Common knowledge

[Anonymous]

There is a lot of discussion on the boards, and some helpfiles that cover topics that you don't often see in game.  I've been curious about how many of these people consider to be "common knowledge" that any joe can go in and play with.

Some examples of things that I wouldn't have thought would be "common knowledge" but seem to make it into game OOCly or otherwise are:

* Mul mothers die - The average slave or commoner should have no idea about how muls are created.  Muls, themselves, would be granted a family rather than raised by one.

* Psionicists can "read your mind" (whether or not this is true).  There was a thread about this, and it seemed to be about a 50/50 split over whether or not Joe Commoner would stop to think about this as a possible consequence of using the way for "sensitive" communication.

* Templars and merchants have their own super sekrit code languages, and most people seem to know what they're called.

* There are helpfiles for read and write, but the average commoner doesn't see scrolls or writing, do they?  Would it even occur that writing existed in some cases?

How do people decide what is and what is not broadly-available knowledge when framing the actions of their PCs?

[Larrath]

* There are helpfiles for read and write, but the average commoner doesn't see scrolls or writing, do they?  Would it even occur that writing existed in some cases?

Literacy is widely considered a near-mystical ability that generally causes awe.  It's not nearly as trivial to Zalanthas as literacy (or the knowledge that literacy is easy to attain) is to us.
Written materials are usually not encountered, but there is writing on the Templar statues in Allanak and probably in other places, probably next to any monuments or murals.  Everyone in the city-states would know that the nobles and templars are literate.

How do people decide what is and what is not broadly-available knowledge when framing the actions of their PCs?

Personally, I just fall back on my mental picture and understanding of Zalanthas, and I also use what I can read and infer from helpfiles/documentation and on what I found out IC.  The Zalanthans in my mind might be a little smarter than a people of thirsty, overworked uneducated people, but that's what I use.
A little vague, I know.  Sorry.

[SpyGuy]

Generally as a rule I just think of the character, would he or she know all these things?  This also includes things not in the docs like IC locations, my desert elf ranger on the scrub plains would likely know the general geography of the area and various out of the way spots even if they aren't in general or clan documents but probably wouldn't know anything about the desert west of Allanak even if I do as a player.  And remember they don't have to know them, they just have to suspect them so things like superstitions and false knowledge can be added in too.  That said I think all of the things you used as examples aren't terribly private, I think a part of commoner culture would know a lot of that stuff.

1) This one I'll give you, the secrets of mul breeding wouldn't be known.  But remember that muls don't have families, indeed most slaves probably don't have families in any traditional sense.  Slavery isn't just being forced labor, it's having no rights to raise your children and an owner having complete rights to sell you, your mate or your young off to whoever he pleases.

2) Commoners should suspect psionicists can do that and a LOT more.  They should fear psionicists as the devils they are.  Now whether a commoner would consider this before using the way, or just consider psionicists as too remote to bother them, is another debate that concerned the thread you refer to.

3) Templars and merchants both use their secret languages in everyday places from time to time.  Though you make a good point, most people would probably just call it the merchant's tongue or the templar's language rather than proper names.

4) Commoners may or may not know what writing is, but since scrolls and ink are sold in shops they may have a suspicion of what it involves.  And as far as I know a noble's ability to write is no secret, it's actually a priveledge of their status and the ability to record and read knowledge is part of what makes them better than the rest of the city.

[spawnloser]

* Mul mothers die - The average slave or commoner should have no idea about how muls are created.  Muls, themselves, would be granted a family rather than raised by one.

Not commenting on what may or may not be accurate about this...the average commoner should not know much except that they're half dwarf and half human.

* Psionicists can "read your mind" (whether or not this is true).  There was a thread about this, and it seemed to be about a 50/50 split over whether or not Joe Commoner would stop to think about this as a possible consequence of using the way for "sensitive" communication.

Psionicists are called 'mindbenders' and 'mindmoles' often enough that I think many people would think this a risk, but for many things, who cares?  What are the chances of the timing?  Maybe be subtle and only give hints that the other person would understand but those listening in would have to get more information to also grasp?  That makes it more fun for everyone.

* Templars and merchants have their own super sekrit code languages, and most people seem to know what they're called.

Most people would know what Cavilish is, whether they speak it or not.  There are enough people part of that culture around that they would know, just like an American can recognize when a language is Spanish, but not have any grasp of how to decipher it.  Tatlum, very likely your average commoner may not know this, but slightly above aveage commoner would, in my opinion.  People know about things and whisper.  Someone finds out and whispers to everyone he knows, and they whisper further...knowing the language name isn't too huge a thing.

* There are helpfiles for read and write, but the average commoner doesn't see scrolls or writing, do they?  Would it even occur that writing existed in some cases?

Most would know that it exists, as there are examples about all over the place.  They just can't decipher it, again.

How do people decide what is and what is not broadly-available knowledge when framing the actions of their PCs?

I just figure out a clear history for my character, what s/he would likely have been exposed to and what s/he would not have been and then apply that to what my character would know.

[Angela Christine]

Muls are monsters.  It isn't too far fetched for common people to believe that they aren't born at all, but instead tear their way out of the mother's body.  They probably don't, a mul baby is still a baby and skin is surprisingly tough stuff, but the idea that they literally punch through skin and crawl out would go well with the mul reputation.  People who know how muls are bred have no reason to correct assumptions that make muls seem scary or monsterous.  



Angela Christine

Ps.  Muls are not monsters, they are people just like humans and dwarves are people.  But there are no humanoid rights organizations to spread the "Muls are people too" message.  Even in our world humans are pretty good at believing that certain other humans aren't really people, believing that a scary-looking non-human isn't really a person would be easy.

[Anonymous]

I can understand the whole "use your judgement about what your character would know" thing, but there are definitely certain situations where a mutual understanding of what is and is not common knowledge should apply.  In those cases, I'm a bit unclear what line to follow.

For example, suppose I were a slave owner with human slaves, and I have a particularly petulant human pleasure slave.  She's got it into her head that she could be a concubine and maybe a wife some day.  She really knows too much about me, as my pleasure slave, for me to risk punishing her in any really significant way.  The last thing I want is for her to run off telling all the guards that my nickname is needle-dick the fly-fucker.

So, instead, I tell her that I have to have a slave to replace her before I can allow her to be free and make her one of my wives.  But, since any child of mine would be a noble bastard, I want her to have the most special honor of having a mul slave to replace her.  As muls are very valuable, this is the highest honor of any slave, and it would allow an immaculate conception (due to the magickal nature of Muls) so that she would remain unspoiled for our wedding day.

Now, OOCly, we both know this is bullshit.  But, I have no idea whether she's made the assumption that her PC would know this is bullshit or not.  I do, however, know that her PC has never been to the mul birthing area, and that I and the other mul-mother owners have never allowed this communication out to the rest of the world.

But, depending on how the other people who hear about this, or are involved in this react on the "is this common knowledge" or "is this not common knowledge" line, it completely changes the RP dynamic.

[SpyGuy]

I would argue that you're lying in that case davien and for what most commoners think muls are half dwarf and half human, that much is known.  BUT that doesn't mean you can't convince the PC that what she knows is wrong.  No one (unless they've played a high ranking Borsail) knows exactly what happens with mul birthings, though most suspect OOCly it involves death.  And the player may not believe you, but the character probably should if you give no other hints she's on the chopping block.

This, like many other things, is a case by case basis.  And it works off of trust between one player and another.  There's no amount of defining the exact knowledge of commoners that will completely remove problems like this, but if everyone plays along well it shouldn't really be a problem.

Super stupid knowledge: Oh just a point a theology professor pointed out that I thought I'd share.  Immaculate conception doesn't actually mean virgin conception.  It means, theologically speaking, without sin.  This goes back to some fairly obscure Catholic (other Christian?) dogma that Mary herself was born without sin and because of that lacked original sin like the rest of humanity.  Therefore she could bear God's child...or something along the lines.

[naatok]

Immaculate conception comes from the Greek concept of 'parthenogenesis'.
For all intents and purposes, the Mediterranean basin at the time of the early Christian church, was a Greek world (Greco-Roman if you wanna be nit-picky).

The idea is that the gods (or one or two of the horny bastard male gods) would, in some twisted form, impregnate a mortal woman with their 'heavenly' seed.  Not necessarily by taking fleshly form either (and even then they weren't always human form!).

There seems to be alot of confusion these days about writings from that time period regarding the difference between chastity and virginity.  Some of the greek, hebrew and aramaic words for those concepts were used interchangably by the early translators of ancient texts.

And lumped in with that, the problem of the early literalist Christian church's attempt to eradicate the pagan mystery tradition, which was their only real rival in the third and fourth centuries anno domini.
Since many of the so-called cults of pagan mystery tradition at the time were 'orgiastic' in nature (It makes sense, really.  I mean...if you go around getting drunk and high and having sex with multiple partners during religious ceremonies, the chances of you becoming pregnant with a god's kid...if you're a woman...increases dramatically! :twisted: ), the early literalist church began a propaganda campaign against such 'sins of the flesh'.  Yeah, I know that the concepts of infidelity, fornication and so on were pre-existent in Judiasm.  But the whole 'earthly' point behind labelling such activities as 'sinful' is about control and tribal exclusivity.  After all, if you don't fuck your neighbors of different tribes you are less likely to fall under the sway of their false, heathen, evil gods and other cultural ideologies.

Same with elves in  Zalanthas.  Everyone knows elves are evil, thieving, lying, stealing, murdering alien fiends.  So if you teach your kids not to fuck elves or half-elves, maybe they'll avoid becoming like those sick, twisted mutants and stay true to almighty Tektolnes.....or whatever cult of personality is going on in your area.

[mansa]

There is also these pages:

http://www.armageddon.org/intro/whatyouknow.html

[SpyGuy]

To respond to Naatok and derail further:  Immaculate conception has nothing to do with Mary getting impregnated by God and the virgin birth.  At least not in Catholic theology (I'm going off hearsay and the web here, I'm no ordained priest).  Sorry if I misunderstood you but it seemed like you were relating immaculate conception with God's impregnation of Mary, my point was that is actually refers to Mary's birth being without the taint of original sin.

In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin."

That's from the Catholic Encyclopedia http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm but since I'm no expert I'm going to stop discussing this terribly unrelated topic  :wink: