D&D 5E Peasant Revolts in 5e

[jmartkdr2]

In a specifically 5e DnD setting - both sides will have magic. The nobles will have court wizards (and maybe artificers) and entrenched churches, along with the nobles themselves often being bards and/or sorcerers... but the peasants will have warlocks and other churches' clerics and some bards and possibly sorcerers of their own. (and disaffected nobles looking to become the new top dogs) If things are bad enough the peasant are willing to take the risk of fighting a dude in magic armor with a magic sword when all they got is a threshing flail... things are real bad, and that likely means more clerics and druids will side with the peasants, IMO.

I think it will net out similarly to historical results: usually it's not a real fight, just a very loud protest, but if it does turn into a war it usually goes to the established powers, and if the peasants do win the new king is rarely all that much better than the old king.

But if the pc's are involved, anything is possible.

 

[Thunder Brother]

Given the right circumstances, a peasant rebellion could do quite well for itself.

 

[Seramus]

Oh, and if you want to see peasants in fantasy...

Go to Netflix, and watch a show called "Galavant". The peasants in the show are not the main characters, but... well..

Waaay too clean to be a peasant. Must be L1 Experts.

 

[Faolyn]

I don’t understand the sentiment in this thread that the peasants would have no hope. Due to bounded accuracy, any creature can be a threat to any other creature in large enough numbers. As long as you have enough peasants, they’ll stand a decent chance of winning, though they will certainly suffer heavy casualties.

While large groups of peasants can be a threat, it definitely depends on how close they can actually get to the people they're revolting against--who, in D&Dland, will likely have at least some access to magic. At most, a few peasants may have a cantrip or two, but the nobility is likely to have a spellcaster capable of fireball.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Also, are peasants themselves even appear in your game as anything other than the background?

For example, a cynical, greedy, self-centered rogue spends 30 seconds bonding with a peasant boy over a coin trick, and later when the boy expires dramatically after a dragon attack, the player suddenly decides his rogue is a heroic do-gooder after all.

You mean like that?

 

[overgeeked]

We've all seen the old joke where a town has to run for its life because a high-level adventurer needs a couple of experience points to get to the next level.

Is it even possible to do a peasant's revolt in Dungeons and Dragons?

Absolutely. You can do any kind of faux-medieval fantasy stuff you want.

Essentially how to gamify the following historical event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kq9sbtFCR8

Haven’t watched the video, but yeah. It’s simple enough to do armies and warfare in any edition of D&D. Most have specialty systems for warfare or you can use the basic combat system every edition has for armies at war. The trick is to change the scale of the stat block. Reverse one if the changes made to make wargames into RPGs.

Also, are peasants themselves even appear in your game as anything other than the background?

They’re the main population of medieval life, so yeah. They appear a lot and not just as background.

and for bonus points, are there any fantasy movies or novels that star peasants? I've done some checks already and noticing most peasant stories are essentially "secret princes" and thus disqualified.

I’m sure there are. I have no idea what any examples would be though.

 

[overgeeked]

While large groups of peasants can be a threat, it definitely depends on how close they can actually get to the people they're revolting against--who, in D&Dland, will likely have at least some access to magic. At most, a few peasants may have a cantrip or two, but the nobility is likely to have a spellcaster capable of fireball.

It’s one of the assumptions I try to avoid when I run games. Only adventurers gain levels. Retired adventurers can take over keeps and castles. But not every noble is going to be a leveled character and not every sage is a spellcaster. It funnels the fiction far too much into the odd realm of superhero fantasy.

 

[Faolyn]

It’s one of the assumptions I try to avoid when I run games. Only adventurers gain levels. Retired adventurers can take over keeps and castles. But not every noble is going to be a leveled character and not every sage is a spellcaster. It funnels the fiction far too much into the odd realm of superhero fantasy.

No, not every sage is a spellcaster. But there are no court mages or religious advisors?

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

A horde with pitchfork can't really take a dungeon. Fortifications were besieged by professional armies and often had the upper hand. With the nobles protected by their walls, and the peasants having zero siege weapons, their storage of food supplemented by a possible steady supply of goodberries, and the court wizard doing early morning sorties to send a fireball hello for his five minutes adventuring day, I don't bet on the peasants successfully conducing the siege. Especially if the food reserve of the whole willage is safely kept inside the castle. Famine decimated besiegers as well. My money is on the rightful and legitimate lord of land, barring the intervention of CE adventurers.

 

[Krachek]

Revolt rarely happens alone.
It need leader, who are often discarded noble, ex military, cleric.
It also need a context, The army is not paid, the lesser nobles want a change and will wait until the revolt make enough damage before reacting.
A revolt can also be manipulated, start on purpose and stop when needed. That’s a gamble, but a price to pay to take the throne!
Planning a revolt can force the DM to define how the population is composed. A kingdom often at war may have enough former military to organize a revolt.