gizmo writes
I'd point you in the direction of a book on social and economic history for Medieval Europe.
I've read dozens of such books--got a particular one in mind? Last week I finished a particularly interesting one I recommend to you and anyone on ENWorld, Francis Pryor's "Britain in the Middle Ages : an archaeological history." That is, btw, why I'm concerned about some of the assumptions laid forth--albeit, this is a "fantasy" world. And, of course, Gygax says in 1st edition that prices reflect a "boomtown" economy. Clearly there were historical highs and lows--the Black Plague of the mid-14th century was awful and devastating, but one of the lasting consequences was the fact that many peasants and serfs in Western Europe did better in the long run, as lack of labor force gave them better wages, and, further, Guilds & schools for the first time starting admitting Commoners into their ranks. But for the most part, even in prosperous city states like Venice, most of the Commoners were so poor that they had to subsist on *gruel*. Most Commoners only ate meat a handful of days a year, and these were on major religious feast days.
In a traditional feudal environment, a few hundred villagers would be expected to support a knight, his warhorse, a fortified manor house, the knight's heavy armor and weapons, a few other armed relatives/retainers, and some local yeoman very proficient with bows and owning quality horses. This gives a basic estimate for the surpluses available from the labor and agriculture goods of the peasants. You could assign a gp value to this surplus, and instead figure out how much of a ranger company or school of wizardry could be supported at the same level of effort.
Realistically, Gizmo, how much surplus is going to come from a Thorp of 20-80 adults? Or a Hamlet? Now I think it is realistic that small urban settlements could afford to pay for some soldiers (most of whom would be 1st lvl Warriors), pitch in to make ditches/pallisades, but a Ranger Company?! Even more absurd is the notion of supporting a School of Wizardry!?! Are you having a laugh? Much more realistic, in my view, would be that a high level Wizard wanting to "retire" and start a Wizard's school might look for a settlement her/himself, or perhaps found a settlement in some remote place, or else near a large city.
I agree with your assessment of $10=1sp to be as good as anything, better than a quarter.
In fact, I own a one ounce silver coin and experts tell me that the average value is in fact around $10, depending on the Silver Futures Market. These are the same folks who tell me that a similar gold coin is around $600-700 in today's market.
Modern production methods, labor laws, and such make it difficult to do too many comparisons though. I'm not surprised that people who regularly play DnD would think a sp is equivalent to $.25 though
Just look at the relative value of the British Pound through history...anyhow, one issue we've touched on is the relative value of silver vs. gold, and I understand that there have been times in history (especially before the discovery of the New World) when the value was closer to 10:1.
Historical records are available from peasants who had their goods confiscated by lords, and from those you can get a general idea of the kinds of goods that people owned at the time. Based on that, I'd say 200-300 gp per peasant household (and that's 5 peasants including women and children) would be a very high figure.
Given the fact that most of these people subsisted daily on gruel? That certainly makes sense to me. Why sit on 200-300 gp and not raise chickens, for example? Even if you were a peasant living in a city, you could raise chickens, as happens throughout the present day real world.
It would probably be easiest to divide peasants into their historical classes, generalized as cottar, half-villein, villein, and farmer/yeoman and asssign weapons, armor, and wealth accordingly. Only the upper 10% would have anything beyond a club, spear, or cheap sword (equiv. to DnD spear) for armaments.
Right, and of course one should probably apply the same sort of stratification to the middle and upper classes as well. A Knight or a Lord does not a Baron, Duke or Count make. For the middle class, if one was admitted into a more prestigious Guild (like the Mercers/Tapestry makers, or the Goldsmiths Guild), one is practically a member of the Upper Class. My understanding is Geoffrey Chaucer's coming from a Wine-Seller's family was one reason he was able to land some prestigious posts in English government, certainly not something he would likely have landed if his father had been a Fowler, Tinker or Scabbard maker.
In a fantasy setting, there is also the possiblity of friendly monsters in the area. Foo lions, brownies, gold dragons in invisible castles, watchful ki-rin in the clouds, etc. are all possible defenders of peasant communities.
Not bloody likely. I've noticed that you repeatedly side-step my point that most of the people in a Kingdom live in small urban settlements, and in a particularly large one, there will literally be thousands of Thorps, Hamlets and Villages. Albeit, many will be clustered near larger settlements, close to rivers, the ocean, roads and other conduits of transportation. But very many will be relatively isolated. Do you think it realistic that a large Kingdom will have droves of schools of Druids, Wizards, Clerics, Monks, Rangers, etc. and benevolent monsters, to the order of hundreds of these, all because of a very unlikely attack within the relatively peaceful interior of a Kingdom? Perhaps they are there to also make sure there's no one running games of three-card Monty, ensnaring uncunning peasants in dodgy pyramid schemes, standing on every village street corner selling fake gold Rolex sundials that stop working once money changes hands?
This is especially appropriate if the villagers are subject to depradations by roving bands of evil high-level wizards.
I was thinking more along the lines of bands of 5th-8th lvl Evil Adventurers. There's much better pickings for evil high-level wizards elsewhere.