Creating a govement based on D&D reality

[RangerWickett]

It's still a bad idea and should be stopped sooner rather than later. Consider this a second protest and second request that this thread be nailed closed.

*looks around*

*decides this thread isn't nearly 'political' enough*

*clears throat*

"But who'd be higher level - democrats or republicans?"



Regarding personal power versus political power, you need to be good at talking to be a politician. Bluffing, intimidating, and using diplomacy. To become good at these things in D&D, you need to be relatively high level. Not epic, not necessarily even over 10th. Heck, I think we figured out a 6th level half-elf bard could get a +30 Diplomacy check.

That bard (because really, the only rulers in D&D should be bards, or possibly marshals or clerics) would be able to convince most adventurers, even those of much higher level, that they're best off working within the system. They'll have their own freedom if they desire that, and the government won't meddle as long as they don't pose a threat. And if they're willing to help out against the occasional scyssassination, all the better.

You might have a nice, smart, diplomatic, and cunning leader. He could be 6th level, and served by folks as high as 20th. And it could all work smoothly until the 10th level enchanter gets himself hired as vizier, dominates the king, and starts oppressing the commoners because he's not nearly as enlightened as a good bard-king should be.


Hmm. Would Arnold Schwarzenegger count as a bard/barbarian who retired from adventuring to be a politician?

 

[taliesin15]

Frankly I don't know why the dominant political paradigm in most campaigns isn't essentially anarchy, or simply a primitive form of survival of the fittest. I've seen plenty of campaigns that were essentially war-ravaged, punctuated by random hordes of monsters, and rifts in the earth where legions of demons were crawling forth in all directions.

 

[Rabelais]

Orcs, Gnolls, Hobgoblins, Kobolds, Halflings

There are so many different races, and some of them are nomadic/Semi-nomadic, and most of them are entirely hostile. Governments are incapable of exercising power outside of their spheres of influence. Even presuming that there's a powerful central government. Wouldn't we be looking at City-States rather than a unified national government?

 

[Tonguez]

I think the standard political structure of DnD would be akin to the Hero-Kings of the classical era. In this tribes established themselves as city-states whereas in DND NPC classed persons would tend to gather around high level adventurers for protection from rampaging monsters and the hero being a hero would respond accordingly

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Even then, the tax collector who goes about taxing adventurers is in for either a storied career or a very short one.

Dude, now I have to go create a high-level, legendary tax-collector. And inflict him on my PC's.

 

[Vrecknidj]

Another related issue is to what degree battles to the death occur. Lots of D&D battles are over because neither side flees. In the wild, in the real world, while there's plenty of killing, there's also a lot of bravado and bluff. There are many, many instances of "erratic retaliator" strategies (anyone know the reference?).

I think that part of the problem that we see, when considering things like fantasy races, is the weird tendency to apply one of the human tendencies of wiping out enemies rather than the far more prevalent strategy of being erratic in one's retaliations against others.

Dave

 

[fusangite]

I don't believe any sort of political discussion is approprate or accaptable here under the rules of these boards, if those rules are enforced.

Well, given that the same rules ban discussions of religion, is it your contention, then, that any thread that discusses Deities and Demigods should be shut down and bans handed out accordingly?

 

[Slife]

Well... eventually something will escape the WotC Optimization Challenge boards and take complete control.

Pun-Pun 4 Prez!




In all seriousness, it depends on the campaign setting's flavor.

The city built around the tarrasque, for instance, is one example of a gritty DnD government. The current ruler may change, but the system keeps going. The strong get stronger, because they can. (the thread also includes different reimaginings of the same idea.)
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=261519

 

[Brakkart]

Dude, now I have to go create a high-level, legendary tax-collector. And inflict him on my PC's.

Heh Greyhawk already has one of these. Well Greyhawk City does. His name is Glodreddi Bakkanin (spelling?), a Lawful Evil Dwarven Minister of Finance. Gawd did my players in my last GH campaign HATE him!

 

[Chimera]

One of the key things to remember in a D&D universe is that People Of Power have other things to occupy besides governing the commoners. Just because you're a rich and powerful Wizard doesn't mean that you're willing to take on that onerous task of endless meetings, appointments and mundane drudgery that passes for political office. Likewise if you are a high level Cleric, Bard or other spellcasting/organizational class. You may have more than enough to do with your own research, item creation, teaching and managing of underlings, personal relationships, etc, etc...that the whole idea of tying yourself down with an official position is extremely counter-productive.

In many, if not even most cases, I could see that it is much easier to let King Bob play the game; spending his time in court and meetings, with visiting dignitaries and so forth; while you sit back and TELL HIM how you expect him to run things.

The other thing to keep in mind is that, just because you can gain a lot of personal wealth and power in a short period of time, this does not translate into effective experience in governing, in established relationships that allow one to govern effectively, in practical experience in being an Executive figure.

Translation: (1) Just because young Torg went out and slew the dragon with his buddies and came back a bazillionaire doesn't mean that he knows squat about running a barony. (2) No matter how many spells 19 year old Elric the Wizard can cast, he's probably not going to be taken seriously as the head of the Guild of Archmages, even if he is more powerful than Bertrand the Elder.


And all things considered, I have to go back to some of my own PBM experience from the pre-internet days. The leader of a faction wasn't necessarily the smartest, or most powerful, or the senior most. In many cases, it came down to 'who is least opposed to the idea of doing all this work?'