How on Earth do you have a tightly controlled D&D world with normal magic (Long)

[Ace]

2) Adventurer does not exist as a profession, and societies with lots of individual freedom are quite rare. Governments do not tolerate armed bands of vigilante groups; noble rank is required to own a sword, licenses are required to transport weapons between jurisdictions, persons found on a lord's property (most of the landscape) with weapons without papers will be assumed to be bandits. An average person will not have heard the term adventurer. If you explained it to them they'd scoff and say, "Oh, you mean you are a blood soaking mercenary. Be off with you." The only case where you would here the term would be a mercenary joking about himself; like a pirate calling himself a 'gentleman of fortune'.

This quote of Celebrim's brought an interesting question to my mind

In a world with Normal D&D magic fuedalism and other primitive authoritarian systems of government really shouldn't exist IMO

Lets say you have a basic fuedal state (a protection racket really) how would you maintain it in the face of Clerics, Sorcerers, Bards and Druids

Ok you can regulate Wizards (spellbooks suck) but the other classes are well above the authority of any fuedal system

Lets take Clerics as an example, these guys get their power directly from Gods.
Unless the gods are either oblivious or don't care do you really think that any good being would approve of a system as exploitive as Feudalism.? I don't
Remember Clerics have spells like this (from the SRD)

Commune

Divination
Level: Clr 5
Components: V, S, M, DF, XP
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: Personal
Target: The character
Duration: 1 round/level

The character can contact the character's deity—or agents thereof—and ask questions that can be answered by a simple yes or no. (A cleric of no particular deity contacts a philosophically allied deity.) The character are allowed one such question per caster level. The answers given are correct within the limits of the entity’s knowledge. "Unclear" is a legitimate answer, because powerful beings of the Outer Planes are not necessarily omniscient. In cases where a one-word answer would be misleading or contrary to the deity’s interests, the DM should give a short phrase (five words or less) as an answer instead. The spell, at best, provides information to aid character decisions. The entities contacted structure their answers to further their own purposes. If the character doesn't focus on the conversation, discusses the answers at length with other parties, or leaves to undertake another task, the spell ends.

XP Cost: 100 XP.


Ask Questions like "Is this system of governence the best one to bring my flock closer to you?"

or "Is it right to disarm people"

I don't know about you but I don't want a god mad at me. Also the simple expedient of refusing to heal memebers of the noble family in the line of sucession is very effective

"Sorry your majesty but your acts offend my god I will not heal you or your kin"

Try and hold him and enjoy the benfits of a contagion spell unleashed on your Knights (or their might steeds hehehehe)

I suspose you can Inqusistion all the Sorcerers and Bards (relying on your Wizards to protect you) but if you do you you had better get them all.

People want revenge and a high level Sorcerer has access to unfathomable power. Lets say the Sorcerer whos mentor you killed wants revenge, he is about umm 12th level

He can probably do a number of the following

Convince you subjects to kill you with a few words
Deflect Arrows
Deflect Blows
Turn into a monster that can kill your knights
Burn the fields
Move anywhere he wants
Ruin the weather
KIll many of your warrior with a word
Summon things to fight for him
Bore a tunnel through any mountain

Your warrior haven't got a chance without magic of his owen

If you want scary

Imagine an epic level Sorcerer with a lightly modified Rain of Fire. Everything in a 2 mile radius is destroyed within an hour (1 pt of dmage per 6 seconds, normal people die in 30 seconds)

This guy can appear anywhere he wants, hit whatever he wants. You might get him eventually (assuming you can find him in his scry guarded lair) but not before he destroys, well everything

Druid and to a lesser degree Rangers.. Well if they don't like you,
well here is simple tactic available to a 3rd level druid or an 4th level ranger

"Speak with Animal"

Hey Pigs, did you ever wonder what happened to all your brothers and sisters? Well the humans here pin them , fatten them and slaughter them. Just thought you would like to know. I will leave they gate open on my way out...

When the swineherd comes into the woods -- He is eaten by a Grue

Stealing the sheep or pigs from a bunch of villages would decimate a fuedal economy

and if there are systems of which the gods do not approve, well they won't stand long....


I rather imagine this scene

King Henrik the Cruel glanced at the sheaf of paper before him "Vizier what is this report I here of uprisings"

"Well your majesty, there is famine in 2/3 of the villages"

"What?! How can this be"

THe Vizier swallowed, he had no desire to joing his predecessor in a crows cage "A band of so called adventurers milord, outlaws really

The king was surprisingly calm "Explain"

"Remeber that thief you had killed last year, the one they called Kilbrick Knifeshadow"

THe king though a moment "I think so"

"Well they want revenge and they won't settle until you and every noble is dead. They have attacked the very fabric of the lands, released animals -- burned crops --- attacked knights"

""Can't you stop them"

"My Wizards are trying Majesty but there are limits. We lack the resources to heal the men properly. After the incident with the Clerics, well...."

JMO but I really doubt people who can kill with a word, contact other planes and talk to gods will be easily controlled. Given the number of uprisings in the real middle ages I dsuspect all high level PC's would have to be soopted into the society (hope they aren't Chaotic in aligment) or destroed to make any authoritarian state work

As horrible to contemplate as it is high level character are super empowered individuals. If they decide to use terror tactics (very very common throught history" they can inflict destruction on a massive level. Think of them (in modern parlance) as super empowered individuals

A party of 4 Characters Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer and Bard is unstopable by any lesser force. Throw in a couple of more maybe a Druid and something else and you kingdom is in for trouble

In a world where people like this exist other systems would work better Manocracy (governmnet by mages) Imperial States (if the government trains spell casters) Theocracy (obviuosly and likely a rather common form of government) Mind Control State or maybe even a Republic I don't think dictatorships, heridatary aristicracys fuedalism probably would work

 

[Oni]

This of course assumes that powerful adventurer types haven't assumed roles of power in the existing governments, don't have an interest in maintaining the status quo. A party of renegade adventurers can only flee so long from a similarly powered group with the power of a government behind them.

 

[Fenes 2]

I think that a great many of the "powerful" adventurer are not brought up with modern ideas of democracy and equality, but raised in that feudal society - they may believe in a divine right to rule, in the good king etc.
Robin Hood, f.e., was according to legend not fighting against the system, but for the rightful king. Those rogue adventurers mentioned (avenging a criminal by slaughtering the populace, causing famine etc.!) may be the target of a great many groups of other adventurers - heck, that scenario is one of the standard D&D adventures, beat the bad guys.
Then there are the churches, and the gods, who are either not concerned with democracy, or actively supporting the status quo. I doubt they will be outnumbered by the "chaotic churches" even if only for better organisation.

And then you are stuck with the fact that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. The system, so to speak, has more ressources, and can field sorcerers, bards etc. as well - and it pays better, gives better recognition and other perks - mainly by working for the king you might earn yourself a title or two in the long run by smacking down dangerous rebels. IMC, I don't have standard magic levels, but if I had you could bet that the knights would be decked out in magic armor and other gear, and trained to perfection - nothing to sneeze at, and numbering at least a handful of former adventurers among them, and that the royal wizards would be a force to be reckoned with.

As another option, Kalamar offers a sort of divine protection for rightful lords, from Counts up to the Emperor - with DR and other valuable perks.

 

[Ace]

This of course assumes that powerful adventurer types haven't assumed roles of power in the existing governments, don't have an interest in maintaining the status quo. A party of renegade adventurers can only flee so long from a similarly powered group with the power of a government behind them.

Of course. Thats why I mentioned co-opting them.

It may not be possible for a gang of six high level PC's to defeat an entire socity but of your society is basically"Midieval England with Wizards" and the effect the wizards have isn't factored in well...

The PC's can and will bring that society to its knees.

Medieval kings are pretty poor by comparson to D&D types and if you use a realistic economy that doesn't factor in magic there won't be many magic items.

Even if you use a level based defense bonus spell casters are at a huge advantage.

Here is a nasty trick, Planar Bind a nasty of you chouice and make this deal

"I want you to kill the royal family of xyz country in as subtle a manner as possible. In exchange you can take any of the following -- fill in with nomenclatura- and do whatever you want with them. You may not kill anyone else unless they attack you and you may not let your summoned buddies do that either"

Most nasties would activly enjoy the chaos and if you are somewhat scrupluous use Slaad instead of Ta'naari just remember to add
"anyone you or your buddies infect must be taken back to limbo with you whent he task is done"

You have just ruined the royal families quality of life

No more hunting in the woods, no playing outside the garden -- Basically they spend the rest of thier lives in fear

Societies that have a well integrated magical portion can handle it but I doubt those cultures are feudal

I will explain in another post..

 

[Frostmarrow]

Here is a nasty trick, Planar Bind a nasty of you chouice and make this deal

"I want you to kill the royal family of xyz country in as subtle a manner as possible. In exchange you can take any of the following -- fill in with nomenclatura- and do whatever you want with them. You may not kill anyone else unless they attack you and you may not let your summoned buddies do that either"

Most nasties would activly enjoy the chaos and if you are somewhat scrupluous use Slaad instead of Ta'naari just remember to add
"anyone you or your buddies infect must be taken back to limbo with you whent he task is done"

You have just ruined the royal families quality of life

No more hunting in the woods, no playing outside the garden -- Basically they spend the rest of thier lives in fear

Schemes like these are great adventure plots. Stop the slaad!

 

[Fenes 2]

Yup. Seems to me that Ace's scenario only works if there are nor adventurers other than the PCs around to foil those evil plots.

 

[Celtavian]

I understand a little bit where you are coming from. It would be very difficult if not impossible to have a feudal society based on warlords or a warrior noble class.

But, what if the noble class is the priests and wizards? In a polytheistic world, there are many different types of gods, not all of them good. They could easily vie for power with the gods of goodness, because in a polytheistic world there is no singular good god whose power is above all.

It would simply be a better life to live amongst the followers of a good god, but that does not mean that the people living under the rule of an evil tyrant god would not think that was the only way to live.

Look at the modern world. People suffer most often because they know no better way to live, not because they desire suffering. One cannnot for one instance presume that things would be otherwise were magic to exist as it does in D&D.

A truly gifted priest or user of magic is not common. There really wouldn't be that many people vying for power, and the majority most likely would not be good.

I really don't see how your argument holds any water. It would be quite easy to build a feudalistic system of government in a world with magic. Very easy indeed.

 

[Gez]

First, there's a question of mindset. I don't know about you, but I have trouble imagining a cleric of a deity of war, magic or nature (the three types of deities prevalent in a D&D world) bothering his deity with discussions on what is the best political system for the greater good. It's just an idea they won't have.

Karl Marx hadn't written his Manifesto during a period of stable feudalism, but after huge society changes coming from industrial revolution. Same thing here, as long as something seems to work OK, why try to fix it ? Why even have the idea to fix it ?

In other words, they may fight against a cruel/unfair/oppressive king; but they won't have the idea of fighting against the system of royalty.

Furthermore, it's true high level characters (level 10+) may have devastating effects. But they'll be quite numerous. In a fantasy world, kings, hierophants, archmages, and guildboss are usually very high-level also -- and they usually are on the side of the status-quo. Rogue adventurers wanting to upset the state of things will have equally powerful heroes on their back. See Sep's excellent story hour (especially the Heretic of Wyre chapters 1 & 2) for an illustration of that.

The Birthright setting was also a good illustration of how magic and feudalism blend well.

Finally, magic -- which's the problem here, as always, damn magic, it ain't working like normal reality -- lend itself very well to nobility indeed. As an anecdote, one of my PC is an aristocrat/sorcerer. Her sorcerous bloodline is her "divine right" to rule. And her idea of how things must be are very feodal (with her on the top of the pyramid, of course). Sure, that may be seen as a sort of magogracy, but it's magocratic only because the royal family has a sorcerous bloodline.

 

[jgbrowning]

Assuming that magic has developed concurrently with everything else, all spellcasters would be assimilated into the current feudal structure.

The reason why warriors were rulers was because they were powerful. wizards sorcs etc would rule as well for the same reason. I'll write more later.


joe b.

 

[Vaxalon]

I have heard of gameworlds where there is a powerful adventuring party at the top of every power pyramid.