Do castles make sense in a world of dragons & spells?

[Celebrim]

When considering the effect of magic on a world, it doesn't seem to make much sense to me to hew too closely to guides that were created to enable a game. Those guides are fine for what they are meant (suggestions on one way to run a world) but hardly are the bible of magic worlds and societies.

No, but there is no bible for magical worlds and societies. We can however deduce something about the 'typical' magical world and society by noting the following: "Castles exist."

This post is about a mental exercise: what would happen to castles if there was magic and monsters in the world.

Sure, and I've been happy to participate in that mental excercise. However, one problem with the mental excercise is that there is no bible for magical worlds and societies. So, lacking any standard, everyone participating in the mental excercise has made certain assumptions about the magical society and based his analysis on that assumption. And that's fine, but the answer you give is wholly dependent on the assumption.

I dont' have a problem with approaching the question in that way, but I personally prefer approaching the problem from the opposite direction.

1) We know magic exists as a given.
2) We know castle exist as a given.

What is the magical society like given those two facts? What's important about this approach is that almost everyone assumes #1 and #2 first because they are the standard tropes of the setting, and only afterwards starts thinking about whether #1 and #2 are incompatible. Some people here seem to want to give the answe, given #1, #2 must be false and they proceed to then invent the conditions for a magical society where this is true. But, those assumptions depend entirely purely individual and utterly pliant opinions about the setting. None of them strike me as having nearly as much reasonableness as, "It's a standard fantasy, ergo castles exist." Therefore, I'm more inclined to say, "Given #1 and #2, what must the society and the magic be like to achieve this?"

Or more generally, what must be true about the magic of a magical society if the society in general superficially resembles historical periods of our own non-magical world.

A DMG may claim mages would be rare and perhaps they would be in the typical realm. But can you image a Rome or any other conquering power not exploiting something as potent as a mage?

You see this is itself an internal contridiction. Unless the society superficially resembles the historical periods of our own non-magical world, I cannot imagine a 'Rome' within it. If we don't assume as a starting point 'superficial resemblence to our own history and myth', and instead choose as a starting point, 'lots of magic exists', then the whole question becomes utterly unanswerable except to say that, "A society with pervasive magic would look nothing like our own history and myth, and would likely require the lifetime of a dedicated polymath to even begin to imagine what it would be like for a given set of assumptions about magic." And keep in mind, most of the really important questions about magic and its use aren't really answered by D&D RAW at all, and often are never even addressed by people who play D&D because questions like, "Can anyone with sufficient intelligence learn to be a wizard?", "How much experience do you get training to be a mage and simply practicing magic as opposed to overcoming lifethreatening challenges?", "What makes magic work?", and "What can't magic do?" don't really come up in most games because they are tangental to the standard goals of play.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

In your campaign!

Gods, how bloody hard is that to understand?
<snip>
Again, it seems to me rather odd that, with all the over-the-top-ness of your campaign, architects can't even get some magic rock. We want a rock! Yeah yeah yeah!

Dude, "over the topness?"

I'm talking about a 3.5 D&D campaign using just the standard distribution and costs from the PHB and the first 4 Completes and the first MM.

Certainly games may be more or less powerful than that, but I don't think I'm out of line here in taking the game's default assumptions as a starting point.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

You don't need spells. If the antagonist has access to flying mounts, there's a good chance that the lord/lady of the castle does also. They could afford to build a castle. The cost of raising a flock of hippogriffs or giant eagles would be trivial in comparison.

Its not just flying mounts- which, btw, would require a LOT of space and land to maintain (see below)- but every other potential foe that has flying.

IOW, Wizards, Sorcerers, Psions, Wilders, Warlocks, Dragons, Undead, giant animals, griffins, wyverns, certain elementals, djinn, chimaera, sphynxes, manticores, rocs, demons, devils, beings with certain magic items...

And that's just for starters: it doesn't account for ostensibly good creatures (to attack evil strongholds), templated creatures, PrCls and critters from the MMs beyond the first.

The skies are full of peril...arguably, a typical D&D game has more beings capable of flying any old time than the USA.

As for your Flock of Hippogriffs (no, not a New Wave band from the fantasy realm...), realize that it takes a LOT more space and money to keep a group of predators in captivity than herbivores...and even herbivores take a lot to keep.

And flying mounts add to the problem...as the saying goes, "How ya gonna keep 'em on the farm?"

IOW, not every castle is going to be able to afford to keep an airforce of mounted air-warriors.

 

[Aeolius]

As for your Flock of Hippogriffs (no, not a New Wave band from the fantasy realm...)

Nah, that's in the undersea castle... a flock of sea ghouls.

 

[coyote6]

Nah, that's in the undersea castle... a flock of sea ghouls.

After that line, your only defense is to run, run so far away. Run, run all night and day.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

This I am going to dispute directly Beaufort Castle in the Lebanon was used prior the the 1982 invasion by the PLO as a base in Southern Lebanon and was prepeatedly subject to IDF airstrikes and artillery bombardment prior and during the '83 invasion but had to be eventually neutralised by ground assault the old fashioned way.

Monte Cassino gave the Allies a similar experience in WWII. In both cases (though there is no reference to it in the Wikipedia article, I am going off memory here) there were lower levels and the ceiling were barrel vaulted and supported by arches. Arches are very strong particularly from impact from above. Read up on any attempts to destroy bridges with free falling bombs, it takes quite a lot to distupt the arch.

 

[Set]

After that line, your only defense is to run, run so far away. Run, run all night and day.

So, so *bad.* Now I have to go watch the video on YouTube...

 

[S'mon]

Monte Cassino gave the Allies a similar experience in WWII. In both cases (though there is no reference to it in the Wikipedia article, I am going off memory here) there were lower levels and the ceiling were barrel vaulted and supported by arches. Arches are very strong particularly from impact from above. Read up on any attempts to destroy bridges with free falling bombs, it takes quite a lot to distupt the arch.

Yeah, I think Monte Casino was subject to rather more than even a big dragon could manage!

 

[Ariosto]

I think the abbey of Monte Cassino was pretty well destroyed by the fraction of bombs that hit it (out of the kiloton-plus dropped in the general vicinity).

It was not militarized at the time of bombing. The Allies killed or drove out the monks and refugees who actually occupied it. A couple of days after the heavy bombing, German troops moved in.

The rubble served well enough for cover, maybe better than the abbey. The height itself retained a commanding view the valley -- which is why the Allies in the first place assumed that it either was or would be an observation post.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The diff between the allies attacking Monte Casino and a Dragon doing the same is that it is capable of not only doing the bombardment, but also the building-by-building clearing itself...probably including an assortment of spells. If the target in question were particularly tough or housed especially alluring treasure, the dragon might even stock up on spells that would help it crack the thing...like Transmute Rock to Mud. Goodbye arches.

I would also assert that Beaufort sustained enough damage from its aerial bombardment that it was essentially deconstructed as a castle- though by virtue of its rubble, it became a bunker of sorts. It also ceased to be able to function as a Medieval strongpoint- only modern weaponry and communication enabled it to continue to operate as a strongpoint at all- there were no places to house mounts with which you could sally forth, no ramparts, etc.