• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Worlds of Design: Baseline Assumptions of Fantasy RPGs

You can write a set of fantasy role-playing game (FRPG) rules without specifying a setting, but there’s a default or baseline setting assumed by virtually everyone when no setting is specified. Moreover, some rules (e.g. the existence of plate armor, and large horses) imply things about technology and breeding in the setting.

You can write a set of fantasy role-playing game (FRPG) rules without specifying a setting, but there’s a default setting assumed by virtually every FRPG. Moreover, some rules (e.g. the existence of plate armor, and large horses) imply things about technology and breeding in the setting.

fantasybasics.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

The Basics of FRPG​

All FRPGs start with some assumptions built into the setting, some of them so innocuous that gamers might not even realize they're assumptions to begin with. For example the assumption that there are horses large enough to be ridden, even though for thousands of years of history, horses weren’t large enough for riding (the era of war chariots from about 1700-1000 BCE, and the era before that of infantry only).

Familiarity vs. strangeness is an important question for any worldbuilder to answer. What are gamers familiar with? That tends to be the default. J. R. R. Tolkien’s works (Lord of the Rings, Hobbit, etc.) are nearly a default setting for many, as in the dwarves and elves who are quite different from traditional stories of dwarves and elves. You could argue that the default setting is more Tolkien than it is medieval European, but he largely adopted Late Medieval European (1250-1500), so I prefer to refer to that.

The question is, do you want your ruleset, or your campaign setting, to follow the default? An early example of great deviation from the default was the wonderfully different world of Tekumel (Empire of the Petal Throne, and a few novels). A “different” FRPG might posit no monsters at all, perhaps not even elves and dwarves, just a lot of humans, yet never explicitly say so: if you leave out rules for monsters and humanoid races other than humans, you have a different-than-baseline setting, even if you didn't consciously make that decision. But be warned: too much unfamiliarity may make some players uncomfortable.

Are there baseline assumptions for science fiction? There seems to be so much variety, I wouldn’t try to pin it down.

The Baseline

What ARE the baseline assumptions? In general, they are mostly late medieval (not “Dark Ages” (500-1000) or High Medieval (1000-1250), as FRPGs tend to be magic grafted to later medieval Europe. In no particular order here is a list of categories for baseline assumptions that I’ll discuss specifically:
  • Transportation
  • Communication
  • State of Political Entities
  • Commonality of Magic
  • Commonality of Adventurers
  • Commonality of Monsters
  • Length of History and Rate of Change
  • Level of Technology
  • Warfare and the Military
  • Religion
  • Demography
  • Climate

Transportation

Wooden sailing vessels, late medieval style. In calm waters such as landlocked seas and lakes, galleys; in wild waters (such as oceans), small sailing vessels. River barges much preferable to poor roads and carts. And are there wonderful roads left by or maintained by an Empire (Rome)? See "Medieval Travel & Scale."

Communication

Proceeds at the rate of travel, by horse or by ship. In other words, very slow by modern standards. Even as late as 1815, the Battle of New Orleans was fought after the War of 1812 had ended (in 1814), but before news of the treaty had reached Louisiana from Europe.

State of Political Entities

Monarchies and lower level independent states (such as Duchies) ruled by “the man in charge” (very rarely, a woman). Nobles. States, not nations (the people rarely care which individual is actually in charge). Castles are so defensible that it’s fairly easy for subordinate nobles to defy their superiors. There are small cities (5-10,000 usually), not really large ones (over 100,000 people).

Commonality of Magic

Magicians are usually rare, secretive folk. Few people ever see any manifestation of magic. In some cases the church or the government tries to suppress magic. See "The Four Stages of Magic."

Commonality of Adventurers

Magicians, knights, powerful clerics, all are rare. 1 in 500 people? 1 in 10,000?

Commonality of Monsters

Human-centric. Monsters are usually individuals rather than large groups. Intelligent monsters are rare. (Here Tolkien’s influence, the great orc/goblin hordes, often overrides European influence.) Undead may be common. Dragons are “legendary.”

Length of History and Rate of Change

Slow pace of change of technology. Awareness of the greater days of a “universal empire” in the past (such as Rome), now gone. Technology changed much faster in late medieval times, than in Tolkien’s Middle-earth.

Level of Technology

Late medieval, or possibly less. (Late medieval for the technology necessary to make full plate armor, if nothing else.) See "When Technology Changes the Game."

Warfare and the Military

Wars rarely changed borders much (Late Medieval) - the great migrations have ended. Wars certainly aren’t national wars, the common people are spectators. See "The Fundamental Patterns of War."

Religion

What we’re used to in later medieval times is a universal monotheistic church (Catholicism), though with foreign churches of different stripe (Orthodox Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist). But in games, more often the setting seems to derive from older, pantheon-based, religions.

Demography

Density of population is low. Depends on whether the local area is frontier or settled. Cities are population sinks (high mortality rates). There may be stories of a Great Plague (later-1340s and onward in Europe).

Climate

Temperate medieval European (more often, English (governed by the Gulf Stream)), with fairly cool summers so that full armor is not impossibly hot. (Imagine wearing full armor when the average summer high is 91 degrees F, as in northern Florida.) But winters are much less severe than in the northern USA. (Modern European climate is currently getting much warmer than in late medieval times.)

Your Turn: Do you see the default setting as different that what I’ve summarized?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

Aldarc

Legend
I don't think it's that odd.

Armies are more reliable and stable than a few magicians. The base assumption is that magic users who can turn battles with magic alone are rare. Most spellcasters are low level, squishy, and expensive to hire. This makes them bad linchpins for battle.

It's better for a noble to train as a fighter or rogue as a youth then use levied peasant spearmen, train man-at-arms, and knights (if you outrank them) to do most battles. If you have the money and rank, you kill a dragon with a few hundred dudes and some siege engines, not 3-6 action heroes. It's likely cheaper.

Adventurers fill in for poor nobles, nobles with busy armies, or nobles who can't roll out a full force for some other reason.
You are throwing a lot of assumptions in here as well. Who said there would necessarily be "a few magicians" if it turns out that magic was a valuable commodity that could be learned? Even if it was only low-level magic, that can still do wonders for a lot of battles, particularly given the nature of attack cantrips in D&D. And aren't most knights also low-level and potentially expensive to hire too?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
You are throwing a lot of assumptions in here as well. Who said there would necessarily be "a few magicians" if it turns out that magic was a valuable commodity that could be learned? Even if it was only low-level magic, that can still do wonders for a lot of battles, particularly given the nature of attack cantrips in D&D. And aren't most knights also low-level and potentially expensive to hire too?

The base assumption has few of even the mid level. Most spellcasters are low level and in warfare are just squishy siege engines with 2-5 shots per day. It's more effecient to hire a few men to man a ballista than hire a wizard to chuck 2-3 fireballs. It's cheaper and better to hire and train a half dozen commoners to use crossbows than hie a warlock to fling out eldritch blasts. And knights and vassals are legally bound to aid their lords so free warriors. Low level magic is great for precise local moments. In base D&D, low level magic is ineffecient to mass produce untill you create a factory for practitioners..

Again the base assumption for the base game of D&D is that it is hard to get training for a PC class unless you are rich, connected, noble,exceptional talented or of a race that cranks out that class like a factory.

Outside of the kingdom leveling event, you wont have a whole unit of arcanists dropping 3rd level spells all over the battlefield. And the king better be on the good graces of the high level PC who can gather them all up in time.
 

Aldarc

Legend
Again the base assumption for the base game of D&D is that it is hard to get training for a PC class unless you are rich, connected, noble,exceptional talented or of a race that cranks out that class like a factory.
Again, my point is that the aristocracy are exactly the class of people who are rich, connected, noble, etc. and who would most likely be drawn to the arcane or magical arts, thus likely propagating a magically-inclined class of people at the upper echelons of society.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Again, my point is that the aristocracy are exactly the class of people who are rich, connected, noble, etc. and who would most likely be drawn to the arcane or magical arts, thus likely propagating a magically-inclined class of people at the upper echelons of society.

It think the base assumption is that wizardry take too much time to learn and cleric training take too much loyalty for a noble to pursue and maintain their full studies. So nobles mostly pursue classes that take less time to learn like fighters and rogues. Sorcerer and Warlock work for nobles but they would be limited to specific families in base D&D.

A noble might sent their children who wont enherit titles and land to be wizards and clerics to bolster the family. This is where noble adventurer wizards and clerics come from. However the royal and noble courts won't be littered with mages unless their race is long lived (like elves). And the nonmagical nobles would not want a whole lot of spellcasters in succession lines all over so that slows the process as well.
 

Arilyn

Hero
Again, my point is that the aristocracy are exactly the class of people who are rich, connected, noble, etc. and who would most likely be drawn to the arcane or magical arts, thus likely propagating a magically-inclined class of people at the upper echelons of society.
Yep. And they have time and wealth, and literacy. And magic equals power. I can't imagine nobility shrugging that away. Throughout history, we've had members of the elite pursuing alchemy and other beliefs that we now know is not how science operates. But what if it did? If there were people who could create something from nothing, and control the elements or other people's minds, there'd definitely be a ton of research, resources and time going into that. Magic is something rulers would grab hold of, and abuse in ways I'd rather not contemplate.

I don't think this realistic portrayal is actually what I'd want in my fantasy game, however. 🤔
 

Tonguez

A suffusion of yellow
It think the base assumption is that wizardry take too much time to learn and cleric training take too much loyalty for a noble to pursue and maintain their full studies. So nobles mostly pursue classes that take less time to learn like fighters and rogues. Sorcerer and Warlock work for nobles but they would be limited to specific families in base D&D.

A noble might sent their children who wont enherit titles and land to be wizards and clerics to bolster the family. This is where noble adventurer wizards and clerics come from. However the royal and noble courts won't be littered with mages unless their race is long lived (like elves). And the nonmagical nobles would not want a whole lot of spellcasters in succession lines all over so that slows the process as well.

yeah there's the adage that even if superior technology can win battles, its ground troops that conquer a nation.
I tend to think of WIzards as the high-tech artillery, effective at long range, doing strafe runs over the battlefield but weak should they get into the thick of the melee.

Nobles will certainly want the strategic edge that a fireball or cloudkill can give them, but they'll also need swords and spears of ground troops to protect the low level casters, fight the pitch battles and hold the ground.
 

Ed_Laprade

Adventurer
In typical fantasy games, we assume gods are sending down divine aid, so that's a big effect.

However, personally, I like the idea of clergy actually wielding arcane magic, as they study to figure out how their world works, either to gain power or knowledge. Gods are too unreliable, after all, if miracles are rare.
I've said this before in other threads, and I'll keep on saying it. Why don't the clerics of the god of magic have access to all of the spells in the book? And maybe even a few more.
 

Again, my point is that the aristocracy are exactly the class of people who are rich, connected, noble, etc. and who would most likely be drawn to the arcane or magical arts, thus likely propagating a magically-inclined class of people at the upper echelons of society.
Perhaps using Arcane magic makes you sterile.

Would explain why nobles wouldn't want to learn it themselves - the family'd lose all that ancestral land.

A good choice for the second or third children, however.
 
Last edited:

Aldarc

Legend
Nobles will certainly want the strategic edge that a fireball or cloudkill can give them, but they'll also need swords and spears of ground troops to protect the low level casters, fight the pitch battles and hold the ground.
I don't recall denying this or arguing that ground troops would no longer be necessary.
 

Yep. And they have time and wealth, and literacy. And magic equals power. I can't imagine nobility shrugging that away. Throughout history, we've had members of the elite pursuing alchemy and other beliefs that we now know is not how science operates. But what if it did? If there were people who could create something from nothing, and control the elements or other people's minds, there'd definitely be a ton of research, resources and time going into that. Magic is something rulers would grab hold of, and abuse in ways I'd rather not contemplate.

I don't think this realistic portrayal is actually what I'd want in my fantasy game, however. 🤔
Then too, there could be social reasons to not pursue magic for power. Magic could be seen the way commerce was by late feudal nobility - a middle class pursuit of those avaricious lowly town based burgers :) Or, more likely imho, it could be a variant of "one for the Church", with non heirs going into religion and magic for the families power. Inheritance would, largely, stay with the traditional route to power - the profession of arms. As for abuse of power, it happens. That's what adventurers are for :)

The ratio of class to non classed has come up above (in other posts). I don't see a problem with NPC classes myself, They have been a thing since Dragon Magazine / 1E and before. They came to be called "NPC classes" in Dragon largely in deference to the determination of Gygax to have everyone playing a standardized game. Before that classes, like the Ranger that came out in the Dragon's predecessor the Strategic Review , were just referred to as "new classes" for D&D. I use NPC classes as opposed to just uniquely statting up every NPC in sight myself. The levels are low and the huge bulk of NPC class characters aren't "adepts" (or whatever your NPC spell caster class is). Magic use can still be rare. Most NPCs are going to be craftsmen, artisans, farmers, fishermen, soldiers, and laborers. Even non-adventuring PC classed NPCs are going to be low level. Adventuring is where the experience is.

I base my non-adventuring xp for classes (regular or NPC) based on a low number earned for practicing the profession on a daily basis. In a human life time (assuming they stop practicing at old / venerable age) they top out around level 5-7 depending on how physically demanding the class is. Non humans who live longer go higher of course. Non humans who have shorter life spans have lower level ranges.

Anyway, imho your campaign can be "low magic" (well, as low as D&D goes) and still have plenty of classed (NPC classed or otherwise) characters.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top