Do castles make sense in a world of dragons & spells?

countgray

First Post
Do traditional castles make sense as defensive structures in a fantasy world of dragons and spells?

Our images of fantasy worlds are rife with castles, but the more I think about, the less they seem like impenetrable fortresses in a world with dragons, gryphon-riders, and spells. Traditional castles, and walled cities, were designed to protect from armed men on foot, horse and chariot trying to enter in a horizontal direction. They were also meant to give the defenders higher ground from which to attack at range with arrows and boiling oil and such, from behind arrow slits and crenellations which protected them from return fire. Castles are well equiped for those purposes. But to paraphrase Wrath of Khan: this pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking.

Rather than lateral attack from swords, arrows, ballistae and battering rams, fantasy defenders need to worry about aerial bombardment. In a world of dragons, flying demons, gryphon-riders, and sorcerors slinging spells, it strikes me that a traditional castle would serve the defenders poorly. A simple Magic missile spell strikes your target without fail, if the wizard can see the archer peer out the arrow slit, then bam, he can strike unerringly and wear him down. Dragons breathing fire from above could take out troops on ramparts, set fire to wooden roofs, land in courtyards and munch with impunity. Winged cavalry would have superior position above the castle defenders, and could drop missles, flaming bags of pitch, blast fireballs and lightning strikes down over the walls and gates.

In fact, I recently saw Prince Caspian, which had the most beautiful and creative use of gryphons I have ever seen. Their stealth gryphons dropped advance scouts and strike troops onto the castle walls and tower tops in the dead of night--allowing them to sneak into the castle to lower gates, sabotage castle defenses, even give them the opportunity to assassinate leaders without any notice or alarm sounding.

All this makes me think that a practical, realistic fortification in a typical fantasy world would have to look very different than a medieval castle. I have no idea what shapes and designs would actually work and prevail in such a world, they would certainly be time tested and function better than what I can come up with my imagination. But here are some thoughts to consider:

1. The Dwarves got it right! Underground delves and citadels hewn deep into mountain rock would provide ample protection from aerial assault.

2. Think London during the Blitz. Air-raid shelters, bunkers, underground tunnels and chambers you could hole-up in with a few feet of rock or concrete between you and the explosions above.

3. What about advance warning systems? Like the air-raid sirens announcing tornadoes and missile attacks? Watchful troops stationed on nearby mountain tops with bonfires (a la Lord of the Rings), might give you a few minutes notice to prepare for that dragon swooping in. But you might want some divination spells set up around the perimeter, at different distances, especially magic mouths, glyphs of warding and such. Heck, I think simple nervous, squawky birds in cages set around the ramparts would be good warning, ones with keen eyesight, the typical prey of hawks and other raptors, ones that will freak out when they spy a dragon in the distance. These, or something like them, would be mandatory I think.

4. No wooden roofs. You want slate, or maybe iron-jacketted beams with steel and stone lintels and supports. Non-flammable materials.

5. No exposed rampararts, no flat tower tops. Those picturesque crenellations would be useless and thus would not be seen in a fantasy world. All towers and walls would have roofs to protect the soldiers; probably angled roofs to deflect missiles and shed acids and liquids over the side. Towers might still have those iconic, conical roofs. With generous eaves. But domes would probably work even better. Onion domes might be better still, as they would make it difficult for a flying critter to find purchase, and the lateral bulge, so good for shedding snow during the winter would serve equally well to divert fire, noxious liquids, missiles and other dangers from falling down the wall into the windows below.

6. You want windows you can shutter in a hurry, probably steel shutters, to protect against dragon flame and hurtling fireballs. Magical protection highly recommended, including anti-magic shells, magically durable glass, large-radius circles of protection, etc. I hear gorgon's blood mixed with paint prevents teleportation.

7. Not sure the traditional walls and courtyard setup of a castle would work all that well. Perhaps something like the Colliseum with a stone dome on top, or something like modern superdome-style stadiums (stadia?) would provide more comprehensive protection to those within. Pyramids, ziggurats, maybe even giant bee-hive shapes strike me as much better suited to aerial defense. Gaudi once designed some paraboloid skyscrapers; those shapes might provide impressive integrity and defensibility. Perhaps even the Sydney Opera House might serve as a model for effective fortification design in a fantasy setting.

8. Extra-dimensional spaces, gates and portals are a major consideration. Troops storm in to find an empty castle? Ah, they forgot to look in the 4th floor linen closet which hides a door to Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion where the king's court retreated! But it's not merely a consideration for defense, but for offense too. Imagine a trojan horse, clown car, treasure chest or cooking pot with 40,000 troops streaming out. Or the ambassador's pocket has a portable hole sewn in it containing swarms of stirges, battle sprites or a giant killer ooze.

I haven't even gone through the list of D&D spells that might have implications for use in sieges and defensive architecture. I don't even know where to begin with "wish" and "miracle".

What do you think? How would D&D style magic and mystical beasts realistically affect the predominant architecture of a fantasy world?

http://www.gc.cuny.edu/images/bluprint.jpg http://www.gc.cuny.edu/images/hotel_render.jpg http://www.gc.cuny.edu/images/hotel.jpg
 

log in or register to remove this ad

S'mon

Legend
It depends on the prevalence of magic and monsters.

I've never found flying monsters to be much of an issue; they're pretty rare IMCs, and most are few in number and vulnerable enough that they can't effectively assault a serious castle. A really big dragon can take out a castle, but that is just as it should be IMO.

The big issue I saw pre-4e was with spellcasters; an 8th level 3e Wizard or Sorcerer can Fly with Improved Invisibility over a castle and rain down Fireballs. A 1e Magic-User with a Wand of Fireballs can send dozens of fireballs into the castle. 4e pretty well fixed this by limiting spell ranges and effectiveness, at 'normal' levels a Wizard can no longer make himself immune to mundane threats and doesn't have the firepower to take out a castle.

Re castle defenses - flat rooftops are vulnerable to flying attackers, so you might see more use of sloped roofs, but if flyers are rare then the ability to put masses of archers up there to rain down fire on enemy ground troops may outway the downside for the defender.

Overall, with 4e I no longer see a credibility problem for traditional castles. A lot is up to how the GM stats things - do you want to make archers behind arrow slits easy to hit, or do they have superior cover + total concealment? Do you want PCs to be able to break down the castle gate & portcullis? Are the walls easy to climb? A castle can be reasonably statted to be effectively immune to likely threats.
 

S'mon

Legend
In fact, I recently saw Prince Caspian, which had the most beautiful and creative use of gryphons I have ever seen. Their stealth gryphons dropped advance scouts and strike troops onto the castle walls and tower tops in the dead of night--allowing them to sneak into the castle to lower gates, sabotage castle defenses, even give them the opportunity to assassinate leaders without any notice or alarm sounding.

I saw it recently too - an interesting battle which showed both the strength and vulnerability of 'magical' attack (sans fireballs) on a 'mundane' castle. Flight is great for giving the element of surprise, but masses of mundane troops can still turn the castle into a killing zone for the attacker.

IMC there's an orc-occupied hill fort. The PCs could take on the orcs - if they could just get in there... I'm interested to see how long it lasts, and what plans if any the PCs come up with to deal with it. They're currently 3rd-4th level and don't seem in any hurry to take it on.
 

Plane Sailing

Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
I agree with S'mon. A lot depends upon the prevalence of flying beasties and magical items like wands, etc.

As he says, 4e basically removes the issue of magic users.

I think that a very interesting ommission from the 4e rules are ritual warfare magic - rituals which attackers can use to cast massive fireballs and rituals which defenders can use to proof their castles against said fireballs, rock to mud and other 'traditional' D&D attacks on castles.

Then it would be possible for PCs to be the commandos sent to spoil the other sides rituals in order to foil the attack/foil the defence.

Cheers
 

Nightson

First Post
To use wargaming terminology, a dragon costs a lot of points, even if it takes out a bunch of archers, if the ballista takes it down, the castle has come out ahead.

The general issue with the D&D universe is that the countermeasure aren't created. There aren't exactly a bunch os magical defensive spells aimed at castle commanders.
 

P

PaulofCthulhu

Guest
Castles vs Flying Monsters & Magic?

Castles vs Flying Monsters I wouldn't see as an insurmountable problem. The beasties can be shot down. Just have improved turrent & roof defenses with some form of missile projector, maybe some spiky or non-euclidian roofing. :)

Castles vs. Magic - is where it mainly falls down. It's why castles stopped being used in Europe as a serious form of defense after the advent of cannon.

- Unless perhaps you have a HUGE fortress, rather than the commonly percieved medieval-style castle. Those have very thick walls. There's a few on the coast of Britain.

Castles vs. Magic probably needs magic castles... certainly in the D&D worlds.
 

CharlesRyan

Adventurer
Like other posters, I agree that it totally depends on the nature of your campaign and what's going on in it.

Building a crenellated wall around a town may be useless when it's assaulted by dragons and high-level spellcasters. But is that the common threat, or are the townspeople really more worried about monthly raids by roving bands of goblins?

Defences will be optimized toward the most worrying sort of attack--and they'll be the least expensive defensive solution that fits the bill. If "exotic" sorts of defenses are commonly needed and not too difficult/expensive to create, the OP is right--that's what should be common. But if a simple crenellated wall will hold out most of the expected attackers, I think it still has a place in the campaign world.
 

UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
Threads like this remind me of the quite in Civ4 when you discover masonry "It is from their foes, not their friends, that cities learn the lesson of building high walls"
Defenses will evolve to counter the threats that present themselves and will have a sophistication to match threats based on the wealth and importance of the location.
So the unimportant border town will have a wall to keep out the goblins, the important pass fortress will have additional anti-dragon stuff and the imperial capital will have everything and with extra knobs on.

To meaningfully discuss the topic you need to be clear on the available threats. D&D (at least in 3e and 4e) never listed much in the way of defensive measures to many of the offensive magic available. 4e is in fact pretty silent on the nature of battle magic rituals entirely, all that is listed is the kind of stuff adventures would find useful.
As for beasties, well it depends on how common they are and every DM has their own ideas about that.

In short if flying beasties are common then defensive structures will be closed from the air and feature designs that make life difficult for anything to land on the roof as well as means to attack airborne threats.
If siege magic is common then counter siege wards will be common also.
If neither is a problem and the pronciple attack vector is ground troops then the fortresses will be like that of medevial europe except in earthquake zones where they will be more like Japan.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
Overall, with 4e I no longer see a credibility problem for traditional castles. A lot is up to how the GM stats things ...

I largely agree with what you say above. I'll add one note here - rituals. Most of the 4e powers aren't such a big deal for castles, but rituals open a door for castle-busting magics if the GM wants them.
 

In the face of reliable magic and monsters, WWII style bunkers and fortifications are the way to go. If they're unconventional methods, then a castle should be fine most of the time but the smart rulers would have back up plans in the event a dragon felt like attacking.
 

Remove ads

Top