Jump to content

No fishing skill ?


Agentorange

Recommended Posts

Now there are 10 pages of results for fishing so if some one knows this has been covered just tell me and i'll wade my way through it all......

I was looking at the background professions, there is indeed a Fisher background - but no fishing skill. Which seems kind of odd. Now i know theres no specific hunting skill for hunter either. But the skills provided for the hunter do directly allow them to make a hunt, track to find the beat, missile weapon to actually kill the beast they directly allow the character to carry out the  function of a hunter.
What are the primary skills for fisherman: Boat and Swim, so that means you know what to do in a boat and what to do if you fall in the water - doesn't help you catch fish though. We do have thrown net, which strangely seems to be a combat skill, and obviously there is the javelin skill for spear fishing....

But what about fishing with nets  from a boat -  the boat skill means you just know how to handle a boat.....

What about NON cast net fishing eg haaf nets, rod and line fishing or angling, the construction of fish traps like the Fyke net ? i suppose you could use devise for that sort of thing, but I don't think the   fisher  profession gets devise. using animals to do fishing ?

it just seems theres a bit of a gap there. Would it break the game if i created a fishing skill for my games ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Agentorange said:

What are the primary skills for fisherman: Boat and Swim, so that means you know what to do in a boat and what to do if you fall in the water - doesn't help you catch fish though. But what about fishing with nets  from a boat -  the boat skill means you just know how to handle a boat.....

Boat(ing) allows you to manoeuvre your nets, depending on the type of net you use. 

Swim(ing) allows you to manage nets and traps without a boat. 

1 hour ago, Agentorange said:

We do have thrown net, which strangely seems to be a combat skill

The skill is Net Fighting (W&E 64). Thrown Net is a seperate skill.

1 hour ago, Agentorange said:

and obviously there is the javelin skill for spear fishing....

Just use the appropriate cultural weapon skill (1 H spear), note we now have tridents in W&E, bidents are easily extrapolated.

1 hour ago, Agentorange said:

What about NON cast net fishing eg haaf nets, rod and line fishing or angling, the construction of fish traps like the Fyke net ?

Devise covers fish traps.

rod and line fishing or angling is the only one not covered and I'd allow a player to make an appropriate manipulation skill (rod & Line), etc

1 hour ago, Agentorange said:

i suppose you could use devise for that sort of thing, but I don't think the  fisher  profession gets devise. using animals to do fishing ?

Quote

The gamemaster and players are encouraged to modify these occupations to fit their purposes.

RQG, page 64

So for a fisher who has ponds, Just tailor the skill list:

for Javelin, Self Bow, or Thrown Net (pick one) +20%, substitute Device +20%

1 hour ago, Agentorange said:

it just seems theres a bit of a gap there. Would it break the game if i created a fishing skill for my games ?

It wouldn't cause any problems. Overall I'd only make rod & line a new skill, but only if needed. I'd be careful in changing the occupational income skills, perhaps only allowing Devise as a alternative (maintaining and optimising equipment is the most important thing fishers do)

  • Like 1
  • Helpful 1

-----

Search the Glorantha Resource Site: https://wellofdaliath.chaosium.com. Search the Glorantha mailing list archives: https://glorantha.steff.in/digests/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all off the top of my head and I make no claims for historical or anthropological accuracy in any of it.  I'm thinking primarily in game terms here, but feel free to critique and brainstorm in order to get things right.

First thing is that I'd draw a distinction between hunting or fishing "for survival", and hunting or fishing "for sport".  "For survival" typically goes after small game (e.g. in the case of hunting, rabbits or ground fowl), and is all about traps, snares, baits and lures.  It should have no mechanical utility for characters beyond gathering food, and likewise other (more martial) skills should not have bearing on it.  It might be done by setting your traps and snares when you camp for the night, then you wake in the morning and check them to see what you've caught, and the goal is to just get enough food for the next day or two.  "For sport" goes after bigger game, boar or deer for example, and involves hunting parties going out for days or weeks at a time, with martial skills being used in the hunt.  During "for sport" hunting or fishing, "for survival" hunting or fishing should also occur for daily food requirements, but the "for sport" game is typically not consumed on the spot; instead it's brought back to the hall or castle for a feast.

"For survival" hunting, fishing or (let's be complete about this) foraging includes abilities such as being able to recognize good spots for game via spoor or droppings, being able to tell which nuts or berries will make you ill, etc.  But it would be useless for tracking a rival warband, or finding useful poisons.

Tools would typically be improvised on the spot.  Sometimes people might carry fishhooks, spear heads, or whatever with them, but they'd complete the tool from local resources and as required.  E.g. a fishing spear needs to be long, thin, flexible, sharp enough to pierce the fish, with a small barb to stop the fish wriggling off it.  You might carry the spear head around, then make the shaft as required by breaking off and stripping down a suitable tree branch.  It would of course be useless in battle, but similarly a typical war spear would probably vapourize a typical food fish if hit with sufficient force.

These all fall under the broader umbrella of "survival in the wilderness", and that would also include abilities such as finding shelter, setting camp, finding water, predicting weather, and so on.

In a pre-agricultural society, hunting, fishing or foraging would be on the "for survival" basis, and would not be much different from when used while travelling.  The tribe would indeed need to move around fairly regularly so as to not exhaust all local resources.  Everyone in the tribe would participate, rather than having dedicated "hunters".

An early-agricultural society might supplement a grain-based diet with "for survival" hunting, as they have probably not yet domesticated any food animals.

In game terms I'd be inclined to handwave the whole thing and say that most characters have sufficient basic ability in all of these to be able to just do them; so long as they spend their few hours at the end of each day, you can just assume success.  It doesn't seem something that needs to be bogged-down in rules and detail.  On the other hand there are obvious exceptions: a temple eunuch, for example, would probably not be able to do any of these and would be reliant on other characters.  Use common sense.

Of course, if it suits your game to go further and start devising skills for these, then by all means do, maybe using this as a jumping-off point.

Edited by 21st Century Moose
  • Like 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, David Scott said:

It wouldn't cause any problems. Overall I'd only make rod & line a new skill, but only if needed. I'd be careful in changing the occupational income skills, perhaps only allowing Devise as a alternative (maintaining and optimising equipment is the most important thing fishers do)

I did think that allowing devise as a substitute skill was the way to go, you could leave out boat, add devise and then you've covered handnet fishing  eg haaf nets, seine nets etc, making fish traps and weyrs and also rod and line fishing. use devise to cover all those things and you're pretty much good to go.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

It’s also super weird that Hunters don’t have Device as a skill.

just change it as advised, the occupations are not fixed:

Quote

 

The gamemaster and players are encouraged to modify these occupations to fit their purposes.

RQG, page 64

 

 

  • Like 1

-----

Search the Glorantha Resource Site: https://wellofdaliath.chaosium.com. Search the Glorantha mailing list archives: https://glorantha.steff.in/digests/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Akhôrahil said:

Some ancient (well, modern as well) fishing was done with thrown nets. In this case, I would allow a Throw Net weapon skill to be used for fishing as well.

or just use the Thrown Net skill in the fisher occupation (as opposed to net fighting).

-----

Search the Glorantha Resource Site: https://wellofdaliath.chaosium.com. Search the Glorantha mailing list archives: https://glorantha.steff.in/digests/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Darius West said:

Fishing with a hook and line is really ancient, like 22,000+ years ago ancient.  It is also a lot less effective than fishing with a net (which is mesolithic).  Why do I even know this stuff?

Rather to my surprise, even rod-fishing goes back to antiquity (although early rods were just long fixed handles that their lines were tied to, without a spool or guides for the line; more like a glorified carriage whip, I think ... ); 2000BC seems to be the commonly-cited date.

I wonder if other techniques might not have existed, without being preserved in the archaeological record.

FrEx, I could imagine something rather like a sling & stone, where the stone is tied to the sling via the fishing-line, and the sling is fastened to the wrist.  But in many cases, archaeologists infer the existence of slings (whose organic matter has presumably decayed) from a collection of sling-stones/bullets/etc.  If such a "fishing sling" existed, the characteristic bullet-collection wouldn't be associated.  (FWIW and for reference:  in the modern era, some people use a "slingshot" (the "Y" shape with rubber bands) in place of a rod; but a single quick&dirty Google finds nothing along these lines being reported by archaeologists)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 21st Century Moose said:

This is all off the top of my head and I make no claims for historical or anthropological accuracy in any of it.  I'm thinking primarily in game terms here, but feel free to critique and brainstorm in order to get things right.

First thing is that I'd draw a distinction between hunting or fishing "for survival", and hunting or fishing "for sport".  "For survival" typically goes after small game (e.g. in the case of hunting, rabbits or ground fowl), and is all about traps, snares, baits and lures.  It should have no mechanical utility for characters beyond gathering food, and likewise other (more martial) skills should not have bearing on it.  It might be done by setting your traps and snares when you camp for the night, then you wake in the morning and check them to see what you've caught, and the goal is to just get enough food for the next day or two.  "For sport" goes after bigger game, boar or deer for example, and involves hunting parties going out for days or weeks at a time, with martial skills being used in the hunt.  During "for sport" hunting or fishing, "for survival" hunting or fishing should also occur for daily food requirements, but the "for sport" game is typically not consumed on the spot; instead it's brought back to the hall or castle for a feast.

"For survival" hunting, fishing or (let's be complete about this) foraging includes abilities such as being able to recognize good spots for game via spoor or droppings, being able to tell which nuts or berries will make you ill, etc.  But it would be useless for tracking a rival warband, or finding useful poisons.

Tools would typically be improvised on the spot.  Sometimes people might carry fishhooks, spear heads, or whatever with them, but they'd complete the tool from local resources and as required.  E.g. a fishing spear needs to be long, thin, flexible, sharp enough to pierce the fish, with a small barb to stop the fish wriggling off it.  You might carry the spear head around, then make the shaft as required by breaking off and stripping down a suitable tree branch.  It would of course be useless in battle, but similarly a typical war spear would probably vapourize a typical food fish if hit with sufficient force.

These all fall under the broader umbrella of "survival in the wilderness", and that would also include abilities such as finding shelter, setting camp, finding water, predicting weather, and so on.

In a pre-agricultural society, hunting, fishing or foraging would be on the "for survival" basis, and would not be much different from when used while travelling.  The tribe would indeed need to move around fairly regularly so as to not exhaust all local resources.  Everyone in the tribe would participate, rather than having dedicated "hunters".

An early-agricultural society might supplement a grain-based diet with "for survival" hunting, as they have probably not yet domesticated any food animals.

In game terms I'd be inclined to handwave the whole thing and say that most characters have sufficient basic ability in all of these to be able to just do them; so long as they spend their few hours at the end of each day, you can just assume success.  It doesn't seem something that needs to be bogged-down in rules and detail.  On the other hand there are obvious exceptions: a temple eunuch, for example, would probably not be able to do any of these and would be reliant on other characters.  Use common sense.

Of course, if it suits your game to go further and start devising skills for these, then by all means do, maybe using this as a jumping-off point.


I am going to disagree with this whole argument, I'm afraid.

Big-game hunting -- for meat, not sport -- is very well attested in antiquity and pre-history.  Cave-art from the stone-age shows it.  The advantage to a tribe of 1 large kill is tremendous!  Not only meat, but the tools that can be fashioned from larger bones, the leather from larger hides, etc.

Also, I suspect even a very-small tribe would quickly strip all the small game from within a reasonable walking-distance of their home (though wandering nomads wouldn't face this issue, settling in place for a week or two and skimming off the easiest 20% or so, then moving on).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, g33k said:


I am going to disagree with this whole argument, I'm afraid.

Big-game hunting -- for meat, not sport -- is very well attested in antiquity and pre-history.  Cave-art from the stone-age shows it.  The advantage to a tribe of 1 large kill is tremendous!  Not only meat, but the tools that can be fashioned from larger bones, the leather from larger hides, etc.

Also, I suspect even a very-small tribe would quickly strip all the small game from within a reasonable walking-distance of their home (though wandering nomads wouldn't face this issue, settling in place for a week or two and skimming off the easiest 20% or so, then moving on).

i mean historically small game and vegetal foodstuffs comprised the absolute majority of food in prehistory and for most of actual history. yes, everyone wants to bag an elk, but practically speaking mostly you ate rodentia (rabbits) and small birds to supplement your grains and roots and fruits

I mean, the same issue of shortage arises when it comes to firewood! that's why stickpickers existed.

Edited by Qizilbashwoman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, g33k said:


I am going to disagree with this whole argument, I'm afraid.

Big-game hunting -- for meat, not sport -- is very well attested in antiquity and pre-history.  Cave-art from the stone-age shows it.  The advantage to a tribe of 1 large kill is tremendous!  Not only meat, but the tools that can be fashioned from larger bones, the leather from larger hides, etc.

Also, I suspect even a very-small tribe would quickly strip all the small game from within a reasonable walking-distance of their home (though wandering nomads wouldn't face this issue, settling in place for a week or two and skimming off the easiest 20% or so, then moving on).

I'd concede on big game for feeding a tribe in a pre-agricultural society. You're right and I'm wrong there, and it's definitely the case that running down a large antelope or two is more efficient. 

For a group of adventurers, traders, or whatever travelling light around the countryside, big game seems to me to not be a good idea. The type of hunting required there might be more properly termed "trapping". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

i mean historically small game and vegetal foodstuffs comprised the absolute majority of food in prehistory and for most of actual history. yes, everyone wants to bag an elk, but practically speaking mostly you ate rodentia (rabbits) and small birds to supplement your grains and roots and fruits

I mean, the same issue of shortage arises when it comes to firewood! that's why stickpickers existed.

And charcoalers!

It's not a pretty job, but it's absolutely vital once you get beyond the subsistence village level of organization. Charcoal is a MUCH more efficient heating source than plain firewood [last longer, produces more BTU] but it requires hardwoods... the *same* hardwoods that shipbuilders, spear-makers, shield makers, and masons want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, g33k said:

FrEx, I could imagine something rather like a sling & stone, where the stone is tied to the sling via the fishing-line, and the sling is fastened to the wrist.  But in many cases, archaeologists infer the existence of slings (whose organic matter has presumably decayed) from a collection of sling-stones/bullets/etc.  If such a "fishing sling" existed, the characteristic bullet-collection wouldn't be associated.  (FWIW and for reference:  in the modern era, some people use a "slingshot" (the "Y" shape with rubber bands) in place of a rod; but a single quick&dirty Google finds nothing along these lines being reported by archaeologists)

I'd suggest it is because sling stones would be fairly ineffective at hitting fish -- even if one has mastered the "fish looks to be there, so I need to aim here" refraction matter (bit easier with a spear -- as one could dip the end into the water and see an approximation of the visual shift)... Because sling stones are rather blunt and will 1) slow down rapidly on entering the water, along with making a big splash that probably startles the fish much before the stone gets near it; 2) at shallower angles stones would have a tendency to ricochet/skip off the surface of the water. At the angle needed for a sling stone to have a chance, you might as well just "tickle" the fish out of the water. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trout_tickling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, svensson said:

And charcoalers!

I created a skill to handle all kinds of working with wood and trees that isn't carpentry - picking out good trees; making charcoal, tar and resin (more advanced stuff, like varnish, goes under Alchemy); tapping trees for maple syrup or birch sap; and so on.  Then connected a new "Woodsman" profession to it.

Edited by Akhôrahil
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Agentorange said:

Now there are 10 pages of results for fishing so if some one knows this has been covered just tell me and i'll wade my way through it all......

Funny, I was going to say that not having a new skill category would be a good thing... why add complexity when one can 

A/ Avoid it... I like simple!
B/ there is little precedence for it, and then svensson posts the following...

 

1 hour ago, svensson said:

So, make a Fishing skill.

For a Fisherman /Boatman substitute the basic skill for Farming or Herding.

So, if Farming and Herding are skills, why not fishing. Write it up, and let your players know about it. It’s your game, have fun!

... remember, with a TARDIS, one is never late for breakfast!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Darius West said:

Fishing with a hook and line is really ancient, like 22,000+ years ago ancient.  It is also a lot less effective than fishing with a net (which is mesolithic).  Why do I even know this stuff?

Because you have an inquiring mind, and we never know when knowledge is going to come in handy.....

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

i mean historically small game and vegetal foodstuffs comprised the absolute majority of food in prehistory and for most of actual history. yes, everyone wants to bag an elk, but practically speaking mostly you ate rodentia (rabbits) and small birds to supplement your grains and roots and fruits

I mean, the same issue of shortage arises when it comes to firewood! that's why stickpickers existed.

The cliche view has the "mighty hunters" (generally adult males) wandering widely for big game, while the "gatherers" (generally women & children) stayed closer to camp (which was, presumably, pitched near the best places to gather).  Realistically, I presume the "gatherers" would also be doing a lot of that small-game hunting (setting snares after harvesting an area -- possibly baiting with some of the harvest -- then visiting the snares the next morning).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Baron Wulfraed said:

I'd suggest it is because sling stones would be fairly ineffective at hitting fish -- even if one has mastered the "fish looks to be there, so I need to aim here" refraction matter (bit easier with a spear -- as one could dip the end into the water and see an approximation of the visual shift)... Because sling stones are rather blunt and will 1) slow down rapidly on entering the water, along with making a big splash that probably startles the fish much before the stone gets near it; 2) at shallower angles stones would have a tendency to ricochet/skip off the surface of the water. At the angle needed for a sling stone to have a chance, you might as well just "tickle" the fish out of the water. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trout_tickling

You mistake my intent, probably because I was unclear.

I'm hypothesizing a regular hook-and-line, just with a sling & stone for range, to "cast" it further out than you can cast without those; not slinging for the kill.
You're still hooking the fish & pulling it in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...