Historians! Gamers! Armchair Gamer Historians! Gather for the arcane revolution!

[Herremann the Wise]

Hi everyone,

Are we assuming that both sides have access to the same magic?

It would be very interesting if there was a difference, however subtle. It would affect the way how each culture viewed the magic as well as turn upside the traditional power structures within each culture.
Even the most simple spells that are taken for granted in game have the most amazing impact on how things are viewed. Cure and Remove Disease Spells in particular are truly mighty magics.
If one side had access to these and the other did not, the change in balance would be fascinating to consider in terms of all the ramifications.

By the way, expeditious retreat press did an amazing book in this regard, looking at how the simplest magics would have the most dramatic influence. This was more aimed at generic world building though rather than conflict.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[WmRAllen67]

You should pick a different war. Both sides of this conflict view magic as a tool of the devil and would need to be desperate to even consider it.

Well, there's your first change right there...

To use magic at the level of control/ "technology" in the D&D rules, it would have had to have been around for a while... and society would have adapted to it. Those who can use the wizardly version would have to be literate, and educated, and have the free time to study (not having to grub around for the days' bread, &c &c). In short, for the Western Europeans, it would be the Church that controls magic...

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"? Well, that's those folks that do magic that aren't in the church (it's all about politics and control...)

For the Moslems? Probably the same thing-- and since the Abbasids are in power, there will be Universities in Baghdad as well. Perhaps the political upheavals that allowed the Crusaders their early successes had as much to do with "Who controls magic" as "Who is the legitimate successor to the Prophet?"

 

[xazil]

A big thing that has always bothered me about DnD at mid to high levels is how destructive magic is versus buildings. With DnD magic around would people even build something like a castle? With the cost of building versus easy penetration/destruction large fortifications seem to be a loosing deal past a certain level of size. Small keeps to keep out the raiding orcs would work, but the outlay for a massive castle can be negated by an enemy nation hiring mage/cleric(s) to destroy it would mean that the king should be looking elsewhere for a home.

One solution is to give easy access to a building material that prevents magic affecting it or passing through it. Possibly big, long lasting epic spells to counter most of the common traps, the court wizards job being to "maintain the defenses". Big magic dead areas would also work, although if the enemy sent in troops with DR there could be trouble for you there.

Of course since castles are such staple of fantasy that this aspect tends to get totally handwaved to make the setting match imagination.

/soapbox

 

[Khayman]

Some social notes... if you want to maintain the appearance of versimilitude, then magic shouldn't be available to the parish priest, maybe not even to his bishop. [yes, this has implications for character generation]

Spellcasting might become concentrated in the hands of organizations, either secular or holy, though the extreme social prejudice against magic would likely relegate it to a shadowy role. Picture an elite corps of Vatican magic-busters along the lines of the purported 'papal assassins' of the Order of the Swan (mid 15th century) or the truth-supressing Revelare Nuncius (from Kim Eastland's article in The Unspeakable Oath). But hey, no one says that destroying magic is the only way to win wars...

On the side of the Christians, knightly and monastic orders might actually command powerful forces, in turn engendering suspicion and contempt from the Church and Nobility. Their rites of secrecy become understandable as a means to protect themselves, just as their layers of ritual are designed to exclude outsiders. On the Muslim side, the Ismailis are a logical choice to become entangled with spellcasters --- teleporting an assassin into a king's bedchamber might seriously affect a war --- though their infamy and prowess are likely due to the imagination of Crusaders. Some esoteric mystical sects with Sufi leanings might develop the knowledge independently, with consequences depending on with whom they are in contact.

Things depend on how widespread spellcasting is. For example, at this point in time Jewish mysticism has a long tradition, as does Gnosticism and Hermeticism and a handful of other -isms. This is in addition to the Catholic, Shia, and Sunni 'mainstreams'. So who has access to magic? Depending on who they are, the magic they control would most likely vary --- Divination among post-Persian mystics, Conjuration among diabolists, Evocation among some demented students of the Zoroastrians, and so forth.

 

[mythusmage]

Nota Bene: Was responding to WmRAllen67's post above. But a couple of folks just had to respond before I could (dang it). But anyway...

Muchly agree. In a fantasy version of the 11th and 12th century CE world magic would be a long known quantity. Even 9th level spells would be around.

I can see the Church with wizardly orders. The Cistercians for example. While the Franciscans might be a druidical order.

That's the thing to note about the pre-Black Death Church. It was remarkably tolerant, exhibiting a liberality that would surprise many today. The Roman Catholic Church's problem with people like the Cathars and Albigensians lay more in their refusal to accept the authority of the Church than anything else.

At the same time certain schools would be anathema. Necromancy for example, since it interferes with God's will and disturbs one's eternal rest. Charm Person on the other hand could be a huge bone of contention if used in the course of proselytization. Is it a valid conversion if done under magical compulsion?

For extra fun add in non-human races. Can orcs be saved? Do elves have souls? Do God's prohibitions on Caine extend to his descendents? Are they, instead, free to become good Christians if given the opportunity?

How would it shape the Church if at some time an elf became Pope? What if a Pope, deliberately or accidentally, became a lich?

With Raise Dead etc. available, what about inheritence? How would Teleport et al. impact trade and transportation? How would Commune affect 12th century attitudes towards personal hygiene and public sanitation? Would Purify Food and Water eliminate epidemics? Combined with Cure Disease?

For that matter, what with all that communication, research, and transportation magic lying about, when would Western Europe discover the New World? Would Richard Cour de Leon even go on crusade, or be off hunting the Grail in North America?

This has possibilities.

593 BC: Solon of Athens makes the first known visit to the New World.

39 AD: Gaulish merchants establish trading posts in the east coast of what we call the United States. By 56 AD the Roman government has established an official presence in in Nova Italia.

496 AD: Artius of Brittannica reestablishes contact with the New World for the first time since the fall of Rome.

1072: A mixed bag of dispossed Saxon nobles, plus Norman younger sons sets sail to bring Christianity and civilization to the New World.

1099: Mohican knights and Seneca friars are among the crusaders who take service with the Kingdom of Jerusalem.

Correct as needed and expend as desired.

 

[Khayman]

The question is whether or not magic has been in use for a long time. If so, it affects history: the Crusades probably wouldn't have occurred, at least not as they did. The existence of magic --- real, tangible magic --- would have direct results on the social and technological development of Europe.

Ars Magica achieved a near-history of Earth by means of its mechanic, but more importantly through an explicit policy of the Order of Hermes to keep the mundanes off its tail. There were limits to the magic available to mundanes, and the existence of the Order was kept in the shadows. Plus they policed their own. Any magus got out of line, and they had a wizard's war to contend with.

 

[Khayman]

For that matter, what with all that communication, research, and transportation magic lying about, when would Western Europe discover the New World? Would Richard Cour de Leon even go on crusade, or be off hunting the Grail in North America?

This has possibilities.

Cool --- ever read The Years of Rice and Salt by Kim Stanley Robinson?

[For anyone that hasn't read it, it features a non-magical variant history that diverges from our own during the Great Plague. Basically, instead of 1/3 of Europe biting it, 95% of Christendom gets wiped out.]

 

[mythusmage]

Some social notes... if you want to maintain the appearance of versimilitude, then magic shouldn't be available to the parish priest, maybe not even to his bishop. [yes, this has implications for character generation]

(snip)

Not to be mean or anything, but this is based on a false assumption. Namely, that in a world where magic has been long known, long used, and long a part of life it would be viewed as magic was historically. Not so. If anything low level magic would be a part of daily life, and the higher level castings and their workings known of by most.

Most importantly, the Powers-That-Be would find ways to concentrate magical power in their hands, using it much as they would any other tool.

Now consider who can learn to cast spells. Unless I've missed something, the majority of people can learn to use low level magic at the very least, If given the opportunity.

Given the starting conditions in D&D in a fully realized setting the great majority of spells, divine and arcane, would have no adventuring use whatsoever. I can see Commoners and Experts having small household or occupational magics to help in business or daily life.

Lots of potential here.

 

[mythusmage]

The question is whether or not magic has been in use for a long time. If so, it affects history: the Crusades probably wouldn't have occurred, at least not as they did. The existence of magic --- real, tangible magic --- would have direct results on the social and technological development of Europe.

Ars Magica achieved a near-history of Earth by means of its mechanic, but more importantly through an explicit policy of the Order of Hermes to keep the mundanes off its tail. There were limits to the magic available to mundanes, and the existence of the Order was kept in the shadows. Plus they policed their own. Any magus got out of line, and they had a wizard's war to contend with.

AM does handle the matter differently than D&D, leading to a more real world like situation. However, if using D&D with one's fantasy 12th century things are going to be different. Possibly very different.

It all comes down to availability. The more readily available a thing is the more it will be taken for granted. It's one thing when it's a single Sleep cast a thousand years ago in a land a thousand miles away. It's quite another when Sleep is used by chirurgeons to help insomniacs in your home town. Hate to tell the "Magic Has to be Rare and Wondrous" crowd this, but magic will take the form the world allows it. D&D as written allows for mundane magic.

BTW, I started The Years of Rice and Salt but got side-tracked. Right now I'm learning a skill-based system for an "Historical Fantasy Medieval Roleplaying Game". My adventures as a 12th century Palestinian Christian teamster are supposed to start this Friday. The starting year is 1120 AD. This thread is pure coincidence.

 

[Khayman]

(snip)

Not to be mean or anything, but this is based on a false assumption. Namely, that in a world where magic has been long known, long used, and long a part of life it would be viewed as magic was historically. Not so. If anything low level magic would be a part of daily life, and the higher level castings and their workings known of by most.

Not being mean at all...
I wasn't aware that the magic had been in use for a long time. My reasoning is based simply on keeping the history as close as possible to that point.
Obviously, the further back in time the divergence, the greater the possibilities for manipulating the setting.

So, if the Romans had existed in a magical (D&D) environment, then their great wars in Germania might be fought against Goblinkind (with the human tribes aiding, abetting, or ignoring things as much as they can). Hadrian's Wall could have been augmented with wards and thus literally kept the Picts imprisoned in the north for a thousand years. The plagues which decimated the native peoples of the Americas might have been averted (if an expedition had a few clerics, or if the crews were pretty much disease-free already) or perhaps caused by unscrupulous sorts looking to grab land or gold.

[For that matter, the Aztecs might have run out of sacrifices and built great ships and invaded Europe...]

On the other hand, if magic was new or limited prior to the time in question, then history would be basically the same up to that point.

[II] On the broader topic of social equality, the estate system of feudal Europe (or the citizen system of Rome) would be hard-pressed to deal with commoners wielding spells. Suddenly peasant concerns become a whole lot more pressing. Does the local society then respond by restricting who can cast spells (i.e., no slaves, no women, no non-Christians, no non-Muslims) or by modifying its social structure? Probably a bit of both.

Anyway, some airy-fairy concerns. Too much anthropology for my fevered brain.