Help me out. PoL. Why don't small towns get overrun?

[Greatwyrm]

It can safely be assumed that tax collectors will not be a common sighting in a PoL setting.

I think that depends largely on how many points there are in your setting. I may (and around here by "may" I mean "quite probably") be incorrect about the density of settlements, but didn't Europe and the Middle East saw their share of tax collectors visiting from Rome a couple thousand years ago?

 

[Surgoshan]

Yes they did, but the Roman Empire doesn't qualify as points of light. The core of the empire, until its later years of course, was nearly free of violence. Rome practiced a system of hegemony to protect itself. In a very simple sense, there were three circles. The innermost circle was the Roman empire, which was free of disorder; this was seen to by the Roman Legions, which were posted in locations most likely to suffer rebellion (Jerusalem had one, Iberia had one, I believe England had two). Surrounding the empire were client states (this is the hegemony). Those client states were capable of Romanization, but the emperors following Augustus generally followed a policy of leaving the client states intact. They served as a buffer between Rome and the non-Romanizable barbarians beyond them. Romanization, by the way, was largely determined by how urban a region was. The client state didn't attack Rome because they recognized the threat of Rome's army and saw the benefit of peaceful trade. The barbarians saw neither. Rome kept those client states healthy and stable through a system of fairly substantial gifts to their rulers. The final circle was Rome's enemies. These were barbarians to the north and south and the Parthian empire to the east.

Thus Rome and, to a lesser degree, its client states were quite not a PoL system. The empire was a heavily civilized and heavily regulated society, and largely a peaceful one.

Now, the Roman empire by the time it began to crumble was definitely a different situation. However, the argument breaks down there as well because those regions which had degenerated to PoL status no longer saw any Roman officials, and this includes tax collectors, while those that still saw tax collectors, though not perfectly safe, were still not at constant threat from barbarians or other hostile armies.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Even the Pax Romana periods of the Empire still had a reputation for brigandage, piracy, and highwaymen, though.

Tax collection could easily be a part of a PoL setting. And such two fisted accountants would likely be the canniest and most deadly individuals you would meet.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

There are several ways to do PoL, both low and high threat. But the use of Light tends I think to make people gloss over the core idea. It's a setting that actively works to prevent or destroy civilization, all civilization. The Points in question can be Light or Dark they can be from any race with any characteristics the DM chooses and still be the POL referred to. Good or Evil the vast majority of the setting is a howling monster haunted wilderness that actively threatens any attempt at making civilization work over the long term. Things are as hard on the hobgoblin city or town as the human one.

You could encounter a settlement of nearly ANY humanoid and they will be similarly beset. On the other hand the barbarians who are one of the sources of threat can be ANY humanoid just as easily. It's not about good humanoid vs. bad humanoid, it's about civilization under siege by a brutal and uncaring world full of barbarians and threats far worse.

The sleepy Shire village doesn't exist in a PoL setting, except as a good dream. The humanoids in question will have to band together in order to survive the high threat environment. No lone farmsteads, that's suicide, instead you have small farming villages with homes all clustered together inside a fortification of some sort. Maybe they're nestled against a cliff, or have a palisade. I'd suggest looking to early American settlements as models.

There were walls and blockhouses, and the fields outside were essentially abandoned at night for the safety of the walls. Unlike America there won't be lone farmsteads because there are much more dangerous forms of wildlife out there for whom a stout cabin is not a deterent. While the majority of any settlement should be 1st lvl NPCs (minions in 4e?) the leadership should be classed NPCs of somewhat higher level. Because without somesupport the settlement won't survive very long.

 

[Surgoshan]

Even the Pax Romana periods of the Empire still had a reputation for brigandage, piracy, and highwaymen, though.

Tax collection could easily be a part of a PoL setting. And such two fisted accountants would likely be the canniest and most deadly individuals you would meet.

I doubt brigandage in the empire was ever sever enough to threaten the existence of a village, though.

 

[Kurotowa]

One of the conceits of the PoL style-setting is the rise and fall of empires. It's not a static situation where civilization barely holds on. A point grows brighter and larger until it starts absorbing neighbors, a hero arises to tame the wilderness and enforce peace, an empire flourishes across all the lands. For a time. Eventually the darkness makes a return, a wave sweeping from without or a cancer growing from within. The empire crumbles, civilization retreats, and all that's left are a few bright points to seed the next cycle.

The peek of the Roman Empire would be one of those high points. There are governments to set tax laws and tax collectors to measure them and a military to enforce them and safe roads for them all to travel on and enough prosperity to generate taxes to collect.

That situation isn't the default for 4e, or at least not the one presumed in the implied setting. Go back 150 years to the height of Nerath and I'm sure you'd find all those. Right now civilization is in retreat and even the greatest city-state only controls as far as their furthest patrol. Now give a highly motived band of heroes the chance and maybe they'll set the foundation for a new empire (*cough*major campaign goal*cough*). But what's the fun in starting off that way?

 

[Ydars]

Well there can't be that many monsters, even in PoL, because they have to eat something. So the density of monsters will have to follow the same logic as that for any other large carnivore.........................not very dense.

Monsters, competing with each other for resources, will have to stake out territories and defend them, just like in nature. So although the wastelands will have monsters, they will be very spread out indeed.

I just hope WoTC designers do start to treat monsters as part of the landscape and give them some sort of ecology. Yet, this is unlikely, given that everything else is moving more towards "ease of playability" rather than making the game believable.

 

[Clawhound]

Remember that there is now the feywild and the shadowfell. Creatures can come OUT of those area into the normal world.

 

[Ydars]

Good point Clawhound, and since the Feywild and Shadowfell only touch the normal world at certain times, those creatures would only be abe to attack during very specific periods of time e.g. certain times of the year (assuming that they don't stay in the real world). If these periods are regular then the PoL would probably try and avoid going out or change their way of life during the period when these creatures can attack to take account of this.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I think that you and others are making the mistaken assumption that tax collectors require a strong empire. Yes, Rome had tax collector during the empire. However, there were massive corporations who farmed the taxes for the late Republic as well. In fact, resentment against the tax collectors was one of the major factors that helped Mithradates two wars against the Roman Republic. (And curbing the abuses of the tax farmers was considered one of the major accomplishments and evidences of Lucius Lucullus's early virtue).

That said, the Romans were hardly the only people to collect taxes. The Hebrew kings collected taxes. The kings of high middle ages Europe collected taxes. King Alfred collected taxes to pay the Danegeld. (And all of those seem much more akin to points of light settings than the Roman empire or late Republic Asia Minor). All that is necessary for tax collection is an authority structure that wants money (or wheat or rice--tax does not need to be in money) and that has a military to collect it.

In the default points of light anti-setting that people are talking about--small villages in the peripherary of the city state with perhaps a few more out on the frontier where they are likely to be overrun and perhaps a few more separated from the tribes of marauding gnolls by the richer and more powerful city state but far enough away that contact with the city state is minimal, the arrival of a tax collector-- perhaps along with a lieutenant and some sergeants looking to conscript a quota of able bodied men into the city's army--seems like a perfectly viable possibility. In fact, the less civilized the land and the less direct control is exercised over the village, the more likely it is that taxation will be infrequent and irregular.

Yes they did, but the Roman Empire doesn't qualify as points of light. The core of the empire, until its later years of course, was nearly free of violence. Rome practiced a system of hegemony to protect itself. In a very simple sense, there were three circles. The innermost circle was the Roman empire, which was free of disorder; this was seen to by the Roman Legions, which were posted in locations most likely to suffer rebellion (Jerusalem had one, Iberia had one, I believe England had two). Surrounding the empire were client states (this is the hegemony). Those client states were capable of Romanization, but the emperors following Augustus generally followed a policy of leaving the client states intact. They served as a buffer between Rome and the non-Romanizable barbarians beyond them. Romanization, by the way, was largely determined by how urban a region was. The client state didn't attack Rome because they recognized the threat of Rome's army and saw the benefit of peaceful trade. The barbarians saw neither. Rome kept those client states healthy and stable through a system of fairly substantial gifts to their rulers. The final circle was Rome's enemies. These were barbarians to the north and south and the Parthian empire to the east.

Thus Rome and, to a lesser degree, its client states were quite not a PoL system. The empire was a heavily civilized and heavily regulated society, and largely a peaceful one.

Now, the Roman empire by the time it began to crumble was definitely a different situation. However, the argument breaks down there as well because those regions which had degenerated to PoL status no longer saw any Roman officials, and this includes tax collectors, while those that still saw tax collectors, though not perfectly safe, were still not at constant threat from barbarians or other hostile armies.