PCs lack of respect for the 'caste' system of your typical fantasy society

[MasterOfHeaven]

Re: what about the church?

All this discussion of "caste" systems (something of a misnomer) in fantasy games brought another question to my mind -- what about the role of religious organizations in games? Historically, the Catholic church had a great deal of power (abbots and monk did not during medieval times, but had alot of wealth during the Renassaince). The church, though, was somewhat monolithic (before the various "heresies" and the Reformation) -- a typical D&D setting has a multitude of gods. But these priests would certainly have social power, even if not political, due to the very real magic they can wield. Given the "problems" people seem to have with class distinctions and relations (which, I would argue, isn't so great a problem as some have made it to be in this thread), how do you deal with religious power? What political/social power do churches have in these games? What limits them? Do your players respond appropriately?

The way D&D works, though, the Clerics really should have no more social clout than equal level Rogues, Wizards and Fighters. They all have equal power, it simply comes from different sources.

Who do you respect/fear more... the guy who can heal your wounds and call down the wrath of the heavens, the guy who can sneak past a sleeping Dragon and assassinate Kings, the guy who can incinerate entire city blocks and travel hundreds of miles in a moment, or the guy who can slay Dragons and Beholders? Sounds like a tossup to me.

I figure Clerics *might* get more appreciation from the local community because of their healing powers, but the Fighters might get just as much because of the fact they protect the town. And Wizards and Rogues have their own ways of generating respect/fear.

 

[nharwell]

But historically (and that seems to be the concern in this particular thread), the church did wield a great deal of political power. And if DMs are so concerned about properly refeflecting social and class division in society, how can you ignore that? An individual cleric may not have more "power" than an individual wizard or rogue, but he should have alot more political and social power due to his position as a part of the church (note: PCs might not qualify due to their "adventuring" status" -- but I think it would be difficult to have an "adventuring" cleric if you're set on forcing the game into an historical fedual mold).

 

[jdfrenzel]

It seems to me the issue is one of respect. Every culture in every time period has some mechanisms for gaining and showing respect, but I've found that most players lack any regard for it whatever. At least until they themselves are in a position of power. Then if the big titles and line-towing aren't showered upon them, watch them cry foul.

Most PCs try to deal with every problem using force, and some of the posts reflect this: "We don't have to bow to anyone because we are all Very Tough Guys." There is nothing egalitarian or meritocratic about this. Being better able to beat someone up makes one a bully or barbarian, not a respectable free-spirit.

Just because a noble sits in a keep and does what seems to be a whole lot of nothing doesn't mean he's not worthy of respect. As pointed out in earlier posts (with terrific wit-I loved the bit about marrying the ugly one), being a noble is hardly fun and games. But is killing a dragon really more respectable than running an entire nation? OK, so the king can't kill a dragon, but then again, PCs can't or aren't willing to run a nation. Does that make PCs more important to their world? Hardly! Or in a modern example, are SEALs really more respectable or important than Supreme Court Justices? Are their achievements greater? No. (Are SEALs more interesting? Hell yes.)

I deal with this with a simple rule about respect: You don't get it unless you give it. If my PCs want to give sass to worthy rulers, or start ordering around high priests, they've earned a few more enemies and they will meet them soon enough. And I'm not concerned about the details of how they show respect, just as long as they make an effort. In other words, they don't necessarily have to bow unless I've specified otherwise, but basic "Yes sir, no ma'am" is good enough.

They don't have to. But they'll probably never get "propers" from anyone else unless they do.

--- John

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

But historically (and that seems to be the concern in this particular thread), the church did wield a great deal of political power. And if DMs are so concerned about properly refeflecting social and class division in society, how can you ignore that? An individual cleric may not have more "power" than an individual wizard or rogue, but he should have alot more political and social power due to his position as a part of the church (note: PCs might not qualify due to their "adventuring" status" -- but I think it would be difficult to have an "adventuring" cleric if you're set on forcing the game into an historical fedual mold).

Ah, but historically speaking, there was only one church, the Catholic Church, in power. No other religions were allowed, and this gave the Catholic Church a great deal of it's clout. Look what happened to the power base of the Catholic Church when Martin Luther started another religion/sect. In almost every D&D world, with a few exceptions, there are quite a few churches, sometimes even dozens, and this keeps the other churches from ever gaining the type of power the Catholic Church and other such organizations historically had.

Now, if you were going to run a world with only one church, I could see Clerics having great political clout, but again the same can be said of other classes in the D&D world. Mess with a Rogue, you mess with the Thieves/Assassins Guild. Mess with a Wizard, mess with the Wizards Guild. Mess with the Fighters, mess with the Army. And so on. Anyone can have great political power if they have the backing of a powerful group.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

Now, if you were going to run a world with only one church, I could see Clerics having great political clout, but again the same can be said of other classes in the D&D world. Mess with a Rogue, you mess with the Thieves/Assassins Guild. Mess with a Wizard, mess with the Wizards Guild. Mess with the Fighters, mess with the Army. And so on. Anyone can have great political power if they have the backing of a powerful group.

Yes, but clerics have the backing of a GOD. Frankly, that trumps everything else, even if there are 50 other gods about. It doesn't mean that kings will tremble at the mere mention of the cleric's name (not at low levels anyway), but it's likely the cleric's deeds and words will be given more weight than other classes. At high levels (13th or so and especially at 18+), the cleric's social influence should rightly outstrip everyone else's. He's a direct conduit of immense god given power- he can resurrect the dead, even without the presence of a body, and create great miracles of faith. True, a wizard can create wonders with a Wish, or summon up demons, but his actions and demands will be viewed as the whims of a mortal man. For good or ill, the cleric's actions will be seen to embody the will of something greater, the divine.

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

Yes, but clerics have the backing of a GOD. Frankly, that trumps everything else, even if there are 50 other gods about. It doesn't mean that kings will tremble at the mere mention of the cleric's name (not at low levels anyway), but it's likely the cleric's deeds and words will be given more weight than other classes. At high levels (13th or so and especially at 18+), the cleric's social influence should rightly outstrip everyone else's. He's a direct conduit of immense god given power- he can resurrect the dead, even without the presence of a body, and create great miracles of faith. True, a wizard can create wonders with a Wish, or summon up demons, but his actions and demands will be viewed as the whims of a mortal man. For good or ill, the cleric's actions will be seen to embody the will of something greater, the divine.

That all depends on your point of view. I doubt I would respect someone more just because their magic came from a "god" and not from wherever Wizards get it from. In fact, I could argue that peasants and such would be more likely to respect and trust the Fighter types than the magical types because it is a form of power that is easier for them to relate to.

So what if some Cleric claims his actions embody the will of whichever god he's serving? So do the next 50 down the block, and they all serve some other god or goddess. I just don't see the reason people would have greater respect/fear for Clerics than the other classes, personally. The only reason peasants would like, and not respect, the other classes is because they provide the healing.

But like I said, the Fighters often provide the protection for the community against the marauding humanoids and other monsters, and that might garner more respect and trust than the guy who cures you of your cold. Like I said, it all depends on your point of view.

 

[Victim]

Clerics can both protect and cure. There's a reason the class has good armor proficiencies. If the community is overwhelming centered in one alignment area (as one might expect if the community is dominated by a powerful church), then forbidance can create "monster-free zones." Also, some churches will sponsor Paladins, provding a fighting arm. Fighters tend not to last too long without healing in drawn out or a sequential combats.

I think most adventurers actually would be able to run a nation, if they put there mind to it. You probably have one real smart character, and another wise one. And most players are devious cunning bastards when they feel like it. I think that adventurers don't necessarily think in terms of force, but instead in terms of the most direct path. Qiute often, that will be brute force, but it won't often enough for them to more versatile than you believe. Of course, the style is still brute force, even if it's not violent confrontation.

In any case, it seems clear that most people believe that the upper class would have inherent power in addition to positional power. Therefore, they should probably recieve respect from PCs because of what they've done in addition to that from the title (possibly nothing in the case of PCs). Adventurers might respect the Duke's skill at driving off trolls more than his title, and the other way around for normal people. However, people who don't give him any respect at all would be pretty foolish.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

That all depends on your point of view. I doubt I would respect someone more just because their magic came from a "god" and not from wherever Wizards get it from. In fact, I could argue that peasants and such would be more likely to respect and trust the Fighter types than the magical types because it is a form of power that is easier for them to relate to.

So what if some Cleric claims his actions embody the will of whichever god he's serving? So do the next 50 down the block, and they all serve some other god or goddess. I just don't see the reason people would have greater respect/fear for Clerics than the other classes, personally. The only reason peasants would like, and not respect, the other classes is because they provide the healing.

Healing is far from the "only reason" peasants would offer greater respect to priests (meaning Clerics, non-spellcasting priests and, in some areas, Druids). A priest of agriculture speaks to his god on behalf of the peasants, praying for bountiful harvest. A priest of commerce intercedes with his deity on behalf of merchants and kings, asking for a profitable trading season. Priests of the gods of death prepare bodies for burial and pray that souls receive their just reward. Tyrants curry the favor of priests of the war gods, hoping for their blessings in conquest. Finally, yes, priests provide the healing. Not just Cure Wounds spells either. A bard can do that, or a non-spellcasting healer can set your broken arm. But the Cleric can restore a peasant's arm after he loses it to the grindstone. A cleric can banish the disease ravaging the village. A Cleric can cure a peasant's blindness or deafness. Most importantly, who but the cleric can bring a peasant's child back from the dead? Or a wife? Or a husband? Or a king?

A Fighter's blade can save your village. A cleric can save your village and your eternal soul.

A rogue can assassinate the king. A cleric can restore his life or Soul Bind his spirit for all eternity.

A wizard can create undead. A cleric can make your baby breathe again.

 

[Ace]

300 men's not that many, plenty of real-world warriors have killed similar numbers over a career. If you have a game where PCs can make 15th level fairly easily, logically the King will either be15th+ level himself or at least will have several bodyguard knights of similar levels. Forgetting this is a common mistake of neophyte GMs, one I've certainly been guilty of myself (eg I once made the Palace Guard of a small state (pop 30,000) all 1st level Fighters, when they should have been more like 50 F1 25 F2 12 F3 6 F4 3 F5 2 F6 1 F8, or similar, maybe higher).

True.
But all at once?
Characters above about tenth level or so are mostly only vulnerable to equivilant monsters, increbible odds, really bad luck and similar things

A fight between A local Champion (8th level fighter) and a 15th levl PC means certain death for the champion.
IRL the power disparity is much less, even a lowly peasant can get a lucky crippling shot.

 

[Desdichado]

Ya know what's funny? Or serendipitous anyway? I took the day off work today because my wife's out of town and I needed to take the older kids to school and all that, so I rented Starship Troopers to have a mindless movie to fritter away my time. Radcak's famous speech at the beginning about brute threat of violence being the only power that had any meaning didn't really strike me until I also happened to be flipping through my DMG later and found my original receipt sitting on page 145 where it says the following:

Power can get out of hand. Power corrupts. PCs may do things that show their arrogance as they advance in power -- or their contempt for those below them. A 10th-level fighter may feel that he no longer has to treat the duke with respect since he can single-handedly defeat all the duke's soldiers. A powerful wizard might feel so unstoppable that she wantonly tosses around fireballs in the middle of town. While it's fine for PCs to enjoy their abilities as they advance in level (that's the whole point), they shouldn't be allowed to do whatever they wish. Even high-level characters shouldn't run about completely unchecked.

Players should always remember one fact: There's always someone more powerful. You should set up your world with the idea that the PCs, while special, are not unique. Other characters, many of them quite powerful, have come along before the PCs. Institutions of influence have had to deal with individuals of great power long before the PCs. The duke may have some powerful warrior or fighter on retainer as a champion for when someone gets out of line. The city constabulary probably has a rod of negation or scroll of antimagic field to deal with out-of-control wizards. The point is that NPCs with resources will be prepared for great danger. The sooner the PCs realize this, the less likely they will run amok in your campaign world.

Weird, huh?