[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: 1517475863894.jpg (41 KB, 348x342)
41 KB
41 KB JPG
Why is /tg/ so opposed to the idea of adventuring guilds?
Adventuring is just a job, like any other, and it only makes sense that it's monopolized and regualted.
>>
>>59748669
>just a job
No, it's the equivalent of travelling everywhere full time. You're either a smelly drifter hobo or some rich girl living off of daddy's money getting enlightened. Neither are real jobs.
>>
I like the idea of small, well organized mercenary companies that operate in high population/wealthy areas for serving as a starting point for a party. A full blown Adventuring Guild is pretty meta.
>>
>>59748723
That's more or less how Forgotten Realms used to do it, with "Adventuring Guilds" usually being a small group of people (4-13) who got enough notoriety to label themselves as such for better pay.
And even then most of them retired shortly after because once you're that famous you're getting high paying jobs wherever you go and probably have connections to settle down anywhere.
>>
>>59748669

It is not sustanaible. How many dungeons can be in the world? How many villains with world-ending plots are there?
>>
>>59748669

Isnt a guild made of crafters? Im sure this is just a modern pleb thinking of guilds as companies rather than crafters cartels.
>>
Depends on the execution, honestly. If it's like a bunch of small-ish specialized mercenary services I can get behind it but if it's less plausible then that then it gets stupid in a hurry. I have absolutely no objection to someone with the resources paying a group of professionals to go retrieve a trinket from a Vampire's castle or take a rubbing of an ancient inscription or kill a dragon for some body part they want.
>>
Adventurers are a stupid concept anyway. You dont send five dudes, You send 30 men to clean the goblin cave.
>>
>>59748981
>you don't send 200 dudes, you send 300000 to eradicate a civilization
>>
>>59748981
I sure am glad you're volunteering to pay for the food and weapons of 30 fighting men.
>>
File: 1478232715684.jpg (157 KB, 864x905)
157 KB
157 KB JPG
>>59749015
I am a lord you fool, it's my noblesse oblige to do so, by order of His Majesty and the laws of His lands.
>>
>>59749062
But then on the other hand, if I send out 5 dudes instead of 30 I can pocket the difference and use it for something else. Worst comes to worst, 5 drifters who contribute nothing else to society will have died and we send out 5 more.

From an economical standpoint it makes sense in a fantasy world.
>>
>>59748811
Most adventuring guilds are used to take care of bandits or monsters though. Problems far enough away from towns that local guards don't want to deal with it while also small enough problems the local lords don't want to be bothered with it either.
>>
>>59749015
Your men-at-arms need something to do when the local duke hasn't called them to rally, might as well have them earn their food instead of letting them sit on their asses.
>>
File: Davinci mercenary.jpg (135 KB, 730x1010)
135 KB
135 KB JPG
>>59749079
In ye olden days mercs got the vast majority of their pay after the job was completed. In fact, much of the time they were just promised loot and got little else.
If someone was looking to rid themselves of some green midgets, they would most likely get it done by offering a reward for the completion of the job. How many men set out to complete it and how many men come back would be irrelevant. If a band of random hobos took the job and got it done then great, but chances are that the guys doing that sort of thing would be part of a larger mercenary company that dispatched an appropriately sized force.

This too >>59748981
Numbers make a big difference. Even if each individual member was making less a force of 10 guys would probably have a higher chance of success than 5.
>>
>>59749296

Goof point. In the early days of D&D adventurers went out as par tof a band, with 5-10 PCs and maybe twice that many hirelings to handle things like wagons, animals, guarding the camp, etc. Hiring linkboys to carry torches because there weren't infinite light cantrips and stuff.
As all that was sloughed away in the name of convenience, it became less believable IMO.
>>
File: 1525754533709.gif (5.06 MB, 541x304)
5.06 MB
5.06 MB GIF
>>59749296
Aye, you make good arguments. But in the end the player characters who see this quest will probably start spewing blood and sweating if someone suggested they split the share with an appropriately sized force instead of fighting tooth and nail for every penny.

In the end, an adventurers guild only functions on the assumption that there are enough lunatics driven by greed and retardation to actually take the jobs for a smaller fee than sending it to competent professional soldiers.
>>
>>59749156
Also a lot simpler than having them build useless walls in the middle of nowhere.
>>
>>59748669
Adventurers don't exist in any setting I make
Sure there's treasure hunters, archaeologists, mercenaries, dragon slayers and so on but no-one roams around killing shit with no motivation
Unless it's a meta setting
>>
>>59750191
>Adventurers don't exist in any setting I make
>Sure there's [various sorts of adventurers]
>>
>>59748669
I would disagree with the idea that Adventuring is a job like any other, or even that it's a job. Adventurers are rare things, the foes they fight often even more so.
>>
>>59748669
Why is /tg/ so opposed to the idea of Visitor's Centers?
Tourism is just a business, like any other, and it only makes sense they're properly informed and tracked.
>>
>>59748981
t. Never Played AD&D
>>
>>59748669
I have a Hunter's Guild sort of thing, but they don't pursue dungeons. That would be the realm of people who seek knowledge, Archeology groups or other organizations who would pay for a mercenary group to go to a place.
>>
>>59748669
>Adventuring is just a job, like any other
If that's the case, who keeps filling all these dungeons with loot for adventurers to find? See, if it's just a job like any other that implies that it's either easy enough or pays so well that at least a hundred other adventurers have already been wherever you decide to go and probably (as in it would be highly improbable that it wasn't the case) already taken anything valuable that was there. If it's not that simple then it isn't a job but actively risking your life for not enough gold.
>>
>>59750207
Treasure hunters spend the majority of their time gathering info and searching, if there's any enemies they'll probably bring mercenaries to take care of it for them.
Archaeologists spend most of their time studying, not killing and looting.
Mercenaries are ... mercenaries, if you think that's adventuring go join Blackwater and have a real life adventure.
Dragon slayers are probably part of the military, they definitely don't go around looting dragon lairs as they please.
>>
>>59748981
Yea tell that to goblin slayer.
>>
>>59748669
>Adventuring is just a job, like any other

You were already wrong
>>
>Adventuring is a job

Depends on setting
>>
>>59750362
I'm ok with guilds as long as they are obviously meta as in the players are in a video game simulation, or they are realistic like a mercenary band but not the jrpg crap with ranks and shit mixed in like Goblin Slayer, because that's retarded
>>
>>59750676
Considering the money to be made I could see seniority being relatively important. I can't see initiate fucknuts of six months' experience receiving a lucrative and low-risk contract when master cockslap of fifteen year's experience also wants the same contract and on top of that those who advance in the guild probably take on more internal duties. Ranks are usually a shorthand for seniority and/or competency and I really see no reason to avoid them.
>>
>>59750724
I'm more against having a big guild hall with a reception handing out never ending quests and acting as some weird contractor hub, with teenagers walking in and any kind of government or army or alternative guilds ever existing... unless the setting doesnt take itself seriously then yea that can be fun.
>>
>>59748669
>Adventuring is just a job, like any other
No, it's not. Specially not "like any other".
>>
In the setting I'm currently tooling around with, "Adventurer" is a catch-all term referring to third-party
>Monster slayers
>Bounty hunters
>Treasure hunters
>Body guards
>Explorers
>Exterminators
>Mercenaries
>Negotiators and intermediaries
>Political-errand-runners
>Detectives
>Gladiators
>Spies
and so on and so forth; essentially, anybody willing to travel around and put their life on the line for cash. I'm still working out the justifications for it, but I'm also not too concerned because I'm prioritizing this campaign around a somewhat larger body of players than normal being able to opt in or out as need be with a more casual commitment all around; hence the need to facilitate rotating party members.

I don't have anything against adventurer's guilds, but when I'm playing with a smaller, core group, I tend not to include them simply because the story is about THE GROUP, not some organization, which isn't the case this time.
>>
>>59748669
In my setting adventurers guild exist but it's main purpose is controlling murderhoboing and making sure party's pay taxes from the treasure they are looting from ruins that legally belong to some state.
Adventuring without a license is a big crime.
>>
>>59748693
What about the postal service?
>>
>>59748669
>Adventuring is just a job

In bad settings, sure. That's why an adventuring guild is sign that a setting is bad.
>>
>>59748669
>adventuring is just a job like any other
No, its not. It never has been. There is no demand for adventurers, there is no demand for adventuring. Anything an adventurer could do an organized militia or professional corp of warriors could do better.Furthermore, in a world with any political or cultural divisions, having a bunch of folks running around with weapons would not be something any ruler would tolerate without direct control. The nearest historical parallel would be the mercenaries companies of the age of pike and shot, and even they had a specific role; to be bribed.
>>
>>59751311
I like that you've thought about what adventurers do, but realistically nobody would use the term if it applied to such a broad skillset. It would be like if handymen were either electricians, plumbers, or carpenters; you wouldnt call for a handyman because the term is generic and your needs are specific.
>>
>>59748669
Depends on the setting, characters, motivation, theme and story.
Adventurer could be just a fancy term for "freelance mercenary and private detective", could be a classical greek-type hero or coul be just someone who happens to be on an unexpected adventure.

You have guys like Frodo and Willow that are adventurers only a by coincidence/fate.
You also have guys like Geralt who do all (or at least most) of the heroic shit for a living.
>>59750676
>not with ranks and shit
Mercs do have ranks and chain of command, especially in middle ages with whole mercenary battalions for hire.
or if you mean "you have to be lvl 10 and kill 10 giant rats to get the quest" ranks, in which case, you need to understand you as a king (or whoever is giving the quest) can't let random trigger-happy teenagers do covert operations and hostage rescue for you, there is a risk of them fucking it up with severe consequences. You need to have some reputation as a professional.
Unless they already know you, are really desperate and/or there is some fate/prophecy involved. But that's all matter of decent story telling.
>>
>>59751365
The postal service has a specific role, and its carriers know where they're going and what they're doing. Adventurers know neither.
>>
>>59748669
>>
>>59748823
Artists, merchants and entertainers, too. And they'd also arrange for things like pensions, support for widows and orphans of members, allowances for members who needed to travel to find work, funerals, etc.
>>
>>59751421
Modern unions and medieval guilds are not the same thing
>>
>>59751390
Realistically, yeah, but I don't mind realism playing a second fiddle to the requirements of the group, and this is gonna be a lighter, more fanciful campaign anyway (compared to the last campaign I ran, which was more serious and structured).

The guild in this case more or less operates as a middle man/registry, getting clients in touch with a selection of specialists who aren't tied down to a specific location (or associated with a particular political faction), but since the tasks are often life-threatening they can't just assign jobs, but instead offer contracts.

Back in the day you'd have to call a circuit board operator to get you in touch with the people you actually wanted to talk to, so this is a fantasy circuit board.
>>
>>59751445
It seems to me that it would be better to just have a guild of wanderers. That gives you a much deeper bench of archetypes and motivations to call on, though I guess thats what you've got by a different name.

Either way, I appreciate your Java Script approach to using adventuring guilds; you know its not perfect, but you use it to be expedient. Thats not a bad reason to use something mediocre. At least you have a reason other than lack of creativity or a slavish devotion to nonsense.
>>
>>59748669
>Only makes sense that its monopolized and regulated
No it really doesn't. Thats like regulating hiking in the middle ages, it doesnt make any sense. An adventurers guild is a super super generous term for a pawn shop and tavern on the same street.
>>
In my setting, adventurers guils are not there to protect adventurers or give them jobs,is to protect people and propierty from armed mercenaries that believe themselves judge, jury and and who steal anything that isnt nailed down.
>>
File: Rory_005.jpg (110 KB, 1280x719)
110 KB
110 KB JPG
>>59748669
it's supposed to be a personal journey you hextuple nigger not wageslaving even in your escapist fantasy
>>
>>59752386
Mixed with an indiscriminate job listing board.
>>
>>59748669
Because an adventure is not an objectively defined thing, unless you simplify it to “travel point A to point B”. And that’s not even considering the way most adventurers are portrayed in PF and DnD. To have a guild implies a static trade skill being monopolized (or attempt) to make more profit in a city.

You can’t muscle farmer bob to pay guild dues or end his practice of adventuring, just because he slain cow rustlers. You can’t do the same to the thief and his band of muggers after they went tomb robbing. You can’t do it to traveling priests trying to find the source of the plague. The concept of adventuring defies the strict definition that Guilds implies, and I detest you for making these threads when we’ve done them countless times with all having sufficient answers.
>>
In one campaign world I had, one had to purchase an exorbitantly expensive license to form an adventurer/mercenary company. However there was a sort of loop hole where there was no regulation on the internal workings of an adventuring company, so wealthy individuals would purchase this license and form "guilds" allowing new adventurers to work under their license for a much smaller fee.
>>
File: 07.jpg (489 KB, 1180x1700)
489 KB
489 KB JPG
>>59748669
What is the actual appeal of adventuring guilds?

Everything about them seems to be designed to skip parts of the setting that you could exclude anyway without using the guild.
>>
>>59752694
>When you can't handle anything that isn't your special snowflake power fantasy.
>>
>>59753476
What's the point of escapism if you're pretending to be an office worker, but in chainmail?
>>
>>59748723
I don't think its that meta. Its a fantasy realm, I'd treat them as pmcs. The majority just get temporary security jobs or escort missions like the Knight's Templar. Meanwhile the PC's can be caught up in shenanigans.
I like the idea of a guild because it gives players a reason to work together despite differences (if they're all from a guild). As well as being a nice plot point, some people refuse to talk to guild members, or guild rank can be used as usable title if regions with their own guild.
>>
>>59753372
For me, it basically serves many different functions in one, that you can't usually get out of one single building.
it is a:
>notice board
>tavern
>sleeping quarter
>forge area
>questgiver
>etc.
It acts as a hub that people feel connected to. They know the people, they have seen guild related drama, they have brought gold into the guild, they have been promoted, etc.
Adventuring guild for me just contains way too much and is way too convenient to not like. The major downside is when a gameworld can sometimes consist entirely of the guild halls, and the kobold cave / bandit encampent / quest area. I've had a game become like that in the past, and it was becoming stale.
Untill the adventuring guild was burnt down by the BBEG riding a dragon he he he
>>
>>59753676
Eh, any settlement could fulfill the same functions.
Still don't see what it brings to the table.
Beside doing the trope to just do the trope.
>>
>>59753872
you're right. but it's just more convenient than creating a tavern, describing the atmoshpere, the building, the interior, the music, the fireplace, the different people. And then the party just sleeps and leaves.
Questgiver is at another building, which I also feel obliged to describe in detail.
Notice board is in front of townmaster / lord / governor / etc. 's residence, which I have to also let them explore...
It bundles up so many things in one. I had an adventuring guild only for one campaign btw. It actually went really really well, because all the disparate parts of a settlement can get a bit difficult to connect thematically, politically, and dimensionally (where to put what).
We play theatre of the mind so I like to use a lot of descriptions, so that I can create storylines from people interacting with mundane things in my descriptions.
>>
>>59753539

It supposed to be a game, not four other people gathered around a table to jack you off.
>>
>>59753964
>We play theatre of the mind so I like to use a lot of descriptions, so that I can create storylines from people interacting with mundane things in my descriptions.
I do this for my group does as well, which is part of why I tend to avoid adventuring guilds, as it really saps away a lot of potential interactions by centralizing everything.
>>
>>59753964
The way I see it you always have the freedom to spend detail how you want. You can handle the supply run with just a sentence or two, you have the ultimate power to place things and people wherever and skip uninteresting things or detail any scene.
I don't need a one point location that is focused easily in one concrete spatial place because I control focus directly.
Under my philosophy the guild would have to be more thematically than just convenience, convenience is worthless as I create convenience via narration flow.

>>59754068
Same.
What is commonly called adventurers guild is just to generic by necessity to justify its own existence (by having enough flavor to warrant it as a thematic location its own right).
>>
>>59748669
I never liked them because them needing to accommodate and the vast amount of potential adventurers of all sorts and abilities just means they'd need connections almost literally everywhere and basically have some control over everything.
Then I try to figure out why any king in his right mind would let someone else have that sort of power before having it wiped off the map. And I can never think of a good reason, so adventuring guilds don't exist in my setting because they'd be completely annihilated the second they gained the amount of power they'd need to function on that sort of scale.
>>
>>59748811
I think it's established that whatever fantasy realm the setting takes place in, it's going to have a lot more dangers than the real world does.
In real life, a peasant might encounter a wolf once in a few weeks. Raiders might attack once a year. In D&D, it's a reasonable assumption that you'll fight for your life every day.
There are monsters that pretend to be human. There are monsters that pretend to be floors.
I think a guild of people who drive these creatures out from the spheres of human habitation might be more sustainable in a world where they are genuinely needed.
>>
An adventurer's guild feels like it turns your fantasy world into an mmo. Make sure to get back to the hub so you can turn in the quest, grab another, flog your old wares and repair your armor!

Just cheapens towns to me.
>>
>>59748669
Adventuring is a side job you do if you're desperate not a full blown industry, that is unless you have a mega dungeon nearby
>>
The singular adventuring guild in my setting is more like a hunting lodge then a guild proper. It started when a couple of adventurers (as in smelly hobos who wander and do anything for cash) decided to buy an old pub just so they have a place they can drink where they can't get kicked out. After that, other vagabonds turned up at the doors, told their stories and stuck around. As the amount of people in the same lifestyle frequenting this location grew word began to spread of this haven for adventurers. And when people started to show up with jobs, contracts, and rumors of loot, they decided that they should call the pub a guild to seem more legitimate. But in reality It's still a place for wanderers to get smashed and tell stories.
>>
>>59754226
The king sending his soldiers to break up the adventuer's guild would be like fucking christmas for the barbarians.
>>
>>59754285
At the same time such a world would profit from more reasonable organizations that make sensible use of specialization. And those would do much more to make a setting interesting.

You would have society change down to basic customs if changelings or mimics where a huge thing, greetings would be ritualized security questions as a possibility.

A constant oppressive Orc threat could militarize a whole society.

A demon incursion would give the church a prominent militarized arm and there would be elaborate specialization in wards and exorcism.

Threat of giants can escalate into Attack on Titan.

Everything more interesting then billboardhouse do everything but staff do nothing headquaters.
>>
I think the best way it would work is as some sort of loose organization that borders on organized crime.
Let's say you have a problem. A friend mentions that he knows a guy that can help. He gets the guy to come talk to you, to understand your problem. That guy sets up a meeting with another guy. You go to a location, maybe an inn or a tavern, and meet privately with this man. He knows a crew that can deal with this problem. A deal is made.
The guy in charge knows over a dozen crews/parties, each with their own schtick. Monster exterminators down on their luck, looking for a side job or two. Shakedown artists willing to get their hands dirty. A handful of army deserters, looking to make a name for themselves as mercenaries. And they all know him, as a man who can get them employment, for a cut and the occasional favor.
The city doesn't know about it, and if they do, they turn a blind eye. Maybe he greases some palms, maybe he takes care of problems that the city guard doesn't need to know about.
And he calls this arrangement "The Adventurers Guild". It's a joke, like the Thieves Guild. It's not a real guild, it doesn't work remotely like one, but it gives it almost an air of legitimacy.

That's the kind I'd like to see.
>>
File: paladin.jpg (406 KB, 510x850)
406 KB
406 KB JPG
>>59754454
>give the church a prominent militarized arm
Almost like a group of holy warriors, bent on exterminating demonic and evil forces wherever they be found?
>>
>>59748669
Fucking around like a homeless hobo is not a job
>>
>>59754529
Yes, except they would actually interact with their church more than once a month. Work with others like them, concentrate on problems that are most relevant to their organization, escort pilgrims, act as an organization. The works.

As opposed to being untrained youths that happen to have a golden glow magic fighting rats in a cellar. Or knights whose quest for today is to awkwardly cling to a manatree trunk because their group leader (whom they have no formal connection to) choose the task from a billboard.
>>
>>59748981
Why would you sent thirty when the five historically do it better? You're just being wasteful.
>>
>>59754226
For my setting I sketched out a number of powerful states all at each other's doorstep. Nobody can afford to expend military resources on local issues since they're all waiting for someone else to make a move, and sometimes you just need a third party to facilitate diplomatic relations, so the singular adventurer's guild on the continent is allowed to exist so long as it upholds its charter - which specifically declines taking jobs from one nation that would directly jeopardize another.

That and the guild was initially founded by ancient heroes of yore who found themselves with a powerful magical artifact that is basically their ace in the hole if anyone tries to mess with them, in a manner not unlike Frank Herbert's Dune, so the other kings need to put up or shut up.
>>
>>59754529
I still don't get why they removed the paladins having to give up most of their gold/loot to the church.
>>
>>59754226
sounds like Knightly Orders, which did have tension with kings (most notably Templars)
one way for this to work is that the guild was started by king himself or his ancestor
so they are technically under the king, the guildmaster is king's vassal and the new/freelance adventurers they hire must swear an oath. It can involve a curse if they decide to stage a coup or something funny like that if you want.

Guild can act as a secret service agency that outsources lot of the jobs to private investigators-adventurers (that are well checked before they give them even the most banal jobs, hence ranks, or as we call it today - security clearance levels). And they also act as a sort of "supernatural police" that hunts monsters when people complain about them. Or they can do any jobs that regular army can't.

although I like the idea of no real institution a bit more >>59754502
>>
>>59754439
>Local adventurer's guild attacks garrison of soldiers stationed close by
>King burns the attackers down in retaliation suspecting a possible threat to the kingdom.

And now kingdoms no longer have a reason to trust adventurer's guilds because they also attack the kingdoms they swear they work for, for the right price.

That's not what actually happened of course, but when the guild is burned to the ground with a select few ""survivors"" spared who claim the guild attacked first, and it won't matter too much what really happened.
>>
>>59754980
More like

>King's soldiers attack guild
>Kingdom and all traces of it are wiped off the map in a matter of days

Fuck with the guild, you get fucking destroyed.
>>
>>59755076
Even better
>Guilds can eradicate kingdoms on a whim for no reason other than because they can
That's sure to get people to believe Adventurer's Guilds are a good plan in-universe.
>>
>>59754910
And keep in mind, the Guild will have to deal with the consequences of being too powerful.
When the Knights Templar got too big, the king had them arrested on charges of demon worship and it was dissolved.
>>
>>59755147
>guild will have to deal with the consequences of being too power
>the king will arrest this group full of dozens of people who are each capable of toppling an entire kingdom by themselves

I'm sure that'll blow over well.
>>
>>59755172
>King cuts a deal with a dozen minor adventurers guilds, all looking to muscle in on the monopoly
>Guild gets swarmed by hundreds of middling level adventurers
>>
>>59755172
>>59755286
Get a room.
>>
>>59755286
>they return to the guild to get paid
>oops, they just burned the guild down
>now have hundreds of broke dudes who only know how to kill to make a living
>turn into the biggest and strongest gang of raiders ever
>time to send the guild out to did tha-OOPS they are the guild

Genius
>>
>>59755498
I was thinking that there are probably a lot of organizations that are trying to do what the Guild does (crime rings, mercenary groups, etc) and resent the fact that the Guild has an effective monopoly on violence. So the king appeals to them, cuts them all shady deals, and uses them to destroy the guild. It's not actual members that destroy the guild, just lots of combat-capable people. He may use his own army or even ask neighboring countries for help.
Of course, then he'll have to deal with the fallout of letting a bunch of violent groups run rampant in his country, but he probably figures a bunch of guys at odds with each other is better than one unified guild. If he's a particularly stupid king, he'll then have to honor more agreements than he can actually afford.
You could make a decent plot out of that.
>>
>>59751399
Don't be dumb.
>>
>>59755147
of course, that's what I was hinting at
that's why a wise king would impose all these restrictions, makes it a law that are treasures found are all property of the king (although he generously gives them a small cut), etc. to not let the guild get power and riches independent to those from the king in the first place.
also, give senior adventurers knightly titles, effectively turning the guild into a potential recruiting ground for new noble houses
>>59755498
>now have hundreds of broke dudes who only know how to kill to make a living
that's the part where you sent them off to conquer the orc infested mountains or another kingdom that pisses you off
>>
>>59748669
>Adventuring is just a job
only if you live in a retarded anime universe
>>
Ive never had an adventuring guild in any game ive played or GM'd but these constant threads about how awful they are make me want to.
>>
>>59755687
heed your own advice
>>
>>59748669

Well... what an adventurer does to keep himself alive? Anything? That might be correct, but surely they must specialize in something, otherwise they would be simply be called wanderers.

If we go with the trope, adventurers explore, that's the whole point of their existence. They are glorified archeologists and travellers, by definition they go to the fringes of society and look for things of value, and whats of value there?

Artifacts and information. The same as it is in our world.

There is no intrinsic problem with a guild of adventurers, specially in fantasy where there are always old things lying around with so much power that can turn the tides of entire wars or cause an apocalypsis, having an organization managing those items is actually a necesity for both increasing the chances of sucessfull parties to protecting those artifacts, profit is not a problem since these guilds can turn into a mafia quite easily(pay or we release this old artifact that holds an entire army of the undead in your lands) or an actual service(provider of powerfull tools) or public utility(museum), and with money there is organization.

The problem is in naming. Adventurer is too broad, for it only means "those who do adventures" and adventure is not a well defined concept.

Except if you go the other way around, and make sure that culturally it makes sense that an adventurer stops meaning that, and instead means wathever you want your adventurer guild wants, I mean, just see how feminists throw a hissy fit when you suggest that "egalitarian" describes their movement better.
>>
>>59755974
I know, right?
getting caught between power struggle between guild and the king could be an interesting plot twist
lot of scheming, spying, assassinations and all of that can serve as a vessel to new adventurers as you get banished into wilderness or the situation escalating into a civil war
that way actually giving you a reason why to be in a group with random people fighting whoever
definitely a potential for an interesting campaign
>>
>>59749083
this
The adventuring guild is a cheap alternative for the state to outsource semi-local peacekeeping problems to
>>
>>59756444
You're right, it's two names for the same thing.
>>
>>59753372
>What is the actual appeal of adventuring guilds?
Having a place where your party can first meet and a place where your party can go to replenish their ranks when somebody dies.
>>
I think it’s more acceptable and likely that the responsibilities of an adventurer’s guild would be taken up by a local dojo/fighting school.

It makes much more sense thematically. You don’t go to the police about a ghost, you go to the monk/priest.

In the same vein, the mayor/village chief might ask the the guy who runs the martial school to send some students out to take care of bandits.
>>
>>59748669
I have no opinions of adventurers guilds. I think they can be a convenient and recognizable tool which can lead to some fun experiences while the party is still a pretty low level. It is familiar and regulated in a way that the danger is implicitly understood to be minimal, which motivates a bolder play-style that players might be hesitant to assume in other circumstances. However, adventurers guilds can become a hindrance if they are not abandoned once the party reaches a certain level; it is like training wheels, eventually they will be of no use to the party anymore.
Somewhere down the line the plot should cast the party out of the guild and into the world of the True Adventure, either by getting them kicked from the guild, destroying or crippling the guild itself, or getting the party sent to some frontier land where the guild has yet to establish itself.
>>
>>59751365
The pony express has been gone a long time anon. Sure, once in a rare while a USPS man gets stabbed or mauled or shot, but those are oddities. On the otherhand, "death by fire rune/skeleton/umberhulk/dragon/mindflayer is a reasonably common fate for adventurers. Adventurers die by the sword more often than not, at least in OSR games. USPS doesnt have that. In fact, I'd wager being in any D&D style setting would be at least 10x worse than Chicago in terms of likelihood of violent death, maiming, or crippling injury.
>>
>>59751380
One could argue pioneers and gold prospectors were closest. "Yep there's stuff out west. Nope we don't know much about it. Watch out for Indians. You put yer name on it and it's yours, and you'll get a donkey."

But thats still more manual labor than adventuring and cave delving to fight drow.
>>
>>59755172
A world where this is possible is broken.
>>
>>59748669
Some do, hate it with a passion. Some on /tg/ love the idea. I think for many of us it just depends on how it is presented.

Historically there were a number of organizations that might be thought of as 'Adventuring Guilds'. Usually some sort of geology society. Others were more like country clubs set in exotic lands where the white travelers would stay.

If we take the historical model and apply it to say a fantasy world we would probably have some sort of country club society in say the capital city. The nobility would mostly fund it. Doing so in order to be members and gain prestige. Further bankrolling some expeditions in order to associate themselves further.

In far away areas closer to the adventure you would likely see a Tavern/Inn where adventurers tend to gather and exclude those that they don't wish to associate with.

In all cases the locations would act as clearing houses for information, connections for adventurers to link up with needed resources, and a way for them to simply talk with people who might understand what they have seen - people they respect.
>>
>>59756676
>adventure is not a well defined concept
>adventure is not being a mercenary
pick just one please
>>
>>59748669
Because it doesn't fit well in 99% of settings.
>>
>>59758923
One could argue that your "vocation" is just whatever you spend your time doing, as long as it pays the bills.
>>
>>59750191
This.
Pirates, conquistadors, explorers etc. But there isn't just a pool of "adventurers" that need organizing/regulating.
>>
>>59751311
I think I'd just call them mercenaries.
>>
>>59751437
Yeah. It was less a union and more of a small scale monopoly.
>>
>>59754727
Yeah. That's a way more fun roleplaying mechanic, in my opinion.
You give the church almost everything you have, and in exchange the church gives you what you need, what it can, or what it thinks you deserve.
>>
>>59755101
This. If the guild is that powerful, it's running the country, the king is just a figure head.
>>
>>59755172
>>the king will arrest this group full of dozens of people who are each capable of toppling an entire kingdom by themselves
lol what sort of retarded setting are you playing in? I usually play fantasy games a little more toned down than DBZ.
>>
>>59759291
>what sort of retarded setting are you playing in
One with an adventuring guild
So very retarded.
>>
That's it, I'm incorporating Adventurer's guild in my game.

Ideas taken from this thread:
Main objective of adventurer's guild isn't just helping adventures, but regulating them. Making sure they don't become murderhobos, pay taxes and don't loot every important historic building they set a foot in.
Adventuring guilds should give small jobs and provide a contact network, but not outright give "quests"
There should be different adventuring guilds, with different approaches and philosophies, politics should be a main point.
Ranks and reputation should be important.
Adventurer's guilds should not be "Questing hubs". They should offer some basic services, but the party should be responsible for finding jobs if they want something more important than clearing somebody's basement.
Adventuring without a licence can be very profitable, but illegal and dangerous. If you were working for somebody outside the guild's regulation and you get scammed out of payment, you just can't do anything,

The only problem I have is the name. Adventurer's guild doesn't sound right for this. Ministry of adventuring?
>>
>>59763914
Have names for all of the various organizations, down to the local level.
>>
>>59764402
Any suggestions?
>>
>>59764427
Keep the names local. Have then be independent but affiliated; if a mage from region A wants a service in region C but the closest organization is in region B, the service in region A should either refer the client to a representative of the organization based in B or use people from A but give a generous percentage to the organization in B.
>>
>>59764666
Yeah, that sounds about right. Thanks anon.
>>
>>59764427
Google it, there are a couple of random guild name generators.

But what sort of name do you want?
>>
>>59748669
It's often poorly done or a blatant and tasteless anime ripoff.

Of course the detractors of the technique rarely attempt to interface with settings/games that do it right, such as Eberron, which has begun an age of exploration in very dangerous areas requiring explorers with class levels with the kind of economic base to support that kind of resource extraction.
>>
>>59748669
Problem with the concept of an adventurers guild is that its unrealistic. Guilds formed primarily as a way for individuals who are of a specific craft to be able to ensure that they don't get screwed over by merchants. They were citizens of nations who tended to remain in one location their whole lives, so it was easy for a crafting guild to provide support to an individual.

Adventurers by their very essence do not stay in one place, ant they typically receive exorbitant amounts of money not just in the form of treasure, but also usually in the form of quest rewards.

I don't know of many DMs who implement taxes, and other measures as gold sinks (though they really should), but adventurers accrue way more wealth in one adventure then an average carpenter, mason, or fishmonger would see in a year.

There is zero reason adventurers would ever need to organize beyond small groups let alone form and entire world expansive guild.
>>
>>59764746
Things that sound interesting, but vaguely institutional. More "Department of adventuring affairs" and less "The order of Coldsteel"
>>
>>59748669
So back in the day there were people called Circuit Riders, which is a term used by mostly religious folks today to talk about travelling preachers, but could mean anyone who could provide a good or service to the communities they passed through while staying for free in a guest room/guest house. So while preachers were among them, you also had travelling salesmen, officers of the law, doctors and midwives, postal workers, etc. That's what I think about when I think of adventurers, people just passing through, providing a service while staying as guests in a king's hall or an inn for a few days before moving on. Adventuring isn't a job, it's a lifestyle.
>>
>>59764855
The King's Man
The Society of the Sworn Sword
Hall of the Banner Sworn

Maybe something like that? Looking at things that might imply loyalty to the crown.
>>
>>59764847
>Adventurers by their very essence do not stay in one place, ant they typically receive exorbitant amounts of money not just in the form of treasure, but also usually in the form of quest rewards.

Player Characters by their nature. No reason to think that NPC's would be that way. There have been many people in history that could be legitimately called 'adventurers', they tended to have a loyalty to a nation and tended to be there (return to) in between their adventures.

PC may not do that because of the nature of an RPG. But it seems likely that other people who would be adventurers might behave otherwise.
>>
>>59748669
muh realisms
>>
File: 1479849607607.png (439 KB, 768x810)
439 KB
439 KB PNG
I feel as though people can't deal with either the lack of specificity being an adventurer entails, or they adhere too much to the specificities of how a guild operates. I've come up with a number of guidelines how my adventuring guild system operates:

>1.) Have a strict definition of constitutes as an 'Adventurer' and everything that might be related to the term
My setting is set in the near 19th-20th century, but the guild itself has lasted for nearly half a millennium. By that time, people have established what an Adventurer is and why they differ from mercenaries, hunters, soldiers, etc. Adventurers are specifically stated to be adjunct services qualified for helping the needs of private and public groups and individuals. They are interdisciplinary and can work alongside, and in some cases are, certain specialists. Being an Adventurer can also mean being a Mercenary, but a Mercenary is not the same as being an Adventurer. I've got definitions and organizations for practically everything that could be misconstrued as an 'adventurer' to eliminate confusion.

>2a.) Have your guild act like a guild
As with any organization worth its salt, you need to have exact rules and structures place with what your organization provides and how it operates. Your guild shouldn't just be an average tavern rowdy people go to with a notice board pinned with requests. My main (but not the only) Adventuring Guild provides benefits to its members as well as outlying the rules and regulations in joining the guild, the penalties of breaking said rules and regulations, and the requirements for membership. They mostly adhere to the Apprentice-Journeyman-Master sense of progression within ranks and have penalties of those working outside their jurisdiction.
(1/?)
>>
File: 2358252385032852 yordle.jpg (903 KB, 1169x827)
903 KB
903 KB JPG
>>59765694
One of their primary operations, among many, is to work as an intermediary to bring together groups of members of different guilds in order to bring a interdisciplinary approach to a problem not suited for any one guild. So it has clout and should feel significant.

>2b.) But don't act like a guild *too* much
All of you are drawing from solely from historical examples of what a guild should be to disavow it's place in an RPG. I feel like this is the problem of solely focusing on a strictly Eurocentric high medieval fantasy sense of a setting. Since I've unshackled the burdens of this time frame I've allowed my guilds to change with the times, taking on more of the forms of modern day unions as well. Guilds were often found from city to city and controlled the work of a certain trade or craft with an iron fist. This hampers the freefloating nature of adventurers, so I made adventuring guilds more lax with their policies and expanded their influence to a multi regional/national size. So this allowed more range for an adventuring party's field of operation.

3.) Have your quests come from a number of places
Quests (or jobs, contacts, whatever you want to call them) should have different means of distribution. Their should be a unified way to make a request for an Adventuring Guild, but it shouldn't just be located in the Guild proper. Usually I have quests come up in newspaper ads and different Adventurer magazines that get posted there. Quests are classified by types and requirements, but there should be a definition and precedent of when a random NPC comes and asks for help and whether or not the Guild should constitute it as a quest or not.
(2/?)
>>
>>59765418
>No reason to think that NPC's would be that way. There have been many people in history that could be legitimately called 'adventurers', they tended to have a loyalty to a nation and tended to be there (return to) in between their adventures.
True, however my point still stands, adventurers gain way more wealth then non adventurers. Thus the need for a guild dedicated to supporting adventurers is a moot issue. Couple that with the idea that the player's characters are viewed as unique existences. In general the majority of the population are not adventurers, and even if you want to say there are some NPC adventurers, would there really be enough to warrant the need for a guild to provide support? Whouldn't such groups be just as capable as the PCs of being able to find work without the needed assistance of a guild? The idea of adventurer guilds is pointless, unless you're boung to run with the idea that a sizeable subset of your worlds population are adventurers, which would mean that the PCs lose their unique existence as a subset separate from the general population.
>>
>>59753650
If you need a guild to make your players work together then that means you either let them make characters that are way too far apart theme wise or you arent doing a good job at creating an interesting story. Heres a free tip: If you are really out of idea on how to bond a group together have something/someone hurt them all or take something from them. Nothing brings people together quite like hatred
>>
Not guilds but companies
>>
File: jones-dining.0.0.jpg (117 KB, 1200x800)
117 KB
117 KB JPG
>>59765888
>True, however my point still stands, adventurers gain way more wealth then non adventurers.

PC perhaps, we don't have to assume that for NPC though.

>Thus the need for a guild dedicated to supporting adventurers is a moot issue. Couple that with the idea that the player's characters are viewed as unique existences.

Which is why I keep coming back to the idea of something more closely a gentlemen's club than what we might think of as a controlling guild.

A place where the adventurers (NPC) return to from their (far less frequent) adventures in distant lands. Coming home to a place that supports them and their life style, provides them with companionship of those who 'get them'. That would also add as a local support nexus for logistics of future expeditions.

Local nobles might support the club in order to join and be associated with the adventurers, getting a touch of that status. They might fund and support expeditions for the same reason.

A lot of this comes from my experience with D&D 2e. When an adventure might be more than just some guys with backpacks going off. You might build an actual support expedition.

So the 'guild' is where they might find someone to organize hirelings for them, pack animals. They might come in contact with someone who might have regional information. Meanwhile a noble might offer to bankroll the entire thing - if he gets a share of the glory (he doesn't deserve). They might also have to avoid some buffoon noble who wants to interject himself.

All of this in some sort of bar room Indiana Jones sort of setting. With contacts being traded for favors.
>>
File: 1458655648952.jpg (662 KB, 732x1000)
662 KB
662 KB JPG
>>59765839
>4.) Give each job and organization a personality
Being such an interdisciplinary field of work, adventurers should not feel like they come from the same cut. A travelling doctor from the Apothecaries Guild should not act the same as a Mercenary just getting back from a conflict zone. There's always the misconception that adventuring automatically means being a mercenary, but that's not the case. I've even made it into a top point of contention between the two occupations, because though the average farmer wouldn't tell the difference, they both hate the others guts. An adventurer to a mercenary is just a poorly paid civil worker dressed up in extra paperwork to make them feel important. Mercenaries to adventurers are ruthless dogs without a lick of honour who would go in and destabilize entire areas if the coin was good. Make it interesting by having some organizations and occupations butt heads with another. I've got a storyline where two adventuring guilds have their respective poster boy parties vye for a quest that's rumoured to be given by the ruling diarchy. Friendships and rivalries should be a big deal, and have relationships across occupations turn up for your party in the future.
(3/?)
>>
File: typical party konosuba.png (279 KB, 1000x563)
279 KB
279 KB PNG
>>59766200
>5.) Make being an adventurer mean something
This whole thing may seem bureaucratic, and it is. Having a set foundation of what your guild is and what its capable of beyond the medieval mindset is important if you feel like implementing it in your setting. But Adventurers should have their time in the limelight for the people as well. It's an occupation that has spawned an entire industry frought with fame and fortune. Whatever significant thing your guild parties do, they should be able to read about it, listen, or watch it not long from now. I've got numerous magazines, newspapers, and radio shows that portray some sort of connection to adventuring, and its influenced the culture, wardrobe, and innovation of multiple countries. Have them measure their merit other than gold and relics, but also with their standing with the people and the media. What if your elf mage gets approached by a fashion designer and gets their own line of clothing after that spell that downed a group of trolls? What if you had entire board game that dealt with a harrowing quest that one party did? There should be common exploits in the history books and instances where colonies or countries are ruled by the most powerful adventurers. Something to make them feel special other than a bag of loot.
>>
>>59766193
>PC perhaps, we don't have to assume that for NPC though.
Why are NPCs even adventurers in the first place? Why is this a profession choice for the general population?

>A place where the adventurers (NPC) return to from their (far less frequent) adventures in distant lands. Coming home to a place that supports them and their life style, provides them with companionship of those who 'get them'. That would also add as a local support nexus for logistics of future expeditions.
Since we established that if NPCs were adventurers, they are wither not as capable or as ambitious as PCs and are in need of a support structure, then why would PCs who we have established are more ambitious, and capable, be allowed access to a guild of this nature?
>>
I blame anime for the idea of the adventurers guild. I remember when adventure hooks were a useful tool for getting adventures started. When DMs could get people interested in playing a game of make believe without having to resort to popculture to get people to play a game.
>>
>>59766429
>Why are NPCs even adventurers in the first place? Why is this a profession choice for the general population?

That would likely depend on the individual NPC. I trust the GM would give them appropriate motivation and attitude. For myself though, adventuring is not a choice for the general population.

But consider, most people were not explorers, adventurers, big game hunters, or far traders - yet there were some few people that did exactly that in our history. And there were associations that supported them in those endeavors. And associations that they were simply members of because other like minded people were also members.

>Since we established that if NPCs were adventurers, they are wither not as capable or as ambitious as PCs and are in need of a support structure, then why would PCs who we have established are more ambitious, and capable, be allowed access to a guild of this nature?

Not following here. Why would such an association not want to include them? Such an association would likely highly value a group that was a cut above the rest - that seems to be the norm after all. Does a country club seek to exclude people who are more competent than the other members, or do they typically seek to exclude the lowest qualified?

In regards to NPC's. I'm not really saying that they HAVE to be inferior. I am simply saying that by the nature of an RPG the PC are probably doing a lot more than what a reasonable NPC would do. Unless there were timeskips in the campaign.

In general, after a major expedition, most people want to take some time off. That time may be measured in years. But that typically makes for a less exciting campaign (it would seem is the opinion) and thus not something that plays in to a PC experience. But for an NPC it would be pretty reasonable.
>>
>>59766513

Nah, it goes back to the early days of D&D, when you had like 50 people playing in the same campaign, with various people coming and going, and where wilderness adventure involved outfitting an expedition.
People over time built up in-world organizations to deal with stuff like getting wagons and hiring teamsters and guards, and buying and selling magic items between players who might not be at the table together. (There were no "magic item shoppes" in early settings, and the books carried no prices for them. They were worth what you could get for them, and players were the best customers)
These kind of things got invented in the 70s and 80s because players found a need and figured out you could buy a building and pay some people in-world to take care of it.
>>
>>59766661
Part 1
>But consider, most people were not explorers, adventurers, big game hunters, or far traders - yet there were some few people that did exactly that in our history. And there were associations that supported them in those endeavors. And associations that they were simply members of because other like minded people were also members.
Exactly, there were people who could be classified as adventurers in actual history, and yet there was no rush to set up an adventurers guild any where throughout our history. Those people who could be classified as adventurers were unique existences. So to bring it back to D&D, if the PCs are supposed to be those that are unique existences why would there be a guild that specifically supports a tiny subset of the population? Adventurers be they PCs or NPCs are such a small group that logistically it would make little sense for such a guild to exist, especially if its supposed to be supporting such a small subset of the population that may be spaced out into several different kingdoms.

>Not following here. Why would such an association not want to include them? Such an association would likely highly value a group that was a cut above the rest - that seems to be the norm after all. Does a country club seek to exclude people who are more competent than the other members, or do they typically seek to exclude the lowest qualified?
Not quite what I was asking. Here's what I was going for. If NPCs are adventurers and If there is a large enough number of them to warrant the existence of an adventurers guild and If PCs are theoretically more capable/ambitious/lucky then why would a DM allow the PCs to have access to such an organization. As the PCs do not need a guild to support their lifestyles, as they are more capable/ambitious/lucky then NPCs?
>>
>>59766661
Part 2
>n regards to NPC's. I'm not really saying that they HAVE to be inferior. I am simply saying that by the nature of an RPG the PC are probably doing a lot more than what a reasonable NPC would do. Unless there were timeskips in the campaign.
But you implied in your earlier post that NPCs were in someway inferior to PCs in preforming the same occupation.

>In general, after a major expedition, most people want to take some time off. That time may be measured in years. But that typically makes for a less exciting campaign (it would seem is the opinion) and thus not something that plays in to a PC experience. But for an NPC it would be pretty reasonable.
Most people would go on maybe 2-3 expeditions tops in their lifetimes, living for years if not decades, off the treasure or rewards received upon returning. Lets also consider that historically, nearly all adventurers and explorers were financially backed by the aristocracy, so wouldn't the same hold true in a fantasy setting?

This is why I do not see the point in an adventurers guild. The logistics of running such a large organization for such a tiny subset of the population. Meanwhile the aristocracy would be more then willing to pay for and finance discovery of new lands and untouched riches. Yet for some reason, we need an adventurers guild to support the PCs?
>>
>>59751365
Damn. Now I need to run a postal service game. The party aren't heroic adventurers thrown together taking quests, they're coworkers for a neutral inter-kingdom postal service guild, wearing silly uniforms with silly hats and fighting to protect the mail from all possible threats.

"Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds!"
>>
>>59748811
As many as necessary.
>>
>>59748981
Five adventurers or thirty adventurers, in neither case is the concept invalidated.
>>
>>59750357
Everything you described is adventuring.
>>
>>59748669
I just don't like the name. I have them, but Always refer to them as "Adventuring Companies" and treat them like mercenaries. Guilds are a very different thing from individual groups, they are overarching organizations that group together the smaller groups.
>>
>>59748669
Because it absolutely annihilates player character motivation to take part in the campaign beyond: "it's my job; i'm a hero; i like to help people"

And that pisses me the fuck off.

It's also weeb as shit, and Adventurer's Guilds (capitalized) are basically another way for Japanese wageslaves to put their everyday lives in their fantasy.
>>
>>59748669
You’re confused.
You’re assuming that anything /tg/ does, thinks, or says matters, when in fact this website was the garbage dump of the internet years ago and is even worse now.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.