D&D General Let's list/complain about things we don't like

[MGibster]

Frankly, a more medieval world would be depressing. Rampant ignorance, corrupt elites terrorizing their populace, the price of goods rapidly fluctuating, witch hunts, superstition replacing science, the Church controlling all aspects of society, rampant racism and sexism. Who would want to live in a world like that?

Europe's big witch-hunting craze started in the early modern period not the middle ages. Most historians believe the following were necessary ingredients for wide spread witch-hunting.

1. An inquisitorial justice system. (One where judges are the ones who conduct investigations, gathering evidence and question witnesses.)
2. A belief in maleficum (harmful magic).
3. A belief in diabolism (the idea that people are making deals with demons to get powers).

1 and 3 were largely absent during the middle ages. The few trials we have records of were political in nature against men accusing them of sorcery.

On another note, people who lived during the Middle Ages weren't idiots and they made several advances. The mechanical clock, three field crop rotation, eyeglasses, a harness to use horses to plow fields, etc., etc. The idea that the middle ages were just an era of ignorance and misery is just not true.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I've always reconciled that magic has done what technology did to the modern world. It has propelled civilization beyond medieval limits of thinking. Germ theory is nothing to people who have knowledge of other realms of reality and how to get to them. A small amount of druidic involvement keeps the crops from failing. Artisan Guilds enforce pricing on a national level. Etc.

Frankly, a more medieval world would be depressing. Rampant ignorance, corrupt elites terrorizing their populace, the price of goods rapidly fluctuating, witch hunts, superstition replacing science, the Church controlling all aspects of society, rampant racism and sexism. Who would want to live in a world like that?

The fantasy part is being able to change some of it.

But seriously, I think imperfect worlds are easier to tell stories with. Stories need conflict, and that's good source for it.

 

[Remathilis]

The fantasy part is being able to change some of it.

But seriously, I think imperfect worlds are easier to tell stories with. Stories need conflict, and that's good source for it.

Oh, I'm not arguing the world of D&D is Utopia. Far from. Its just easier to assume a lot of bad things are ignored so that we can get to the fun stuff. Which is why society is structured around freemen-farmers rather than slaves and serfs, coinage, and capitalism rather than barter, egalitarianism amongst genders rather than strict gender norms, and so on. The old joke in our corner is that if a setting didn't have modernistic thinking, the players would hold a revolution and institute it.

 

[Remathilis]

Europe's big witch-hunting craze started in the early modern period not the middle ages. Most historians believe the following were necessary ingredients for wide spread witch-hunting.

1. An inquisitorial justice system. (One where judges are the ones who conduct investigations, gathering evidence and question witnesses.)
2. A belief in maleficum (harmful magic).
3. A belief in diabolism (the idea that people are making deals with demons to get powers).

1 and 3 were largely absent during the middle ages. The few trials we have records of were political in nature against men accusing them of sorcery.

On another note, people who lived during the Middle Ages weren't idiots and they made several advances. The mechanical clock, three field crop rotation, eyeglasses, a harness to use horses to plow fields, etc., etc. The idea that the middle ages were just an era of ignorance and misery is just not true.

Europe had werewolf trials as early as the 15th century, which is usually where the tail end of D&D tech lives (galley ships and firearms). And while the so-called "Dark Ages" were nowhere near as dark as some historians suggest, it's still far more rudimentary than what I think most players would want to interact with.

Besides, it ruins the joke about how the more things change...

 

[Micah Sweet]

Oh, I'm not arguing the world of D&D is Utopia. Far from. Its just easier to assume a lot of bad things are ignored so that we can get to the fun stuff. Which is why society is structured around freemen-farmers rather than slaves and serfs, coinage, and capitalism rather than barter, egalitarianism amongst genders rather than strict gender norms, and so on. The old joke in our corner is that if a setting didn't have modernistic thinking, the players would hold a revolution and institute it.

I would probably be more accepting of this in D&D if the designers were more clear about that assumption in the books.

 

[Remathilis]

I would probably be more accepting of this in D&D if the designers were more clear about that assumption in the books.

Go back and time and tell Gary to be more explicit. While you are at it, tell him Studded Leather isn't a real thing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Go back and time and tell Gary to be more explicit. While you are at it, tell him Studded Leather isn't a real thing.

I would settle for the current masters of D&D covering this in the official game, especially if they want that mindset to be the default.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I would settle for the current masters of D&D covering this in the official game, especially if they want that mindset to be the default.

That would require them to care more about the incoherence in setting assumptions in D&D than any prior publisher (or frankly, a lot of fantasy game publishers) ever have.

 

[Lanefan]

Oh, I'm not arguing the world of D&D is Utopia. Far from. Its just easier to assume a lot of bad things are ignored so that we can get to the fun stuff. Which is why society is structured around freemen-farmers rather than slaves and serfs, coinage, and capitalism rather than barter, egalitarianism amongst genders rather than strict gender norms, and so on.

The official published settings have to tread a thin line (becoming thinner all the time) between providing flavour and not giving offense to anyone.

Homebrew settings don't. Mine, for example, has slaves and serfs all over the place, and coinage and (some) capitalism among the rich (including nearly all adventurers) while most common folk use barter among themselves. And racism is rampant, not between different types of Humans but between Humans and some non-Humans and between various different species of non-Humans.

Gender egalitarianism (or lack thereof, in both directions) shows up to differing extents depending which culture and-or species you look at.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That would require them to care more about the incoherence in setting assumptions in D&D than any prior publisher (or frankly, a lot of fantasy game publishers) ever have.

That's true. Nevertheless, I wish they would. I view coherence as a virtue in both game and setting design.