-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Help me out. PoL. Why don't small towns get overrun?
- Thread starter Wisdom Penalty
- Start date
There is always something else that other things need to worry about as you move up the chain of power.
Humans worry about the orcs in the hills and the gnolls in the forest. Individually, the orcs and gnolls are nuisances at best, making travel dangerous. If they grouped together...
But they hate each other (which the humans don't know). So the orcs and gnolls worry about each other and the humans.
The orcs worry about the ogres that lair in the mountains nearby: sometimes the ogres raid for orc slaves. The humand and gnolls are too far removed to really know about the ogres except maybe rumors of large mountain brutes. But none of them, the humans, gnolls, or the orcs have any clue about the trolls that hunt the ogres in the mountains; the ogres raid for orcs so the captives orcs get eaten by the trolls instead of themselves.
The gnolls are concerned about the small coven of hags that live in the forest. The hags have been a thorn in their side for generations, randomly stealing gnolls for slaves and for food. But such a superstition has been created around them, the gnolls are affraid to launch an all-out assault on the hags.
The hags get what they want from the gnolls: food and slaves. Every so often, they get a couple human strays as well. The humans, having less knowledge and interaction with the hags, have an even greater ghost-storyesque tale about the witches in the foods in league with the gnolls.
The hags do have that pesky dryad problem, though. They would love to get rid of those cursed fey and rule the forest as they feel they should, but they haven't been able to best them yet, not with the dryads controlling the small flock of owlbear.
By playing everything against each other, you can create an ecology around an area. The humans could be destroyed by any number of creatures in the world around them, but what would such destruction gain the monsters? in the end, if the orcs made an all out attack on the humans, the losses would weaken them, opening them up to destruction from the gnolls or ogres. The balance is delicate and can easy be swayed in any direction, but this is how small communities can be designed to survive in a PoL setting.
Weigh the pros and the cons of actions against each other. Everything has consequences. In the world, it is not just the human settlement vs. the roaming orc band because the orcs need to protect themselves and their own interests from the environment around them.
Humans worry about the orcs in the hills and the gnolls in the forest. Individually, the orcs and gnolls are nuisances at best, making travel dangerous. If they grouped together...
But they hate each other (which the humans don't know). So the orcs and gnolls worry about each other and the humans.
The orcs worry about the ogres that lair in the mountains nearby: sometimes the ogres raid for orc slaves. The humand and gnolls are too far removed to really know about the ogres except maybe rumors of large mountain brutes. But none of them, the humans, gnolls, or the orcs have any clue about the trolls that hunt the ogres in the mountains; the ogres raid for orcs so the captives orcs get eaten by the trolls instead of themselves.
The gnolls are concerned about the small coven of hags that live in the forest. The hags have been a thorn in their side for generations, randomly stealing gnolls for slaves and for food. But such a superstition has been created around them, the gnolls are affraid to launch an all-out assault on the hags.
The hags get what they want from the gnolls: food and slaves. Every so often, they get a couple human strays as well. The humans, having less knowledge and interaction with the hags, have an even greater ghost-storyesque tale about the witches in the foods in league with the gnolls.
The hags do have that pesky dryad problem, though. They would love to get rid of those cursed fey and rule the forest as they feel they should, but they haven't been able to best them yet, not with the dryads controlling the small flock of owlbear.
By playing everything against each other, you can create an ecology around an area. The humans could be destroyed by any number of creatures in the world around them, but what would such destruction gain the monsters? in the end, if the orcs made an all out attack on the humans, the losses would weaken them, opening them up to destruction from the gnolls or ogres. The balance is delicate and can easy be swayed in any direction, but this is how small communities can be designed to survive in a PoL setting.
Weigh the pros and the cons of actions against each other. Everything has consequences. In the world, it is not just the human settlement vs. the roaming orc band because the orcs need to protect themselves and their own interests from the environment around them.
Zaruthustran
The tingling means it’s working!
The Wild West (as presented by Hollywood) is a good example of PoL. Tiny towns struggle along as best they can, far from the military. But the surrounding monsters (in Hollywood's West, these would be bandits or "indians") are aware that even though far away, the military does in fact exist. They can't just smash town after town, or the army will roll in and obliterate them. So they walk a fine line, and antagonize just enough for a lone stranger (or a Magnificent Seven) to rise up and heroically save the day.
Actually, The Magnificent Seven (or Seven Samurai, etc.) works very well as a model of a party-based, and even class-based, adventure.
Actually, The Magnificent Seven (or Seven Samurai, etc.) works very well as a model of a party-based, and even class-based, adventure.
I think the problem is the idea people (and probably WotC) have of Points of Light is scattered footholds of civilization surrounded by OCEANS OF MONSTERS!!!!
A true PoL setting is something more along the lines of Middle Earth though. It isn't that the world is filled with evil creatures all over the country side, it is that the world is mostly barren of civilization. In this barren wilderness, adventurers occasionally encounter monsters (Bilbo and the Dwarves don't fight Trolls all the way to Rivendell, they encounter one group on the entire journey for example.)
In other words, the country side is extensive and dangerous in a PoL world, but that doesn't mean there are armies of organized monsters roaming the countryside pillaging all the small settlements.
A true PoL setting is something more along the lines of Middle Earth though. It isn't that the world is filled with evil creatures all over the country side, it is that the world is mostly barren of civilization. In this barren wilderness, adventurers occasionally encounter monsters (Bilbo and the Dwarves don't fight Trolls all the way to Rivendell, they encounter one group on the entire journey for example.)
In other words, the country side is extensive and dangerous in a PoL world, but that doesn't mean there are armies of organized monsters roaming the countryside pillaging all the small settlements.
lukelightning
First Post
Mal Malenkirk said:
But I believe the samurai movies of that era/genre were themselves influenced first by westerns; previously samurai period pieces were more about "courtley" samurai, not wandering ronin.
JDJblatherings
First Post
In real life villages had to have some means of defense or they didn't get to stay there. They had to be isolated or fortified or naturally fortified by terrain or have a nearby protector or be part of an organized larger state that could aid them. The Pol may not have the larger organized state but all the other ones can easily be there.
Gentlegamer
Adventurer
To protect settlements, there's a keep on the borderlands . . .
Professor Phobos
First Post
I think people exaggerate the goal of the "Points of Light" setting. The goal is not a Monster Apocalypse, with a horde surrounding every settlement. The goal is uncertainty.
Yes, you know there's a village up on top of that mountain. The last time anyone from your village went up there to trade, it was your father before you were born, and he lost his brother on the slopes to frostbite. If the monks are still there, maybe they can guide you to the Temple of the Wind God. Maybe they've become degenerate cannibals. Maybe they're all long dead and their bones will rise up to beg you to seek vengeance for them the moment you step into their land. Who knows?
The point of the PoL setting is that people don't know about what lurks in the darkness at night, or what is beyond the horizon. Major cities might have maps compiled by traders and explorers, but they won't be accurate or up to date except for the most frequently traveled routes and destinations. There'll be misinformation and legends about the people, places and things that lurk beyond a village or a city. "Them folks across the mountains- they heads are backwards and they do everything in reverse!"
In your standard D&D setting, the feel is very modern- there aren't a lot of blank spots on the map. Eberron is closer to the 1930s in 'feel' than it is to say, the world of Robert E. Howard's Conan.
I don't get the impression it's like a Zombie Apocalypse, with settlements constantly struggling for survival against a horde of monsters. My impression is that settlements are routinely struggling for survival against the elements, and perhaps once a decade or twice a generation faced with some challenge (monsters, raiders, etc) that threatens their survival. Which is not to say they don't get raided or monster attacked, but that these are limited in scope. The gnoll band hits one farm and moves on rather than heading for a clean sweep, either because they want to get away before alarm can be sounded or that they want there to be a community in the same place next summer and if they kill too many, the place will die out during the winter.
Plus, places can be protected unintentionally. Say Village A is located next to some difficult terrain, and on the other side is far wealthier Village B. Raiders hit B and, satiated, never get around to hitting A, which while not nearly as well off as B during good times, is essentially shielded by its existence.
Likewise, take one of the city-states at the entrance to a mountain valley. The villages down the valley enjoy its presence blocking an entrance into their region.
How a settlement survives is a great question to ask when designing and building settlements, and there are thousands of possible reasons, all good for gaming. ("Yearly sacrifice to the Dragon...", for instance, is a great one. You just need an uptight British policeman to investigate a disappearance)
Yes, you know there's a village up on top of that mountain. The last time anyone from your village went up there to trade, it was your father before you were born, and he lost his brother on the slopes to frostbite. If the monks are still there, maybe they can guide you to the Temple of the Wind God. Maybe they've become degenerate cannibals. Maybe they're all long dead and their bones will rise up to beg you to seek vengeance for them the moment you step into their land. Who knows?
The point of the PoL setting is that people don't know about what lurks in the darkness at night, or what is beyond the horizon. Major cities might have maps compiled by traders and explorers, but they won't be accurate or up to date except for the most frequently traveled routes and destinations. There'll be misinformation and legends about the people, places and things that lurk beyond a village or a city. "Them folks across the mountains- they heads are backwards and they do everything in reverse!"
In your standard D&D setting, the feel is very modern- there aren't a lot of blank spots on the map. Eberron is closer to the 1930s in 'feel' than it is to say, the world of Robert E. Howard's Conan.
I don't get the impression it's like a Zombie Apocalypse, with settlements constantly struggling for survival against a horde of monsters. My impression is that settlements are routinely struggling for survival against the elements, and perhaps once a decade or twice a generation faced with some challenge (monsters, raiders, etc) that threatens their survival. Which is not to say they don't get raided or monster attacked, but that these are limited in scope. The gnoll band hits one farm and moves on rather than heading for a clean sweep, either because they want to get away before alarm can be sounded or that they want there to be a community in the same place next summer and if they kill too many, the place will die out during the winter.
Plus, places can be protected unintentionally. Say Village A is located next to some difficult terrain, and on the other side is far wealthier Village B. Raiders hit B and, satiated, never get around to hitting A, which while not nearly as well off as B during good times, is essentially shielded by its existence.
Likewise, take one of the city-states at the entrance to a mountain valley. The villages down the valley enjoy its presence blocking an entrance into their region.
How a settlement survives is a great question to ask when designing and building settlements, and there are thousands of possible reasons, all good for gaming. ("Yearly sacrifice to the Dragon...", for instance, is a great one. You just need an uptight British policeman to investigate a disappearance)
Last edited:
Similar Threads
