Conan the Student
This stems from something decades ago. When making some 3rd Edition Dungeons & Dragons characters with players, one was asking why his barbarian wasn’t allowed to start with reading and writing. He had to use points to give himself these skills that everyone else had. I let him get the skills as long as we explained how he had them, which was pretty simple. Since then, I’ve never taken a basic skill away from a character unless it was important to their development or the main plot. Yet, there is still something to ponder in here.
There are plenty of skills that we take for granted. Reading, writing, basic math, walking, hygiene, and more. For many, it’s baffling that anyone would become an adult without these skills. We probably forget how hard it was to learn them when we were children. It could also be a learning disorder or no opportunity. The latter is the reasoning behind D&D barbarians not knowing two of most basic skills. Still not a fan of that, but you can see the logic. It gives them an obstacle they can’t berserk their way out of too.
Now, while I do understand why certain skills may be removed from characters, I don’t agree that it should be done to entire groups. Yes, the barbarians being a ‘primitive’ society could mean no reading or writing. On the other hand, we have seen real-world ‘primitive’ cultures still have these skills, but in their own language. Barbarians aren’t typically isolated from societies too, so cultural diffusion is bound to come about. I think saying an entire group lacks reading and writing skills is denoting them as stupid and almost lesser. It would make sense for a group to not know how to fish, hunt, or bathe regularly. Plenty of human societies have had that throughout history. Yet, reading, writing, and basic math have existed for centuries on some level.
This is where the taking things for granted come into play as well. The author may take all of their ‘basic’ skills and use them as the foundation for characters. Any who don’t have them are seen as lacking or uneducated. This can give them a chance for growth as person, which is a good thing. It can also denote a clear segregation in society where you have a poverty class who can’t learn the basics to success. Not that they won’t, but they can’t. This is usually only done with conscious effort for good reason since, again, the author is unwittingly assuming all people have their skills. We all do this on some level too, so nobody should feel called out.
I do have an issue when the skill isn’t really basic and is found in an area that doesn’t make any sense. For example, I’ve read stories where a character knows how to fish, but they come from a desert or mountainous area. The terrain of their homeland lacks bodies of water necessary for fishing to be necessary. No explanation is given and they have no issue with the skill. Now, I live on what could be called an island and fishing is a thing even though the charter boats are expensive. I’ve gone a few times and still have no real skill in it. So, I find it hard to believe a character who grew up without access to oceans, lakes, and rivers will be an expert fisherman without an explanation. My assumption here is that the author knows how to fish or knows nothing about it, so they put it on their list of basic skills.
Guess that’s another part of taking skills for granted. We see some used so often in stories that we forget they can be difficult to learn. If it isn’t noted as difficult, we don’t treat it as such. So, we get to our own story and slap it on everyone without doing the proper research. Oops. On the plus side, your average reader might not notice this issue and it’s usually pointed out by those who worked hard to acquire the skill. Even then, they might not think it worth making a public fuss over. Still, it is best to step back and consider if a skill is part of a basic set or even slightly more advanced.
So, what do you think of adding or taking away skills we can deem as basic?
Legends of Windemere 