D&D - Mediaval Social, Political & Economical Structure.

[Turjan]

I always thought the typical D&D adventure setting was more akin to the Wild West with trappings of the middle ages. There is typically far more sexual and racial equality than there would be historically, the idea of an entire social class of semi-itinerant people carrying the heaviest weapons they can carry on their persons for self defense, seeking fortune and fame, and tending to go off like vigilantes (or at best an ad-hoc quickly deputized representative of local authorities) to bring justice to an evildoer is more suited to Zane Grey than Chaucer.

It is actually mostly disguised Victorian & Wild West culture, trappings and technology of the early renaissance, and some "cool" elements from antiquity and the middle ages dragged along.

I completely agree. I have already done the Wild West comparison in several discussions myself. Plus, social conventions and sensibilities from the late 20th century. There's nothing medieval about D&D. Even the "medieval" trappings look more like 19th century ideas thereof.

 

[pemerton]

There is typically far more sexual and racial equality than there would be historically

<snip>

Basically, players, in my experience, want a medieval fantasy game with the atmosphere and trappings of the late middle ages or renaissance, and a 19th or 20th century culture with a thin veneer of medievalism grafted onto it.

I mostly agree. But whereas players do expect modern attitudes towards sexual and racial equality, and also perhaps religious toleration, I think they're more tolerant of non-modern political cultures (eg monarchy over democracy, no separation of powers etc). Which is why I think that political/social structures, rather than more personal/diffused cultural norms, are the best place to get some medieval feel into a D&D game: like I said upthread, everything that is rationally administered or bureaucratised in the modern era can be made parochical and ad hoc. This can give a medieval feel without upsetting modern sensitivities about sex, race, religion and similar elements of personal identity.

 

[S'mon]

I mostly agree. But whereas players do expect modern attitudes towards sexual and racial equality, and also perhaps religious toleration

IME players are fine with discrimination against fictional races, as long as it doesn't negatively affect their PC. No bait & switch - don't let a player make a dwarf PC in a setting where dwarves are discriminated against, without telling him that. They certainly seem fine with discrimination against Evil-alignment races, although they avoid killing noncombatants, Orc babies & such.

IME players are usually ok with 'background' sexual inequality, as long as it doesn't negatively affect their PC. There was one major exception, but that seemed to be due to weird inter-player dynamics where the female players were taking their view of the world more from one male player's twisted (paranoid) interpretration, rather than what I was actually presenting, and ignoring/reinterpreting my assurances. This is the trickiest one though.

IME players don't have a problem with intolerance among fictitious religions. In particular I've not seen anyone agonise over the morality of slaughtering the cultists of evil deities, demon lords etc.

 

[mmadsen]

There is typically far more sexual and racial equality than there would be historically, the idea of an entire social class of semi-itinerant people carrying the heaviest weapons they can carry on their persons for self defense, seeking fortune and fame, and tending to go off like vigilantes (or at best an ad-hoc quickly deputized representative of local authorities) to bring justice to an evildoer is more suited to Zane Grey than Chaucer.

The semi-itinerant people you describe are called knights errant.