How mediaeval is D&D, anyway?

Hussar said:
What setting is this?

His own personalized verison of Oerth, of course. But then, Greyhawk is meant to be open for individual DM customization, so it's no skin off our backs. ;)

In terms of actual D&D conventions? Probably not so close to RAW. D&D is exactly as medieval as the DM wants to portray it as, but by default it's much more modernized in theme than not. Medieval times were a b---h, anyway. :heh: There's a reason part of it was called the Dark Ages, after all, and not everyone wants to play a plague-bearing hobo with no coin and an early demise on the horizon. :p
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I have always tried to shoehorn D&D into the "medieval" paradigm, but Eberron has caused me to rethink that. I am starting to look at things more along the lines of "what would things be like if Rome had magic and didn't fall?".

I mean, think about it, what if Rome hadn't fallen? Where would things have gone?

The pre-medieval period (dark ages) was harsh due to the loss of an overarching government and the rise of a religious power base that feared knowledge being in the hands of anyone other than themselves (not an attack on anyone, :D ). The medieval period was actually the bridge between the "dark ages" and the Renaissance period, though many lump the "dark ages" into the medieval period.

In any case, I always use either fantasy novels or history (or both :D ) as the basis for a campaign setting because I need some sort of base for the setting. But then, I think we all do this, whether we mean to or not.
 

Hussar said:
See, to me, the problem with CSL's idea is that it is too static. There are just far too many things in D&D that can disturb that social order. Things that are pretty easily done as well.

Easy travel - flocks of hippogriffs. All it takes is one nation to start breeding hippogriffs and suddenly they become as ubiquitous as horses because they are too much of an advantage NOT to do. A small flock of 150 hippogriffs could absolutely change the face of conflict. Not to mention commerce.

For a look at what a D&D world should probably look like, I usually point to Terry Pratchett's Discworld.

I disagree on the hippogriff part. First of all, where are you going to find enough hippogriffs for them to breed? How many mistakes are you going to have to make-killing much of the available hippogriff population in the process? You'd essentially have to learn horse-breeding all over again, making all the very same mistakes that the earliest breeders made.

And besides, are hippogriffs really trainable in war? Do they panic too easily, or are they fast enough in combat? I can see armies using hippogriffs and griffons as scouts, but they'd be a pain in the you-know-where to keep fed and stabled, and it'd probably be too expensive to do over the long run as comapred to horses.

Then there's commerce-horses only have to pull a wagon of goods along, with gravity keeping it attached to the ground. Hippogriffs or other flying creatures would have to carry it below them while flying, with gravity pulling against it. Just how much of a weight would that be? How many hippogriffs would you need? How much would it cost to keep them all stabled and fed? Hippogriffs aren't that strong-they lose a step when carrying one passenger and his gear. Could they really be useful in commerce when a team of horses can do so much more? Sounds too expensive to be worth it.

Since, in my version, man will never invent the internal combustion engine, he will never be able to fly without magic. Also, since in my version you have to be 18th level to manufacture a permanent magical item, and characters of that level are as rare as a twelve-leaf clover, most merchants will simply accept the risks of travelling overland or by sea, since flying is simply impossible.

My attempt here is to show how, by altering some of the mechanics or parameters of the setting, you can easily make your campaign much more medieval, if you want. It's a simple matter of DM fiat. Maybe the RAW are more 21st century, but who says they have to be that way?
 

Since, in my version, man will never invent the internal combustion engine, he will never be able to fly without magic. Also, since in my version you have to be 18th level to manufacture a permanent magical item, and characters of that level are as rare as a twelve-leaf clover, most merchants will simply accept the risks of travelling overland or by sea, since flying is simply impossible.

Is that the same version that a 3rd level cleric can make permanent heatless light sources for free?

I was, of course, only using hippogriffs as an example. Considering how much horses have changed every culture that had them, I would think that domesticating any sort of flying creature would have a massive impact on culture. Sure, they might be expensive, but, then again, nations have money. If someone can march elephants over the Pyranees, I'm thinking that maintaining a stable of hippogriffs is within the realm of possibility.
 

Rabelais said:
...................
Governments organized on something other than familial relationships? Mostly so Check
..........

countries divided up by race seem pretty much familial relationships to me....

it uses swords, it doesn't use gunpowder - ergo medieval is the 'easiest' real world equivalent. after all it covers almost a thousand years and a huge variety of locations

but until we dig up a fossilised elf, we're going to pretty much rely on imagination and a whole variety of sources to work out a 'real' fantasy setting
 

countries divided up by race seem pretty much familial relationships to me....

That's the problem though. "Countries" The idea of nation states led by a strong central ruler is very much NOT medieval. Most "nations" in the loosest sense of the word in the medieval period didn't extend much further than you could ride in a day or two. Take a look at the political maps of the period and it isn't until well into the Renaissance that you start to see anything approaching the organization level shown in most D&D campaign settings.

And, before anyone points to Rome, I would point out two things. One, Rome isn't medieval - medieval doesn't start until the fall of Rome, and two - even in Rome the emperor's actual authority was pretty much limited to Rome itself. The governors of the provinces, so long as they paid tribute, had the run of things to themselves. ((And, yes, I realize that's a gross simplification)).
 

Hussar said:
............

And, before anyone points to Rome, I would point out two things. One, Rome isn't medieval - medieval doesn't start until the fall of Rome, and two - even in Rome the emperor's actual authority was pretty much limited to Rome itself. The governors of the provinces, so long as they paid tribute, had the run of things to themselves. ((And, yes, I realize that's a gross simplification)).

that does highlight one of the issues though. In a lot of ways the medieval period was less advanced than the roman period (organisation, freedom of movement, commerce, baths, rule of law etc), in other ways (heavy horses for instance) they had grown beyond imperial limitations. since fantasy / magic implies a divergent development of technology its almost impossible to say that this period or that represents a best fit.

Plus its location dependent - Byzantine remained imperial in name until the renaissance. The british isles / northern europe was never fully conquered and remained pretty tribal, which developed into traditional monarchy's as opposed to the more complex arrangements of the Holy roman empire and the far more civilised (at the time, no political comment intended) Islamic cultures of the east and western mediterranean plus the iberian peninsula. - all of which comes under medieval europe
 



Remove ads

Top