows what subjects (lore) the reader can learn about or what skills they can improve. Unfortunately, the rules for how this works were incomplete. The following has been proposed as an erratum:

TOMES & SCROLLS 4 (Clarification): Lore. Many areas of knowledge can be learned through reading. Where a skill is listed as a Lore skill (for instance, "Lore: Kubora"), it is treated as an individual skill with the following attributes:
(SB: EYE INT INT, Sunsign modifier: Tai +2, OML: SBx1)

So, while that isn't official yet, it will likely be what gets published to address this issue.

This makes sense. Reading the first part of your post I was thinking that the "lore" you mentioned would already be covered by the skills of that profession, but I see where you are going and it makes sense.



I would think an "area lore" would give some knowledge of the local heraldry, I.E. the red cross on the shield means clan X. Lore of a man at arms or even better, a knight would give one more detailed or better overall knowledge of this same thing.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

Yep, a tiny bit of local heraldry would fall under "Lore(area where your character was raised)".

My concept for Lore skills:

Lore (Area: Coranan)
vs
Lore (Area: Coranan, Born and Raised there)

would be different skills.

ANY character could learn the first skill. To get the second skill, you gotta be FROM that area, or live there, full time, for at least 1/2 a decade, in which case it would become "Lore (Area: Coranan, Lived there full time 7 years).

The difference between the two skills would be subtle, but the short of it is that the "Born there" skills gets MASSIVE GOBS of basic of information with no roll required, and even some 'not so basic' information with rolls.

Personal gaming pet peeve of mine: GMs assuming characters are completely ignorant of every BASIC aspect of their own world / kingdom / town / etc...... So wrong its not even funny. No, I don't expect to be allowed a roll, I expect to KNOW the answer, no roll required. Rolls are for non-basic info, or for info on foreign places, etc (and even there, the assumed character ignorance of some GMs just goes to far, but at least with foreign places there is some excuse.......)

Personally I'd make generic "Lore (x)" Skill base = Int/Int/Will (no sun sign) OML SBx1, but thats just me ("Born there" skills would be OML SBx4, with bonuses if apprenticed in same area).

I could also see larger "Area" skills, but they would need some justification. A royal Forester would be an example. On a related note, a barbarian character would have superb knowledge of his SUB-TRIBE's range, but only lesser knowledge of his "tribe's range" (which could be expressed in one skill, specifically naming his sub-tribe).

I like the basic idea, but I find having separate skills based solely on where the character was born to be awkward. I'd make it the same skill, either way, but adjust the OML based on the background. A character new to the area will open the skill at SB1, but they might well learn their way around fast enough to rival (or surpass) the local who doesn't get out much.

Just grabbed my copy of "Tomes & Scrolls" and looked on page 4. Did not see anything on "Lore" but I noted you used the word "(Clarification)". Is there an errata out there somewhere? (Also noted another skill not listed in the core rules: "Leadership"....)

Yeah, I'll freely admit my idea can lead to excessive 'skills'. An ugly down side that can negatively effect play. For simplicity sake, one skill is probably better for any Canon that might eventually be published on the issue. Having said that, I still like 'allowing' a note to be made for such skill like "Born and Raised there", but probably best an optional rule.

Well, another way to reflect that would be as a modifier. Any skill that would benefit from having been born and raised in an area is probably worth an EML bonus, in the same fashion that having superior tools might aid a Craft skill, or a weapon modifier benefits a combat skill.

A good model for this approach is the various treatment modifiers used with the Physician skill.

No erratum has been published on this; what I posted above is what will likely be included in the forthcoming errata document. It is called a clarification because it seeks to make a rule more clear or add one where one was not. This is opposed to a correction, which seeks to correct something that was incorrectly stated in the original.

As you noted, Tomes & Scrolls was a bit inconsistent in how it handled these. While some "lore" skills were noted as "Lore: XXX" others were not. For example, page 9 mentions "History: Early Hârn" where I believe it would have made more sense to say "Lore: Early Hârnic History." While you could say that your example should be "Lore: Leadership," it could also be interpreted as increasing one's ML in the Command specialty of Rhetoric skill, since that is an existing HM3 mechanism for dealing with leadership.

Odd... I had just assumed "Lore" was a shorthand way of referring to the "Folklore" skill in HM3...

Cheers
De Coucy

Sure, you could look at these as specialties of Folklore. I think the main/only difference would be that Folklore is learned largely as an oral tradition, where the subjects covered in Tomes & Scrolls are learned by reading and studying. If you want to differentiate between them, you can use Folklore for one type and Lore for the other.

So with 'Lore:Pvarism' is it reasonable to assume the Shek P'var would open this skill at an OML higher than SBx1? Or even opening the skill in character generation at OML2/3/4? What does everyone think?

_________________
"The woods are alive with the smell of his coming!" Ilviran chant.

I would say it would be very sensible to give folks a big Skill Base multiple for their own profession.

But I'll also warn again that we can 'lore' ourselves to death. Does a common Tashal native who worships Peoni (or Ilvir or Larani) KNOW, with no roll required, that in the Thardic Republic there are Churches to all those Gods, and to Agrik and Morgath, all openly existing in cities without 'open' combat between them? I'd say a CLEAR "yes". Many GMs assume 'no', but can't really explain how a person could be so ignorant without living in an isolated cave. Would the same Peoni worshiper know about how gambling to the Pamesani games is handled? Almost certain 'no', unless they had a related lore. Yet any resident of Coranan who has ever attended the games WOULD know, and even many residents who never have attended.

I would think that a modification to a Lore skill could easily cover this problem.

A Lore skill about the home town/manor of the character would recieve a multiplier of 2.0
A Lore skill about the home hundred of the character would recieve a multiplier of 1.75
A Lore skill about the home shire of the character would recieve a multiplier of 1.5
A Lore skill about the home kingdom of the character would recieve a multiplier of 1.25

In addition, if a EML of a Lore skill is over 100 than the knowledge is automatically known and no roll is required. We not talking about something that can directly harm another, this is only a knowledge skill. Plus I would be surprised if any but the most dim local wouldn't be aware of which lass is the local lord's mistress. These communities are just too small to hide secrets like that for long...

_________________
...and I'm not dead yet...

I'd lean against getting over lored out.

And above all, above ALL, keep in mind, a LOT of 'lore' should be known, no roll, for a lot of characters. Exactly which lore is known with no roll varies by individual.

The Tashal native from the Mercantyler family knows at least a little bit about all the 'listed' Mercantylers in Tashal, just from sitting at the dinner table with his family, no roll needed. (and probably some details with rolls) The Orbaalese mercenary in Tashal probably has no knowledge at all on the same subject.

Given the way some GMs think, you'd need to have developed skill to know how to open simple unlocked door (yeah, this is probably my biggest gaming pet peeve....).

Multipliers and modifiers have their place, but so does: "No need to roll, your character knows this."

Remember: the context is learning these things from reading a book.

Actually, I was thnking in terms of a knowledge catch-all skill.

Admittedly, it was a line in a canon publication on Harnic books that prompted me to write. But if we make a strict 'book based lore', then we'd need TWO sets of lore skills (one for books, and one for non-book).

Harn core rules could use a few catch-all skills, "Lore" probably more than most.

Actually, I think that the existing Folklore skill covers the subjects not learned from books. It essentially already is the catch-all Lore skill you're looking for. You can have Folkore (Tharda), Folklore (my village), Folklore (whatever).

A simple memory roll against a base target level of 5×INT will often serve just as well, unless keeping records for a never-ending cascade of Lore (whatever) skills is one's idea of gaming fun.

IMO Lore skills are in general more useful to define the special interests and pursuits of NPCs, rather than to attempt covering every last bit of trivia a character might know.

_________________
«Fair is what we see, Fairer what we have perceived, Fairest what is still in veil.»
—Nicolaus Stenonius