D&D General D&D, magic, and the mundane medieval

Status
Not open for further replies.

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
The problems raised by @Hussar and @Paul Farquhar follow from applying magic to an assumed real-world baseline. It seems that the obvious solution, therefore, is to change the baseline:

Thus, in a faux-mediaeval world with clerics who can perform miracles, it seems to me that the better framing is that something like historical mediaeval society is what you get as a result of that magic use. Without it, who knows how terrible the fantasy world would be!
How would that work? The current model still has people with amazing magical powers that do nothing to improve their societies outside saving them from various OTT threats every week. That's a superhero setting, practically by definition. If that's what D&D wants to be, they should just say so, and acknowledge the genre conventions of such.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

pemerton

Legend
How would that work?
Just play as written. And when someone asks why all the MUs, hermits, village priests etc haven't changed things from being faux-mediaeval, explain that all their work is required just to keep things as they are - their prayers and miracles and magic hold back some of the worst depredations of terrible diseases, minor demons, evil spirits and monsters, etc.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Just play as written. And when someone asks why all the MUs, hermits, village priests etc haven't changed things from being faux-mediaeval, explain that all their work is required just to keep things as they are - their prayers and miracles and magic hold back some of the worst depredations of terrible diseases, minor demons, evil spirits and monsters, etc.
If that works for you. Seems a little too "clap your hands if you believe" to me though.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
So, let us consider - Newton went to Trinity College, in Cambridge.
Even today, that college takes a whopping 200 students a year, and only some of them are mathematicians.
In 1650, the population of Europe was about 74 million people.

If European colleges were putting out a thousand mathematicians a year, it would still take 700 years for mathematicians to be one in a thousand people. Ergo, pre-Renaissance, mathematicians were not a one-per-village kind of thing.

The thing you miss is not that mathematicians need to be plentiful for people to learn and extend mathematics - what you need is for them to record mathematics, and pass it along. Mathematics was passed on and was advanced because they communicated through books, and then through colleges, not because you could easily meet a practitioner on the street.
If I had said they could be easily met on the street, you’d have a point.

Meanwhile, I’ve “missed” nothing.

What you have missed is threefold:

1) You are counting professional mathematicians at universities as if they are the only mathematicians that lives in Europe in a given year, leaving out clergy and nobility.

2) The numbers, again, are not the point. Mathematics impacted Europe. There were enough people along the full spectrum from craft-folk who use basic maths to do their work, to the people progressing the field, that the world changed over generations because of them.

3) My point has always been, and remains, that the floor for learning to cast spells cannot rationally be the heights of professional advancement, but the practical usage of working people, even if only those at the higher end of the journeyman’s skill and knowledge. This is why “how many mathematicians in Europe” is not a question I see any value in the answer to. It doesn’t tell us anything we cannot glean from the effect of mathematics on crafts, architecture, economics, astronomy, chemistry, and whatever else, over many generations, because one needn’t be Newton to use mathematics or even to learn advanced mathematics like calculus and apply it to solutions to practical problems.
 

Here's a scenario: a PC cleric grows to say, 3rd level, and the player decides that the PC is moved by the idea that their clerical powers could be used to help society as a whole rather than fight monsters. They decide to retire the PC to a community with the intention of using their abilities to help improve their quality of life, including training new acolytes as circumstances allow.

This could happen in any campaign, as it's a player decision. How would you, as the DM, extrapolate that retired PC's effects going forward?
Depends... When I extrapolate it is more at a societal level. It also depends on the time frame. Over the next couple of months? Not much. Five years later, twenty years later? Much more. The degree that the players interact with the village is also pretty important as that determines how much thought I put toward it.

Let's say the PC retires to a village in a borderland zone (1). Let's also say they're a bit out of the way so Shepard River is the only magical healer in the area. There may be a woodwife or cunning man in the village, which would be very helpful in supplying medications and local lore to Shepard River.

As long as there is only one really bad thing that happens a day, the cleric would be able to fix it. A broken leg from a logging accident can be fixed good as new with a combination of cure wounds and lesser restoration. If they can live with a limp for a while, cure wounds would be enough. In combination with augury they would be a boon to maternal mortality. Being able to prevent or treat catastrophic blood loss with cure wounds and stop strep infection in infants with lesser restoration is a tremendous advantage. I would also expect someone who became a semi-specialist in clerical maternal care would develop couvade, a spell that transferred some labor pains to the father. This would undoubtedly increase maternal and infant survival as well as increase general empathy. This would increase survival from 1:100 to more like 1:1000, when a number of interventions occurred in the US, including the availability of PCN.

In my campaign, there are many priests but few clerics. I would expect a devotional shrine to be developed immediately. With the growth of population, barring any terrible monstrous attack (2), this would likely develop to a chapel within 20 years, about one generation. There is likely to be 1-2 subordinate clerics should that progress. I'd have to look up how many subordinate priests / monks would be there from my tables.

As it happens, I did have a 7th level PC cleric retire a few years ago. They decided to reclaim a temple near the local "Mordor", and invested his wealth accordingly. It became a forward base for a number of adventurers, and the local polities also came to see its value. It is now a fortified small town, and was in fact used as the forward base to throw down the Ivory Queen and reclaim the city of Shodan. There was about 6 real years and 12 game years between the two points.

(1) Civilized, Borderland, Wilderness; determines monstrous encounters, level of infrastructure both within the area and connection to the capitol / general resources.
(2) That's hard to predict the outcome there since that's below a societal vantage. The village will do better with an actual cleric on their side, certainly. If it became important I would probably game it out.
 

MGibster

Legend
Here's a scenario: a PC cleric grows to say, 3rd level, and the player decides that the PC is moved by the idea that their clerical powers could be used to help society as a whole rather than fight monsters. They decide to retire the PC to a community with the intention of using their abilities to help improve their quality of life, including training new acolytes as circumstances allow.

This could happen in any campaign, as it's a player decision. How would you, as the DM, extrapolate that retired PC's effects going forward?

I have to admit that I find this to be a rather odd question. If the player is no longer interested in what that character is doing, why would a DM be interested in taking the time to figure out what affect they have going forward? I'm not going to be more interested than the player in what that character is up to. The long term affect the retired PC has on the community is going to be measured in years and likely won't have any meaningful impact on the campaign.

If I were to think of such a thing, it would be part of the finale of the campaign where I go over what long term impact the PCs' actions had on the campaign world. Kind of like the ending to Fallout and Fallout 2 where we find out what happened to the communities we interacted with. I'd probably have the community prosper under the PC's guidance, at least for at time, and the rest would depend on bigger events in the world. Maybe the town the PC retired to was in the path of the undead horde that showed up later in the campaign and was wiped out or perhaps it became a beacon of learning and is the site of a great university now.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
I have to admit that I find this to be a rather odd question. If the player is no longer interested in what that character is doing, why would a DM be interested in taking the time to figure out what affect they have going forward? I'm not going to be more interested than the player in what that character is up to. The long term affect the retired PC has on the community is going to be measured in years and likely won't have any meaningful impact on the campaign.

If I were to think of such a thing, it would be part of the finale of the campaign where I go over what long term impact the PCs' actions had on the campaign world. Kind of like the ending to Fallout and Fallout 2 where we find out what happened to the communities we interacted with. I'd probably have the community prosper under the PC's guidance, at least for at time, and the rest would depend on bigger events in the world. Maybe the town the PC retired to was in the path of the undead horde that showed up later in the campaign and was wiped out or perhaps it became a beacon of learning and is the site of a great university now.
I think it's entirely likely that a community-minded caster would exist and be interested in using their abilities as more than just a monster-slayer. The player would move on to a new PC for adventuring, but would still be interested in the future of the old PC and would want that story to continue. In a persistent campaign setting (which is the whole point of this discussion), these are important questions to answer.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
If that works for you. Seems a little too "clap your hands if you believe" to me though.
Wait, and magic spells don’t!?

This is a game where you can meet a unicorn in a secluded glade and be healed of your wounds, or skewered and trampled, depending on the unicorn’s judgement of your character.

I’m all for worldbuilding that cares about extrapolating rationally from its premises, but the idea posited by pemerton is standard fantasy.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Wait, and magic spells don’t!?

This is a game where you can meet a unicorn in a secluded glade and be healed of your wounds, or skewered and trampled, depending on the unicorn’s judgement of your character.

I’m all for worldbuilding that cares about extrapolating rationally from its premises, but the idea posited by pemerton is standard fantasy.
It seems like a way to dodge the issue, since it doesn't require changing anything.
 

I'd like to make sure we all have the same idea of what "very rare" might be.

What percentage of the population do you think were mathematicians in Europe in, say, the year 1600 CE? Isaac Newton was born in 1643.
my guess (and I am no historian so this is pull out my backside numbers) between 25% and 50%.

I base this on pre computers people HAD to know math... every farmer every builder every smith uses math
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top