D&D and Medieval/Dark Ages Simulationism

[WayneLigon]

The major overhaul that needs to occur in the perceptions of a lot of people is this: Wizards don't interfere in the matters of normals. They generally keep to themselves and hoarde their knowledge, and almost never use it save to serve their own ends or as part of some much larger design or plan. They will never light a town using Continual Flame even though after a point that would be a trivial thing for them. They will never make a magic item just because someone, even a King, dumps a bunch of gold in their lap. They are forever Apart from most people. Same with clerics, really. Even the good ones don't just heal anyone, even if it means that power goes unused.

A corollary to this: people fear wizards and, really, any spell caster. They may appreciate them, they might even send round a fruitcake every Christmas, but on some level they are afraid of them and go out of their way to avoid them. Same goes with spell-casting clerics.

That level of conceptual, cultural seperation is nessesary if you want a D&D that resembles any sort of middle ages world.

 

[billd91]

It could be fun and forms the very basis of what the Green campaign books were all about in 2nd edition. If you can find Charlemagne's Paladins, Vikings, or the one on the Crusades, you'd have a good idea how to start.
You really have to cut down on magic, particularly non-enchantment or flashy magic. Characters end up being a lot more mundane, focused more on the warrior-style and rogue classes, but that's not so bad. You could even make a run with all NPC classes if you wanted to keep the power level even lower.
You also might want to look a the Thieves World stuff from Green Ronin. There are some very deadly additions to combat rules that add an element of crippling realism to the game that you might find useful.

 

[Dan Bell]

So, without going back to 1E, what changes, inclusions and/or omissions need to be administered to D&D to promote medieval/dark ages simulation insofar as the setting/milieu is concerned? What changes would you make, both in presentation ("fluff") and rules ("crunch")? Moreover, would you at all? Is D&D best, in your opinion, when attemtping to fit into a semi-historical milieu?

Hi Reynard,
I have changed "fluff" in that I now game in the rules-independent HarnWorld setting. (See www.lythia.com for more info & free downloads in this medieval type setting). The rules (aka "crunch") I vary: I have run groups using D&D 3ed., GURPS, HarnMaster, and HackMaster (Kenzer & Co.'s system that is loosely based on D&D) all with success. Each has pros & cons but the setting goes a long way towards medieval/dark ages simulation.
Happy gaming
Dan

 

[jdrakeh]

Hi Reynard,
I have changed "fluff" in that I now game in the rules-independent HarnWorld setting. (See www.lythia.com for more info & free downloads in this medieval type setting). The rules (aka "crunch") I vary: I have run groups using D&D 3ed., GURPS, HarnMaster, and HackMaster (Kenzer & Co.'s system that is loosely based on D&D) all with success. Each has pros & cons but the setting goes a long way towards medieval/dark ages simulation.
Happy gaming
Dan

I refrained from mentioning it earlier but I actually just picked up the complete HarnMaster 3rd rules (including Magic and Religion) in an effort to move back toward low magic, medieval fantasy from the default high fantasy heroism of D&D

 

[fuindordm]

Grim Tales is a better d20 base rule set for this sort of setting, I should think. It has less detail on armor and weapons, but that can be added back in if you want. Spellcasting requires a very heavy investment, and is rather dangerous. The rulebook is chock-full of advice on tuning the campaign to the level of grittiness you want. There are tons of non-magical talents for the players to choose from.

You wouldn't even need level limits. With critical hits and a relatively low massive damage threshold, that fighter-type with 130 hp still has reason to fear battle.

 

[Reynard]

I am not so concerned about whether the PCs, in their capabilities and (down the line) power levels, fit into the dark ages/medieval milieu as I am about the world in general.

I think the first step is deciding that the PCs -- and the foes who are on even footing with them -- are rare, unique even. Ditch the demographics rules right out. Get rid of "NPC classes" in general in fact. In a world where 99.99% of the people are "0 level" commoners, artisans and nobles, things can hew closer to what pre-modern Western Europe was like. If magic -- whether arcane or divine, whether in characters or monsters -- is rare, it both remains wonderous and does not impinge upon the historical versimilitude of the setting. If only one in a thousand or ten thousand can cast fireball or cure disease, the esitence of those powers will have no perceptible impact on society or history.

One of the big things, though, is monotheism. The influence of the Church on western Europe during the dark and middle ages cannot be overstated. More than magic or technology, leaving this out and following it to its logical conclusion would create a world far different than the one of the dark ages and medieval period. Now, i don't think it matters whether or not the priests and/or saints can actually cast spells or not, since people believed in the power of God and his servants in that time period with no real evidence anyway -- after all, people came from leagues away to gain the healing power and blessings of Benedict and if a fantasy setting counterpart could actually bestow those things, I don't think it would make the character any more powerful or influential than the real Benedict was.

As far as D&D rules not fitting the milieu goes, I think this is a clear case of "3rd edition rules, 1st edition feel". Slow advancement and deadly adventures can go a long way toward stripping the 3rd edition "super-heroes" of their capes. Eliminating the magic item economy has any number of beneficial effects, from mainting medieval feel to making the rare powerful monsters that much more frightening. Of course, it would be easier to do in 1E where many of the rules are already in place and, more importantly, many rules counter to the milieu are not in place and so much is in the hands of the DM, but I am more interested in doing it in 3E simply because it would be harder (and therefore more rewarding).

Of course, the goal isn't to have a "historical" game -- it is to have a fantasy game set in a plausible historically-inspired setting. these are two very different goals, I think.

 

[shilsen]

Now, i don't think it matters whether or not the priests and/or saints can actually cast spells or not, since people believed in the power of God and his servants in that time period with no real evidence anyway -- after all, people came from leagues away to gain the healing power and blessings of Benedict and if a fantasy setting counterpart could actually bestow those things, I don't think it would make the character any more powerful or influential than the real Benedict was.

Color me skeptical, but if Benedict was able to actually heal the wounded and dying or slay people with his touch(Cure/Inflict X Wounds), healed people of paralysis (Remove Paralysis) by his touch, would interrogate people by casting a spell which made it impossible for them to lie (Zone of Truth), created magical torches which would never go out (Continual Flame), could inflict or cure blindness or deafness (Blindness/Deafness, Remove Blindness/Deafness), healed any disease by touch (Remove Disease), created food and water out of air to feed dozens (Create Food and Water) and walked on water (Water Walk), I'm betting he'd be seen a little differently than the historical Benedict was. And I just used examples of spells from levels 1-3.

And what of his friend Alberich (wizard), who can fly, conjure up magical creatures, turn invisible, slay hundreds of people with bolts of fire from his hands? In a world where 99.9% of the populace are 0-level commoners, such PCs would be even more powerful than they normally are in D&D and could affect society in even more drastic ways. After all, if the PCs are the only people with access to their powers, that makes them capable of slaying kings, taking out religious leaders, and essentially changing society by controlling who's at the top.

 

[robertliguori]

I am not so concerned about whether the PCs, in their capabilities and (down the line) power levels, fit into the dark ages/medieval milieu as I am about the world in general.

I think the first step is deciding that the PCs -- and the foes who are on even footing with them -- are rare, unique even. Ditch the demographics rules right out. Get rid of "NPC classes" in general in fact. In a world where 99.99% of the people are "0 level" commoners, artisans and nobles, things can hew closer to what pre-modern Western Europe was like. If magic -- whether arcane or divine, whether in characters or monsters -- is rare, it both remains wonderous and does not impinge upon the historical versimilitude of the setting. If only one in a thousand or ten thousand can cast fireball or cure disease, the esitence of those powers will have no perceptible impact on society or history.

One of the big things, though, is monotheism. The influence of the Church on western Europe during the dark and middle ages cannot be overstated. More than magic or technology, leaving this out and following it to its logical conclusion would create a world far different than the one of the dark ages and medieval period. Now, i don't think it matters whether or not the priests and/or saints can actually cast spells or not, since people believed in the power of God and his servants in that time period with no real evidence anyway -- after all, people came from leagues away to gain the healing power and blessings of Benedict and if a fantasy setting counterpart could actually bestow those things, I don't think it would make the character any more powerful or influential than the real Benedict was.

As far as D&D rules not fitting the milieu goes, I think this is a clear case of "3rd edition rules, 1st edition feel". Slow advancement and deadly adventures can go a long way toward stripping the 3rd edition "super-heroes" of their capes. Eliminating the magic item economy has any number of beneficial effects, from mainting medieval feel to making the rare powerful monsters that much more frightening. Of course, it would be easier to do in 1E where many of the rules are already in place and, more importantly, many rules counter to the milieu are not in place and so much is in the hands of the DM, but I am more interested in doing it in 3E simply because it would be harder (and therefore more rewarding).

Of course, the goal isn't to have a "historical" game -- it is to have a fantasy game set in a plausible historically-inspired setting. these are two very different goals, I think.

Rarity isn't good enough. Imagine one party of moderately-leveled adventurers, acting in adventurer-meiter.

Party: (approaches small village on outskirts of fort)
Fighter: "Greetings, good folk! We seek refreshment for-"
Villager: "A woman! You've got a woman with you, in man's attire!"
Ranger: "Man's attire? I kill things with a bow and hide in underbrush! The attire is unisex."
Villager: "'Tis unnatural and we will have naught to do with such things in our village."
Wizard: "Oh. So, I should just wait outside then?"
Villager: "What?"
Wizard: "What with me being a wizard and all."
Villager: "Witch!"
Wizard: "Oh, no, sir, you are thinking of warlocks, whose magic is clearly flavored to be dark and-"
Villager: "Burn the witch! Heresy! Blasphemey! He will bring curses and plague down upon us!"
Fighter: "Good people, please, listen to us! Would you truly seek to slay this man simply because of his chosen profession?"
Villager mob: "Burn! Burn the-"
Fighter: "OK. That makes you lot evil."
Fighter: *Great Cleaves through mob on his surprise round, and spends his upcoming move action posing*
Ranger: "We kill evil things. And take their stuff."
Fleeing villagers: "The king will-"
Fighter: "This is the same king who tortures people, right?"
Wizard: "Will he send his armies? Please tell me he will. I'd hate to think I took Widen Spell for no reason at all!"
Villagers: "You can't defeat an entire army!"
Wizard: "Really? Who'd like to test that theory?"

Like I said, imagine one such party, making their way across the land every hundred years (or even more rarely). The mere concept of individuals capable of doing such things would shape the world. The problem is that there are certain pretty fundamental assumptions about the way the world works that support a medieval-esque world, and D&D 3.5 not only kills these assumptions but feeds them to barghests afterward. You think that the church has an impact on soceity? That wizard can Planar Bind celestials; I wouldn't imagine that too many religions could survive a concerted physical and spiritual attack from figures straight out of their mythos.

Slow advancement and deadly combat can retard the problem. But once you've got one pack of adventurers that make it to level eight or so, they are pretty much going to be walking setting mechanics, because by that point, characters are tough enough and have enough abilities to start engineering the environment.

Let us take a single hypothetical eighth-level druid. This druid, if she chooses, can remain shapeshifted into the form of a perfectly unremarkable wild animal indefinitely. The druid can (if she takes Natural Spell) bombard her foes with the fury of nature, raining down fire, lightning, and hail. The druid can slip into her foes' midst, than turn into a wild, furious beast. Worst of all, the druid can simply move about the land using Plant Growth and Diminish Plants to ensure that her enemies starve, and the larders of her allies are full to bursting. You know those horrible plagues that infested life in the middle ages? She can start them, as well as saving select individuals. This druid can bring back the dead, see her foes from afar in natural pools of water, and summon legions of horrible creatures to wreak havoc. The druid can follow ships under the water, then use her magic to drop the water around them, trapping them for over an hour while she takes whatever action she pleases (including casually sinking the boat.) If threatened, the druid can simply take the form of a bird and fly away.

And this is just one character. Imagine a party of similarly-powered individuals, all willing to use their talents in synchronicity. Either you posit that similar individuals exist to check them (and the world becomes not at all medieval), or the first moderately-leveled characters that decide to change the world do so unopposed.

 

[Evilhalfling]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned E6: Cap levels at 6th after that 1 feat per 5000 xp gained.
This also limits magic items, no +2 weapons, no rings or rods. you should also consider banning wands. If magic items with blatant effects can be bought or sold at all it should be at x10 listed prices. +1 swords and armor can fit in at normal prices.

For demographics say that 90% are 1st level NPC classes, and not capable of gaining levels.
then cut xp earned by 1/2 (although PCs can be an exception) this makes 6th lvl NPCs very rare. You would want to create a non-magical priest caste, to support the rare actual clerics.
the highest level clerics would generally not be the highest ranking, spending too much time believing and not enough in church politics. They could either be recognized or ostracized by the hierarchy, but would rarely lead it.

It can be done, but I agree with others, who say using another system might work better.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

If only one in a thousand or ten thousand can cast fireball or cure disease, the esitence of those powers will have no perceptible impact on society or history.

The best way to have this work is to make wizards very cautious about using their magic.
In LotR, Gandalf is cautious because using magic would alert Saruman and Sauron to his whereabouts.
In Dragonlance (and Harry Potter, come to think of it), wizards have a pact to not interfere in the affairs of non-wizards.
Both Middle-Earth and Krynn, as a result, look rather medieval-ish, with castles, knights, and so on. Magic is contained enough that it doesn't reshape the world.

You could also say that there is a finite amount of magic in the world, and the more is used the weaker magic becomes -- so wizards generally are reluctant to use spells, and are quite happy to kill any other wizards they encounter.
Or perhaps all magic is tied to extraplanar entities. Fireball conjures a bit of Surtur's energy to the world, so every time you cast it you bring Surtur a bit closer. Casting Confusion calls upon some Elemental Lord of Madness, increasing the general level of chaos and/or insanity throughout the world.

Maybe spells have a chance of harming the caster in some way. Perhaps mundane counters to magic are more common than in the default rules.

Basically, there has to be SOME check on magic, whether it is mechanical or in-game.