D&D (2024) Greyhawk Confirmed. Tell Me Why.

[pemerton]

Um. Since I reread The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings this month, I can say with confidence that we are told these things.

I'm fairly familiar with LotR and Appendices. Perhaps our standards for what counts as being told is different?

Prince Imrahil comes to Minas Tirth. So does Forlong. How, as members of the ruling class/caste, do they interact? Does Imrahil get to act only if a council on which Forlong sits advises him to do so? Must Forlong present Imrahil with a gift when they meet, or vice versa, or neither?

These things are not revealed.

It matters for the story at hand that the Shire is very nearly ungoverned, and that this contrasts with Gondor’s and Rohan’s functional (though declining) feudalism.

But at the end of the Hobbit, an auction is taking place. Under whose authority? What is the relevant law of buying and selling?

In the story, The Shire actually exists in some sort of liminal legal state - it has all the trappings of a sophisticated system of private law (including buying and selling, a very robust class hierarchy, sharecroppers and gardeners, etc) but also at key points the author tells us that there is little law. Except clearly Pippin and Merry assert some sort of entitlement to rule and to dispense justice during the Scouring of the Shire, and this seems clearly related to their membership of noble houses of Tuckborough and Buckland. There is a system of government here, that we might compare to some version of English manorial government, but details are left unspecified, and invoked only when needed by the unfolding events of the plot.

It's not clear to me, either, that Rohan is feudal. Is Erkenbrand an enfoeffed noble under Theoden's suzerainty? He is clearly a mighty warrior and captain, but his position in the government of Rohan is ambiguous as best I recall.

And more so with the basically modern kleptocracy Saruman imposed. The lock holes and the bureaucracy around the gatherers were innovations along with the factories.

Yes, The Shire had no bureaucracy. But it may still have had JPs. For instance, Bilbo left Bag End to Frodo. How was the transfer effected? Do Shirriffs play a role in witnessing or certifying documents? These are all questions that are implicit in the story - not surprisingly, given that The Shire is an ideal picture of not-quite-modern rural England - but that the story leaves unanswered.

I see the underlying point, and since I’ve previously argued that relevance to play should be the test for worldbuilding and presentation, I don’t disagree much. But I think you got carried away by enthusiasm in several places. If I were outlining a pair of chapters on world building (one general advice, one worked example), I’d include short lil’ entries on interesting types of social and political organizations, each with typical adventure hooks - emphasis on opportunities over restrictions. Same deal with types of religion and degree of development (where are you most likely to find monsters, and such).

Some decades ago now I studied Roman Law for two semesters in part to better understand the legal system I was imagining for Rel Astra in the Great Kingdom, which was the home of the PCs in my then RM game. I don't regret the study - understanding a bit about Roman Law and civilian legal reasoning more generally has helped me in my subsequent career - but the information never really became useful in play.

I think specifying that wizards are, typically, high status or low status I think can be helpful. Specifying that the ruler must be a wizard - ie the place is a Magocracy - I think is fun and colourful. But trying to turn that into a general account of the government of a place (for instance, that every governing official must be a mage) I personally think is hopeless, and is going to produce results that are implausible, unrealistic and constricting of the fiction.

I think focusing on particular NPCs, on some colourful social facts (customs, status, etc), and then extrapolating from that as play demands, is more effective and produces more realistic fiction.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm fairly familiar with LotR and Appendices. Perhaps our standards for what counts as being told is different?

Prince Imrahil comes to Minas Tirth. So does Forlong. How, as members of the ruling class/caste, do they interact? Does Imrahil get to act only if a council on which Forlong sits advises him to do so? Must Forlong present Imrahil with a gift when they meet, or vice versa, or neither?

These things are not revealed.

But at the end of the Hobbit, an auction is taking place. Under whose authority? What is the relevant law of buying and selling?

In the story, The Shire actually exists in some sort of liminal legal state - it has all the trappings of a sophisticated system of private law (including buying and selling, a very robust class hierarchy, sharecroppers and gardeners, etc) but also at key points the author tells us that there is little law. Except clearly Pippin and Merry assert some sort of entitlement to rule and to dispense justice during the Scouring of the Shire, and this seems clearly related to their membership of noble houses of Tuckborough and Buckland. There is a system of government here, that we might compare to some version of English manorial government, but details are left unspecified, and invoked only when needed by the unfolding events of the plot.

It's not clear to me, either, that Rohan is feudal. Is Erkenbrand an enfoeffed noble under Theoden's suzerainty? He is clearly a mighty warrior and captain, but his position in the government of Rohan is ambiguous as best I recall.

Yes, The Shire had no bureaucracy. But it may still have had JPs. For instance, Bilbo left Bag End to Frodo. How was the transfer effected? Do Shirriffs play a role in witnessing or certifying documents? These are all questions that are implicit in the story - not surprisingly, given that The Shire is an ideal picture of not-quite-modern rural England - but that the story leaves unanswered.

Some decades ago now I studied Roman Law for two semesters in part to better understand the legal system I was imagining for Rel Astra in the Great Kingdom, which was the home of the PCs in my then RM game. I don't regret the study - understanding a bit about Roman Law and civilian legal reasoning more generally has helped me in my subsequent career - but the information never really became useful in play.

I think specifying that wizards are, typically, high status or low status I think can be helpful. Specifying that the ruler must be a wizard - ie the place is a Magocracy - I think is fun and colourful. But trying to turn that into a general account of the government of a place (for instance, that every governing official must be a mage) I personally think is hopeless, and is going to produce results that are implausible, unrealistic and constricting of the fiction.

I think focusing on particular NPCs, on some colourful social facts (customs, status, etc), and then extrapolating from that as play demands, is more effective and produces more realistic fiction.

I think Tolkien does discuss this a little more than you remember in The Scouring of the Shire. There are no JPs in the Shire because there is basically no crime. They follow the legal code of Arnor, passed on by oral tradition. In the event of a dispute, as with Bilbo's property, hobbits agree collectively as to the correct interpretation of the law. Thus, no lawyers.

There are a couple of ways of looking at this. One is that hobbits are not human. This leads to the idea of racial alignments, and hobbits being always lawful in early D&D.

The other interpretation is that the Shire is utopian. It represents the world (AKA rural England at the beginning of the 20th century) as Tolkien would like it to be, it's not intended to be realistic.

Rohan is based on Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, which I think tend to be described as pre-feudal. They were small, and hence relied a lot on personal relationships, rather than the more legalistic codes of feudalism.

 

[Pauln6]

They could probably solve a lot of issues with world specific heritage tables specifying locations where different races can be found and how others view them.

Are you including everything in the Monster Manual too? Because it doesn't make sense to require PC species to come from a specific place, when all those other species are found anywhere.

That's not strictly true in Greyhawk. Oerth is quasi-medieval, and very human-centric where population mobility is low and inter-species antipathy is rife. There were certainly humanoid settlements specified and other random small lairs tucked away. Warforged will exist outside Blackmoor or tieflings outside the Great Kingdom but will require a specific origin story that is the meat and potatoes of character generation. And don't expect the average peasant to react favourably to either one.

Example, in 4e, one of our players wanted to play a dragonborn. They had not previously existed so we decided that the most appropriate place for them to live was the Far West, in the Celestial Imperium and Zahind. Since Resbin Dren was originally styled as from Zahind, the PC became a former member of her honour guard.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

And some of us just flat out think the 5e DMG wasn't very good at all. What good bits there might be are buried in the book and very difficult to find. Additionally, the 5e DMG, as @Minigiant rightly points out, is meant for experienced DM's who are already steeped in DnD. There's an entire 26 page chapter on Creating a Multiverse (Chapter TWO?!?!?) that could be cut out. It certainly should NEVER have been the second chapter of the book. There's a couple of pages on how to develop a multiverse, then 20 some pages of Planescape Light describing the various planes in D&D.

This was a very bad idea. Number one, it shouldn't be in the DMG at all. This is something that doesn't need to be there. It should be in setting guides or a Planescape book. Additionally, it adds a bunch of mechanics - Color Pools! Psychic Wind! Ethereal Curtains! - that are 100% pointless to anyone who isn't already deep diving into planar stuff in D&D. It certainly is of zero use to anyone who is trying to learn how to DM.

Good grief, you're 70 pages into the book before they even start talking about writing adventures. Y'know, that thing that ALL DM's MUST DO. That FIRST THING that all DM's must do? That thing? Yeah, we're going to bury it nearly a quarter of the way into the book. Because it's vitally important that a new DM (or any DM for that matter) knows what happens if you travel on the Ethereal Plane before we teach you how to write an adventure.

Oh, and then we're going to spend over ONE HUNDRED PAGES detailing treasure and magic items. Then, finally, we get to Chapter 8- actually how to run a game. That thing that is probably the most important lesson for DM's after how to write an adventure? Yeah, we're going to bury that 2/3rds of the way into the back of the book. But, don't worry, it's vitally important. You know it's vitally important because we're going to spend just about the same page count that we used to describe the planes back in chapter 2.

And because placing something at the end of a book is a great way to highlight how important we consider it to be to the game, we're going to give you about 30 pages of half baked house rules that are mostly just suggestions. When adventures come out that actually need rules like these, we'll just ignore the DMG and write new rules.

Room for improvement is very much an understatement.

Really, it should be something like this.

1. How to run a game.
2. How to write an adventure.
3. How to create a setting/sandbox.
4. How to create and customise monsters.
5. How to create custom player options.
6. Magic Items (including crafting rules).
7. Strongholds.
Appendices - lots of reference stuff, lists, tables and additional optional rules.

 

[pemerton]

I think Tolkien does discuss this a little more than you remember in The Scouring of the Shire. There are no JPs in the Shire because there is basically no crime. They follow the legal code of Arnor, passed on by oral tradition. In the event of a dispute, as with Bilbo's property, hobbits agree collectively as to the correct interpretation of the law. Thus, no lawyers.

There are a couple of ways of looking at this. One is that hobbits are not human. This leads to the idea of racial alignments, and hobbits being always lawful in early D&D.

The other interpretation is that the Shire is utopian. It represents the world (AKA rural England at the beginning of the 20th century) as Tolkien would like it to be, it's not intended to be realistic.

There is no serious crime, but there can clearly be legal disputes - eg Bilbo's with the Sackville-Bagginses. And there is at least some petty theft - eg of Farmer Maggot's mushrooms.

I don't think there are lawyers in The Shire, but I do think there could be JPs - if only to hold intruders or wrongdoers for handing over to the King's officers for the dispensing of justice. And also, as I said, to certify or witness private legal arrangements, which clearly are a thing that happens in The Shire. (It is not a place where property is held in common. It has a noticeable class hierarchy.) And even in The Shire, there would be fencing disputes or straying of animals onto others' pastures or crop-fields that would require adjudication.

Rohan is based on Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, which I think tend to be described as pre-feudal. They were small, and hence relied a lot on personal relationships, rather than the more legalistic codes of feudalism.

Yes, Anglo-Saxons and Goths. (I'm relying here on Shippey, The Road to Middle-Earth.)

Personal relationships - including between Theoden and Erkenbrand - will be fundamental. But personal relationships can also be important in feudalism: I don't think there is a sharp contrast between all warlord/retainer and all lord/vassal relationships. Though there may be a sharp contrast between some of them - eg there may be some lord/vassal relationships that are largely devoid of a personal dimension and are more purely legal in their character.

I think how all this works in Rohan and in Gondor is left rather opaque. And is Rohan's obligation to respond to the beacons analogous to a treaty obligation? Or analogous to the obligation of a vassal to assist their lord?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

There is no serious crime, but there can clearly be legal disputes - eg Bilbo's with the Sackville-Bagginses. And there is at least some petty theft - eg of Farmer Maggot's mushrooms.

Which are resolved via society, not the law. The Sackville-Bagginses have no legal claim over Bag End, and everyone knows that. If Famer Maggot finds kids steeling his mushrooms he might deliver a little corporal punishment, everyone accepts his right to do that, and that's the end of it.

but I do think there could be JPs

Tolkien specifically says the Sheriffs are the ONLY law enforcement in the Shire, and they spend most of their time rounding up stray animals. There are no JPs.

And also, as I said, to certify or witness private legal arrangements

You don't need special qualifications to witness documents even under UK law, anyone (with provisos with regard to age) can do it.

 

[Hussar]

You don't need special qualifications to witness documents even under UK law, anyone (with provisos with regard to age) can do it.

You don't have notary publics in the UK? I find that hard to believe.

There are all sorts of documents that you need special qualifications to witness. Try dealing with anything related to citizenship and you will find that out fast enough.

 

[Cadence]

You don't have notary publics in the UK? I find that hard to believe.

There are all sorts of documents that you need special qualifications to witness. Try dealing with anything related to citizenship and you will find that out fast enough.

That made me go google. It looks like in the UK they are mostly for authenticating things for use abroad. They're apparently the oldest branch of the legal profession in England & Wales (and so apparently not the kind of person you'd find at a copy shop or pack-and-send store, for example).

 

[Hussar]

That's not strictly true in Greyhawk. Oerth is quasi-medieval, and very human-centric where population mobility is low and inter-species antipathy is rife. There were certainly humanoid settlements specified and other random small lairs tucked away. Warforged will exist outside Blackmoor or tieflings outside the Great Kingdom but will require a specific origin story that is the meat and potatoes of character generation. And don't expect the average peasant to react favourably to either one.

Example, in 4e, one of our players wanted to play a dragonborn. They had not previously existed so we decided that the most appropriate place for them to live was the Far West, in the Celestial Imperium and Zahind. Since Resbin Dren was originally styled as from Zahind, the PC became a former member of her honour guard.

Kinda, sorta?

It really depends on what part of Greyhawk you're looking at. After all, the Sea Princes travel very extensively for example. With trade reaching all the way from Iuz to Keoland.

Never minding that you have very, very large areas that aren't settled particularly at all. Dragonborn would seem to be a very easy thing to slot in. Easiest would be to say they were thought to be lizardfolk and have only recently started getting noticed. Wild Coast and Pomarj would be simple sources. Greyhawk may not be vast, but, it's not exactly small. Every one of those hexes is 30 miles. From Geoff to the Great Kingdom is 4000 miles as the crow flies. To put that in perspective, that's Paris to Delhi. That covers most of Europe and a honking big chunk of Asia.

There's LOTS of space in Greyhawk. It's freaking huge.

That we would have any difficulty missing a group of people in that sort of space in Medieval times is very easy to believe.

 

[Hussar]

That made me go google. It looks like in the UK they are mostly for authenticating things for use abroad. They're apparently the oldest branch of the legal profession in England & Wales (and so apparently not the kind of person you'd find at a copy shop or pack-and-send store, for example).

I have to admit, any time I've needed to use one, it's always been regarding something for use abroad.

And they are very much not cheap.