Medieval Economies and D+D

[Winnah]

There has to be a distribution of threats where CR1 is the most common and the frequency of threats of CR N is decreasing as N increases. So when a CR20 threat arises, the noble tier that is approximately that badass deals with it. (Which might be the ruler, which would imply a CR 20 threat is an *existential crisis for the kingdom* in that case.) Basically, high CR threats are rare enough that civilization has time to grow before one destroys it, or at least rare enough that some monstrous badass who might decide getting paid to protect a kingdom is a good deal can handle all the high CR threats that come along while the humans are building up a heirarchy of powerful nobles. This is an absolutely essential prerequisite to even having civilization in the first place.

It's also pretty essential that explanar shit *can't get to the prime* without someone on the prime enabling that, because otherwise we know that demons and devils just annihilate civilization. Since that hasn't happened, they obviously can't freely move armies of CR10+ evil outsiders to the prime. (There is seriously an infinite number of demons and devils, so there's no way civilization survives if they can enter the prime at will). Planar warfare is thus inherently asymmetric, because the lower power civilizations control all the access.

So you're an Ed Greenwood fanboy? Because you pretty much just described the Forgotten Realms.

You really don't, because one 20th level wizard makes arbitrarily many 1st level warriors irrelevant. That makes it really easy to predict what happens. Heck, a 10th level fighter makes arbitrary numbers of 1st level warriors pretty irrelevant. (Not even a Tome fighter, a regular fighter).

Pretending low level armies matter would be like suggesting you fight battleships with paper airplanes. That's beyond retarded and anyone who has glanced at a 20th level character can see it.

That we can talk ourselves into having feudal lords who rule over peasants at all (and we haven't solved all the difficulties yet) is about as good as we can do to make it recognizable.

You were just saying a few paragraphs ago that low level adventurers were relevant because they get to go on tax collection adventures, now level 20 makes anything less irrelevant?

Truly consider the implications inherent in the world you are suggesting. Human and demihuman populations would be ruled over by an overclass of superheroes that fly around solving mysteries, when they aren't trying to tele-frag each other for the purpose of...what exactly?

Money and commodities mean nothing to high level spellcasters. Power, at least as the real world defines it, means nothing in this world. Instead, power is personal power, the amount of supernatural force you can bring to bear.

Why would these high level characters even be jockeying for the positions of authority over this peasant class? The peasants may as well be a different species.

But lets look at society and technology. By bother perfecting something as mundane as metalworking when you have magic at your disposal? Navigation, cartography and shipbuilding simply does not happen, because divination and teleport. No more castles either, because the lack of conventional warfare does not require them. Medicine? That is what priests are for.

The noble class is not going to sponsor the development of sciences and technology, when is does not benefit them. In fact, it only takes power away from the spellcaster and gives it to the peasant. Magical research, sure I can see that, but no noble is going to hire a bronze worker when they can simply fabricate iron.

You're looking at civilisation reaching it's technological zenith around Sumeria, then diverging into an unrecognisable clusterfuck. This is worse than superheroes acting as feudal lords, it's God-Kings of stagnant cultures.

If I tried to present that to a group of players as an authentic vision of what a D&D world should be, they would say "not Dark Sun again."

[squirrelloid]

There has to be a distribution of threats where CR1 is the most common and the frequency of threats of CR N is decreasing as N increases. So when a CR20 threat arises, the noble tier that is approximately that badass deals with it. (Which might be the ruler, which would imply a CR 20 threat is an *existential crisis for the kingdom* in that case.) Basically, high CR threats are rare enough that civilization has time to grow before one destroys it, or at least rare enough that some monstrous badass who might decide getting paid to protect a kingdom is a good deal can handle all the high CR threats that come along while the humans are building up a heirarchy of powerful nobles. This is an absolutely essential prerequisite to even having civilization in the first place.

It's also pretty essential that explanar shit *can't get to the prime* without someone on the prime enabling that, because otherwise we know that demons and devils just annihilate civilization. Since that hasn't happened, they obviously can't freely move armies of CR10+ evil outsiders to the prime. (There is seriously an infinite number of demons and devils, so there's no way civilization survives if they can enter the prime at will). Planar warfare is thus inherently asymmetric, because the lower power civilizations control all the access.

So you're an Ed Greenwood fanboy? Because you pretty much just described the Forgotten Realms.

Forgotten Realms falls pretty short if that's what it's intended to represent.

Also, assuming Ed Greenwood actually holds those beliefs about D+D worlds, I don't see why arriving at that conclusion makes me a fanboy. I can still hate his DM penis self-insert Elminster, and I can still hate the kinds of stories he tells.

More relevantly, that state of affairs is logically required because we have civilization at all. If that isn't true, there is no civilization. It can't even happen to begin with. You can't just close your eyes, cover your ears, and shout loudly to avoid that conclusion. If you object to it, you need to actually provide a way that some other sort of world arises which actually has civilization in it.

You really don't, because one 20th level wizard makes arbitrarily many 1st level warriors irrelevant. That makes it really easy to predict what happens. Heck, a 10th level fighter makes arbitrary numbers of 1st level warriors pretty irrelevant. (Not even a Tome fighter, a regular fighter).

Pretending low level armies matter would be like suggesting you fight battleships with paper airplanes. That's beyond retarded and anyone who has glanced at a 20th level character can see it.

That we can talk ourselves into having feudal lords who rule over peasants at all (and we haven't solved all the difficulties yet) is about as good as we can do to make it recognizable.

You were just saying a few paragraphs ago that low level adventurers were relevant because they get to go on tax collection adventures, now level 20 makes anything less irrelevant?

Level 20 makes armies irrelevant. They still can't be bothered to deal with protecting all the merchants or making sure the taxes get paid. But getting invaded by your neighbor is an existential crisis, so the ruler and posse come out and deal with it if necessary. I laid this out in the politics post, rulers are either lazy or otherwise busy, so they have a heirarchy of lower nobles (and adventurers for hire beneath them) who deal with the stuff that doesn't require the ruler to throw down. But existential crises are by definition the job of the ruler to deal with.

Truly consider the implications inherent in the world you are suggesting. Human and demihuman populations would be ruled over by an overclass of superheroes that fly around solving mysteries, when they aren't trying to tele-frag each other for the purpose of...what exactly?

Money and commodities mean nothing to high level spellcasters. Power, at least as the real world defines it, means nothing in this world. Instead, power is personal power, the amount of supernatural force you can bring to bear.

Why would these high level characters even be jockeying for the positions of authority over this peasant class? The peasants may as well be a different species.

This is in fact the subject of the next post I'm working on. (Spoiler: Superheroes need to care about the gold economy or society just doesn't work).

But lets look at society and technology. By bother perfecting something as mundane as metalworking when you have magic at your disposal? Navigation, cartography and shipbuilding simply does not happen, because divination and teleport. No more castles either, because the lack of conventional warfare does not require them. Medicine? That is what priests are for.

I'm not convinced ocean-going shipbuilding happens anyway, because the Sahuagin just say 'no'. There's no way that ends well for the surface races.

Anyway, the fiddly details are in-fact fiddly details, but it's not so obvious that some of these things fail to happen. Example: medicine might be what priests are for, but unless there are enough priests to take care of every ailment, folk medicine totally exists to fill that void. Some of it actually works. Whether that actually develops into a science of medicine is a totally different question.

The noble class is not going to sponsor the development of sciences and technology, when is does not benefit them. In fact, it only takes power away from the spellcaster and gives it to the peasant. Magical research, sure I can see that, but no noble is going to hire a bronze worker when they can simply fabricate iron.

Unless they want bronze? Fabricate does not let you make bronze, in point of fact. "You convert material of one sort into a product that is of the same material." Bronze is not the "same material" as some Tin and some Copper, nor is Tin + Copper 'material of one sort' until a metallurgist has gotten through with it.

Presumably someone had to discover iron at some point for mages to even realize they could make use of it in the first place. Technology doesn't just improve peasants, it gives mages more stuff to play with.

There's also a question of 'is this worth my time?' and 'I'm protecting all these peasants, they might as well be doing something for me.'

You're looking at civilisation reaching it's technological zenith around Sumeria, then diverging into an unrecognisable clusterfuck. This is worse than superheroes acting as feudal lords, it's God-Kings of stagnant cultures.

If I tried to present that to a group of players as an authentic vision of what a D&D world should be, they would say "not Dark Sun again."

I'm not convinced that's the only conclusion. (Actually, a lot of the possibilities are even more of a clusterfuck than Dark Sun).

The more important question is: given you have superheroes running around, how can you possibly imagine that this has no consequences for the organization of society and the way wars are conducted? We not only know that the PCs are playing superheroes, we know there'll be suitable threats for them to slay all the way up the level ladder. Which means the PCs cannot be special, if for no other reason than those threats exist.

Edit: Losing a tag is annoying to find and fix

[Nath]

The political system and society of a D&D world would differ greatly for Medieval Europe. The establishment of an hereditary military nobility is the result of ethnic and familial loyalties. Invaders from the Germanic tribes established themselves as a ruling military minority class, and passed it over to their sons. However, hereditary power and loyalty already existed before that, in spite of the Roman Empire more or less successful attempts at suppressing it.

But there are two major differences between our world and D&D. In real life, education plays a big role in hereditary transmission. A child learning sword-fighting a,nd the art of warfare from the age of 6 has better chances of succeeding his father as a military leader (even if only a merely good one) than a peasant's son. Retaining loyalty from your father subordinates also counts a lot, when a single servant can assassinate you or a bunch of peasants can throw you down from your horse and beat you out. Ancient Egypt or Christian Kingdoms added a bit of theocracy on top of that, with divine rights and all that, but only to increase loyalty, as divine powers rarely intervened.

In D&D, all that matter is level. If the son of a 20th level wizard doesn't reach at least 15th or 18th level, succession is right out. Another high-level wizard will come and beat him. Loyalty owed by lower-levels characters will be useless for defense. The most likely political system in D&D actually is an adventurocracy, where small groups of adventurers reign over portions of lands, until they're defeated by a more powerful group or die of old age. Lasting dynasties would require a number of the ruling group children to reach a high-level as well at every generation... or marry high-level adventurers.

[squirrelloid]

The political system and society of a D&D world would differ greatly for Medieval Europe. The establishment of an hereditary military nobility is the result of ethnic and familial loyalties. Invaders from the Germanic tribes established themselves as a ruling military minority class, and passed it over to their sons. However, hereditary power and loyalty already existed before that, in spite of the Roman Empire more or less successful attempts at suppressing it.

But there are two major differences between our world and D&D. In real life, education plays a big role in hereditary transmission. A child learning sword-fighting a,nd the art of warfare from the age of 6 has better chances of succeeding his father as a military leader (even if only a merely good one) than a peasant's son. Retaining loyalty from your father subordinates also counts a lot, when a single servant can assassinate you or a bunch of peasants can throw you down from your horse and beat you out. Ancient Egypt or Christian Kingdoms added a bit of theocracy on top of that, with divine rights and all that, but only to increase loyalty, as divine powers rarely intervened.

In D&D, all that matter is level. If the son of a 20th level wizard doesn't reach at least 15th or 18th level, succession is right out. Another high-level wizard will come and beat him. Loyalty owed by lower-levels characters will be useless for defense. The most likely political system in D&D actually is an adventurocracy, where small groups of adventurers reign over portions of lands, until they're defeated by a more powerful group or die of old age. Lasting dynasties would require a number of the ruling group children to reach a high-level as well at every generation... or marry high-level adventurers.

Which is pretty much what I argued.

The only point I disagree is I think you get reasonably long-lasting political entities, its just that who gets to rule depends on who can kick the most ass. But there will be inertia keeping the country together, and whomever tries to move into the top spot is going to want it all. Maybe sometimes a lesser lord switches alliance to a neighboring kingdom instead, and that ruler is powerful enough that the new ruler can't do anything about it.

Sometimes you get multiple contenders who are close enough in power that they divide the kingdom rather than fight for it. So you probably see some evolution over time of transitions between large empires forming (one ruler becomes badass enough to conquer his neighbors) and fracturing (no single ruler who can dominate the high nobles, each become the lord of their own kingdom), but you don't see a total collapse of government.

Below the top-dog position, I think you have a reasonably stable heirarchal division of lands even if who is holding those lands changes somewhat frequently. Lands get grouped together by custom, and whomever gets handed the reins gets handed that grouping of land. Since they're serving under a more powerful ruler, they don't have to claim the lands by conquest. The overall ruler is teh one ultimately responsible for defending it from conquest from outside. You're just there to deal with threats below that and manage those lands for the benefit of your liege and yourself.

[Wrathzog]

It's not fantasy concepts, its the geometric power scaling which makes low level peons meaningless at the level of kingdom conflict. When just one of the opposition can teleport into the middle of your army and cast Wail of the Banshee before they even know what's going on, you have a serious problem even doing anything with an army.

The real problem is decapitation. If you're fighting someone who can teleport, they're not going to bother going after your rank and file, they're going to go directly after you. An Army without a head will either disperse or become ineffective. Either way, the army is no longer a threat and that's what you were after.

[rasmuswagner]

Truly consider the implications inherent in the world you are suggesting. Human and demihuman populations would be ruled over by an overclass of superheroes that fly around solving mysteries, when they aren't trying to tele-frag each other for the purpose of...what exactly?

Proactive self-defense.

[Winnah]

My point was that in the real world people assume positions of power and authority in order to further their own interests, or the interests of some group. They perpetuate the legitimacy of that power through various means.

Political position, wealth, belief systems and military strength all means by which people excercise power in the real world. They also go a long way toward legitimising the right to excercising that power.

These conventions are turned on their head an a D&D world. There are no social contructs that can match personal power.

Personal power = authority comepletely alters the framework by which a culture operates and develops.

But I have yet to seek a compelling reason why those with personal power would seek authority over a mundane society in the first place. Why play God-King to a bunch of meaningless muggles when they do not actively contribute to your personal power?

Unlike real world authorities, they gain no more meaningful influence or control by perpetuating their reign over their lessers. In squirreloid's vision of D&D society, it is the power of the individual that is exalted, not the power of a collective. So why bother fighting for political authority in the first place?

[squirrelloid]

Unlike real world authorities, they gain no more meaningful influence or control by perpetuating their reign over their lessers. In squirreloid's vision of D&D society, it is the power of the individual that is exalted, not the power of a collective. So why bother fighting for political authority in the first place?

We're going to need to create a reason. I'm working on options for that.

Because at the end of the day, if superheroes don't have a reason to protect 'muggles', then there *are no muggles*. Period.

[rasmuswagner]

Kingdoms are how you keep score.

[Winnah]

Kingdoms are how you keep score.

In D&D? Did you even read this stupid fucking thread?

In D&D, experience points are how you keep score. Running a kingdom does not give you xp.

[rasmuswagner]

Kingdoms are how you keep score.

In D&D? Did you even read this stupid fucking thread?

In D&D, experience points are how you keep score. Running a kingdom does not give you xp.

No, XP are how you gain power. Kingdoms could be a way to show off that power. It's not like people are just going to let you cast "Detect Level" on them without beating their countermeasures.

But it's a fact that I've got one million guys singing the praises of my cock every morning. You've got, what, 5.000? Nice barony, Lord Smalldick. You gonna do anything about that?

[rasmuswagner]

Think of it this way: In the 1960ies, power was ultimately expressed in terms of tank divisions and nuclear armed submarines. So the superpowers decided to engage in a race for the moon, the military and economic value of which was absolutely fuck-all.

[Wrathzog]

Unlike real world authorities, they gain no more meaningful influence or control by perpetuating their reign over their lessers. In squirreloid's vision of D&D society, it is the power of the individual that is exalted, not the power of a collective. So why bother fighting for political authority in the first place?

Most creatures wouldn't for that exact line of reasoning. Things that would be interested in being in charge of lesser beings will do so for abstract reasoning most likely.

Also, providing mechanical benefits to leadership is going to snowball really badly. It's probably a terrible idea.

[Winnah]

Think of it this way: In the 1960ies, power was ultimately expressed in terms of tank divisions and nuclear armed submarines. So the superpowers decided to engage in a race for the moon, the military and economic value of which was absolutely fuck-all.

Aside from:

areospace engineering
applications satellites (eg. navigation, communications, imaging)
water purification
solar technology
miniaturisation and the development of microprocessors
chemical detection sensors

not to mention the countless advances in digital electronics, public safety, nutrition and medicine that come from spinoff technology. Like the internet. Y'know, the place where you are talking shit.

That would not have been achieved if the space race nations were a number of individuals competing for meaningless prestige by murdering each other for the sake of being named king of the biggest peasant farm.

[Surgo]

...all of which could have been achieved without sending anything at all to the moon. Just because something happens to have some side benefits, doesn't give the goal itself some kind of value.

All that money could have been spent on research for exactly those things, and it would have been cheaper.

[sabs]

Space Travel is the single most important research mankind can do.
And it gives us really awesome side benefits. But going to the moon was an important symbolic gesture. Compare it to today, where we have to give the Russians suitcases full of cash to send supplies to the international space station.

[Winnah]

...all of which could have been achieved without sending anything at all to the moon. Just because something happens to have some side benefits, doesn't give the goal itself some kind of value.

All that money could have been spent on research for exactly those things, and it would have been cheaper.

I reject your premise. Explain how pure research would have yielded the same benefits without active devopment and implentation.

It's one thing to theorise. It is quite another to put something into practice.

[Grek]

As great as space and space research is, it really has nothing to do with D&D economies. Go make yourselves a MPSIMS thread.

[shadzar]

As great as space and space research is, it really has nothing to do with D&D economies. Go make yourselves a MPSIMS thread.

real world space travel i agree, but Spelljamming.. now there is something to think about. not only do you have different kingdoms types of currency, but now different worlds or universes...

this might be the best place for a generic currency type else you end up with "Republic credits are no good here."

that or coins of precious metal variety are treated much like hack-silver, and its value is in it weight and purity rather than its denomination. which again makes necessities a more valuable currency: food, water, AIR.

[...You Lost Me]

But it's a fact that I've got one million guys singing the praises of my cock every morning. You've got, what, 5.000? Nice barony, Lord Smalldick. You gonna do anything about that?

So many things to quote, so little space in my signature.