D&D General Need wheat. Too dangerous. (worldbuilding)

[Ancalagon]

I sort of assumed that this is a large part of feudalism being a common system in DnD games. The lords protect their land, they have soldiers or knights that clear out any creatures that are threatening those that the lords protect. If not feudalism, then whoever is in charge or the area is responsible for solving these issues.

And the peasants pay heavy tax for the favor. Like say, giving a sheep once a week, sacrificing a young man to the army once a year.... It's almost extortion

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So all of this comes down to personal preference. I don't hand wave it, but a lot of my world does rely on low level magic. I think of it this way: most magic is actually not "combat magic" that PCs specialize in. I mean, yes, you can use a tank to plow fields, but it's not exactly the most efficient way of doing things.

Instead, most people rely on slow-to-cast-but-useful low level spells and that goes for agriculture as well. So the local nature priest blesses the fields, calls for rain when there's a drought, magically enhances crops, grain is protected against spoilage and so on. People can get as good or better yields than we do with modern magic. Add in magic to help with the planting and harvesting, and you need less acreage than was traditionally required. Dwarves and other races that live underground use continual flame spells to provide light for crops. Given complete control over the environment they can grow multiple crops per year on relatively small plots of land. Every scrap of old food, all waste, even the dead get turned in to mulch and fertilizer for the fields.

Most of this is incredibly subtle and if you didn't know it was happening you might not realize it. After all you might not realize that the rain just happened to hold off long enough to get the crops planted and then rain just enough to get them started. It happens now and then it's just a lucky coincidence. Except that it happens pretty much every year. In a similar way, fishermen just happen to find the best fishing spots and they generally come home with nets fuller then we would expect in the normal world. But people in the world just accept it as normal.

So if there is a period of drought or a blight or animals getting sick, in all likelihood there is a supernatural explanation.

There are things that go bump in the night however, along with monsters that think that farmer would make a juicy snack. So in dangerous areas very few people live in isolated homesteads and instead cluster in small hamlets with at least a wooden palisade for protection. In addition to ways to call for help - whether someone that can use a more limited version of animal messenger or a sending stone - the people are reasonably capable of defending themselves for a short period of time against the most common threats. Pretty much everyone is trained to use simple weapons such as slings (which are more deadly than people give them credit for), bows and spears. When things get too dangerous or the threat is too great, that's when adventurers are called in.

In addition, in my current campaign things are significantly more dangerous than "normal" because of events in previous campaigns so a fair percentage of the work force in the most dangerous areas are there paying off a debt or have been convicted of crimes.

This is similar to how I run games, with the very minor exception that the everyday magic is often communal, incorporating seasonal, annual, lunar, and daily, traditions. So, the rain comes when it’s needed because the unmarried youths dance around the maypole, because it’s part of a ritual that takes generations to cast.

Well, that, and the weather is dangerous to mess with too much, so it’s more predicting the weather accurately and knowing what the land needs, with some light control.

 

[Hussar]

Personally, I find the biggest issue with D&D worldbuilding to be the lack of integration with what's actually in the game. Never mind spells, that's a separate issue as are magic items.

What about the Monster Manual?

There are SO many things in there that would be exploited by our putative settlements. Imagine what a world with Treants, just as an example, would actually look like? Communities would help the Treants by clearing out dead woods and protecting in the forests, in exchange for protection against larger enemies. "Hey, we'll plant trees for you, water and care for them, if you'll give us a hand when ogres come to eat our cattle. Sound good?"

Two or three Treants are more than powerful enough to put paid to just about anything short of largish armies. Giant Bees for the honey - OMG, can you imagine the calorie count of a giant bee hive? Giant Fire Beetles for free light, garbage disposal and, in a pinch, source of food. Make friendly with the local pixie clan for protection.

So on and so forth. And that's ignoring the MOUNTAIN of stuff that's outside of the 5e Monster Manual.

Like I said, a D&D world that actually integrated the elements of D&D into the functioning of that world would be a really, really different place.

 

[cbwjm]

And the peasants pay heavy tax for the favor. Like say, giving a sheep once a week, sacrificing a young man to the army once a year.... It's almost extortion

Well, extortion or taxes.

 

[Ancalagon]

Personally, I find the biggest issue with D&D worldbuilding to be the lack of integration with what's actually in the game. Never mind spells, that's a separate issue as are magic items.

What about the Monster Manual?

There are SO many things in there that would be exploited by our putative settlements. Imagine what a world with Treants, just as an example, would actually look like? Communities would help the Treants by clearing out dead woods and protecting in the forests, in exchange for protection against larger enemies. "Hey, we'll plant trees for you, water and care for them, if you'll give us a hand when ogres come to eat our cattle. Sound good?"

Two or three Treants are more than powerful enough to put paid to just about anything short of largish armies. Giant Bees for the honey - OMG, can you imagine the calorie count of a giant bee hive? Giant Fire Beetles for free light, garbage disposal and, in a pinch, source of food. Make friendly with the local pixie clan for protection.

So on and so forth. And that's ignoring the MOUNTAIN of stuff that's outside of the 5e Monster Manual.

Like I said, a D&D world that actually integrated the elements of D&D into the functioning of that world would be a really, really different place.

This is a very good point. Even some mundane or "traditionally evil" monsters could get in on this action - like the ogres wanting some sheep in exchange for protection... or maybe a troll? Do you think bandits would mess with a village with a troll? And the troll doesn't want the people that feed her to be messed with... plus she probably gets to eat the bandits.

 

[Micah Sweet]

We

I don't know if many D&D settings really make a solid attempt to explain where all the food comes from and I don't know if most players really care. We're playing a fantasy adventure game not Sim Farm with the downloadable fantasy expansion. I also don't take things like random encounter tables as the norm for everyone in the setting. If farmer Brown wants to go visit his brother Eustace in the next village, nobody's going to bother rolling on some table to see if he runs into an owlbear or a traveling minstrel. The game is designed for high fantasy adventuring not simulating a realistic economy.

Well, 5e isnt built for it anyway. Many other versions of D&D, past and present, have been.

 

[Tonguez]

Personally, I find the biggest issue with D&D worldbuilding to be the lack of integration with what's actually in the game. Never mind spells, that's a separate issue as are magic items.

What about the Monster Manual?

There are SO many things in there that would be exploited by our putative settlements. Imagine what a world with Treants, just as an example, would actually look like? Communities would help the Treants by clearing out dead woods and protecting in the forests, in exchange for protection against larger enemies. "Hey, we'll plant trees for you, water and care for them, if you'll give us a hand when ogres come to eat our cattle. Sound good?"

Two or three Treants are more than powerful enough to put paid to just about anything short of largish armies. Giant Bees for the honey - OMG, can you imagine the calorie count of a giant bee hive? Giant Fire Beetles for free light, garbage disposal and, in a pinch, source of food. Make friendly with the local pixie clan for protection.

So on and so forth. And that's ignoring the MOUNTAIN of stuff that's outside of the 5e Monster Manual.

Like I said, a D&D world that actually integrated the elements of D&D into the functioning of that world would be a really, really different place.

What makes you think that Treants would treat humans any differently to ogres? From their perspective Humans are destructive pest who cut down and burn trees and build stone walls too.
Pixies are also extremely unreliable pest prone to dangerous and destructive mischief - they need to be appeased not befriended.

Otyugh on the other hand are intelligent and will keep the sewers clean and safe from bandits

 

[clearstream]

I've been having a suspension of belief recently over a commodity that is buyable just about anywhere - bread.

Here's what got me stuck:

1. Bread is a cheap, freely available staple food.
2. You need huge fields outside the walls to make lots of bread.
3. Huge fields outside the walls will inevitably be attacked and overrun.
4. No more bread.

Assuming 1-3 to be true, how do you fix this problem while keeping bread generally cheap and plentiful?

Long distance trade from a fabled land of wheat where there are no monsters? Dwarven underdark wheat, grown in deep basements, if there is such a thing?
I'm just drawing a blank, since every town should be surrounded by acres and acres of wheat fields, and so many places in many different settings, that just isn't possible. 1 cup of flour would need maybe three square feet of wheat plants. That's an awful lot of land to protect.

ideas pls?

It feels like a reasonable angle to contemplate, that could have emergent pay offs in your narratives. For me, the gravest threat to wheat seems likely to be a polity's closest kin - other humanoids - who might themselves use it, or who are ruthless enough to destroy it. The latter was one tactic of medieval warfare: destroy an opponent's ability to feed themselves.

Goldenfields in Faerun is one possible solution (a vast fortress enclosing magically productive fields). Another is trade or tithe - removing the motive for violence by sharing.

 

[Hussar]

This is a very good point. Even some mundane or "traditionally evil" monsters could get in on this action - like the ogres wanting some sheep in exchange for protection... or maybe a troll? Do you think bandits would mess with a village with a troll? And the troll doesn't want the people that feed her to be messed with... plus she probably gets to eat the bandits.

Yeah, once you start digging down into this, alignment really starts going out the window.

What makes you think that Treants would treat humans any differently to ogres? From their perspective Humans are destructive pest who cut down and burn trees and build stone walls too.
Pixies are also extremely unreliable pest prone to dangerous and destructive mischief - they need to be appeased not befriended.

Otyugh on the other hand are intelligent and will keep the sewers clean and safe from bandits

Couple of points.

1. Why are you assuming the townsfolk are human? The description of grippli, for example, does mention that grippli will sometimes LIVE in treants and use them as a sort of mobile home. Plus, treants are intelligent. They're no less likely to see the benefits of cooperation than anyone else. Even your point about humans being destructive pests assumes that the humans have never really had any contact with the treants. But, in a fantasy world like this, treants are no more unusual than any other thing. They can talk, they have a language, they're intelligent and, best of all, they can be reasoned with. All things that humans are particularly good at. Never minding elves or halflings, either of which are predisposed to getting along with treants.

2. Pixies again, are intelligent, have a language and can be reasoned with. They are described as extremely social and friendly. And peaceful as well. Why wouldn't they get along with humans? Again, cooperation benefits everyone and any race that's intelligent can easily see the benefits here.

Otyugh are another good example.

That's the point that I'm making though. Why would intelligent creatures who have grown up next to other intelligent creatures not pretty naturally start to cooperate? Even if it's not all of a given race, sure, that's fine. But, the benefits of doing so would be so obvious that it would almost have to happen. Treants want to protect their home. Human neighbours cut a deal where they will gather dead wood in the forest, plant new trees every year. In return the treants help defend the humans from nasties.

Like I said, no one ever bothers actually creating integrated worlds. It's always some faux Europe with a bit of monsters. It's rather sad really. I'd LOVE to see an actual fantasy setting that wasn't just yet another warmed over Middle Earth or Hyboria. In fiction, if you want to see a great example of this, check out Steven Erikson's Malazan series. He REALLY nails it well.

 

[MGibster]

That's the point that I'm making though. Why would intelligent creatures who have grown up next to other intelligent creatures not pretty naturally start to cooperate? Even if it's not all of a given race, sure, that's fine. But, the benefits of doing so would be so obvious that it would almost have to happen. Treants want to protect their home. Human neighbours cut a deal where they will gather dead wood in the forest, plant new trees every year. In return the treants help defend the humans from nasties.

I get where you're coming from. But looking at the past few thousand years of human history, we're an intelligent species that does not always get along with one another. I wouldn't take it as a given that a treant would automatically get along with the humans who just moved down the creek a few years ago.