Before a criminal's guilt can be determined, your fantasy society has to care about justice first.
Assuming the accused was apprehended, early medieval societies used a blend of trial by ideal and compurgation to determine their innocence. Both were vulnerable to abuse and manipulation by outside forces. Trial by ideal was usually used when a crime was accused on the basis of specific facts, while compurgation was used when an accusation was precipitated by public outcry.
Trial by fire, a form of torture, required the accused to walk nine feet over red-hot plowshares or holding a burning iron. The wound would then be bandaged and re-examined three days later. If the wound was festering, the accused was guilty.
Trial by water required the accused to reach into a boiling pot of water to retrieve a stone, with the depth of the boiling water determined by the severity of the crime. Like the trial by fire, the nature of the wound would determine the accused's innocence or guilt. There was also dunking in cold water, often against supposed witches, in which the guilty was dunked in water and, if they sank, were considered innocent.
If the victim was dead, there was even cruentation, in which the accused would be required to put their hands on the dead body and, if it bled or moved, was considered evidence of guilt.
There are flaws in this system, the most obvious being that innocence is being determined by a divine force. Depending on the campaign, this might rely on the character's relationship with his patron deity, or it might be circumventable by magic.
For player characters, ordeals pose an interesting opportunity. In combat, most PCs have resources at their disposal that common villagers might not (although a champion appointed by a powerful noble could pose a challenge). Trials by fire and water can both be circumvented with spells; the assumption is that divine punishment determines guilt, so it's up to the DM to determine if this has any basis. A cleric attempting to heal someone who is guilty might find their spells don't work.
Compurgation was sometimes used by influential people to get around trials by ordeal. It was also a means of ensuring those of higher influence could easily avoid criminal charges, by relying on their reputation. The dispossessed, mentally ill, and underclass might not be able to muster the resources available to someone of higher rank. Additionally, compurgation made it possible to accuse someone of being a changeling or a witch; those who couldn't defend themselves would be susceptible to trial by ordeal instead.
Compurgation is trickier for PCs to circumvent, but with the right application of charm spells it can be overcome. Conversely, doppelgangers and shapeshifters can wreak havoc with compurgation, as a person's reputation trades on consistency and the accused could theoretically kill with impunity with enough allies willing to attest to their innocence. Unpleasant and unpopular PCs might find themselves surprisingly vulnerable to compurgation.
Your Turn: What sort of justice systems do you apply to your fantasy societies?
Hue-and-Cry
Early policing and justice systems relied on the hue-and-cry, a process by which bystanders are summoned to assist in the apprehension of a criminal who has been witnessed in the act of committing a crime. There are some obvious issues with this method, most specifically that if there are no witnesses a hue-and-cry cannot be raised, and much of the testimony against the criminal relies on the reputation of those raising the hue-and-cry in the first place.Assuming the accused was apprehended, early medieval societies used a blend of trial by ideal and compurgation to determine their innocence. Both were vulnerable to abuse and manipulation by outside forces. Trial by ideal was usually used when a crime was accused on the basis of specific facts, while compurgation was used when an accusation was precipitated by public outcry.
Trial by Ordeal
Early medieval societies used trial by ordeal, a religious practice in which guilt or innocence is determined by a painful and usually dangerous experience. This could be by combat, taking place between the two parties in dispute. Sometimes, champions were designated to fight on their behalf. Whoever lost was considered liable or guilty.Trial by fire, a form of torture, required the accused to walk nine feet over red-hot plowshares or holding a burning iron. The wound would then be bandaged and re-examined three days later. If the wound was festering, the accused was guilty.
Trial by water required the accused to reach into a boiling pot of water to retrieve a stone, with the depth of the boiling water determined by the severity of the crime. Like the trial by fire, the nature of the wound would determine the accused's innocence or guilt. There was also dunking in cold water, often against supposed witches, in which the guilty was dunked in water and, if they sank, were considered innocent.
If the victim was dead, there was even cruentation, in which the accused would be required to put their hands on the dead body and, if it bled or moved, was considered evidence of guilt.
There are flaws in this system, the most obvious being that innocence is being determined by a divine force. Depending on the campaign, this might rely on the character's relationship with his patron deity, or it might be circumventable by magic.
For player characters, ordeals pose an interesting opportunity. In combat, most PCs have resources at their disposal that common villagers might not (although a champion appointed by a powerful noble could pose a challenge). Trials by fire and water can both be circumvented with spells; the assumption is that divine punishment determines guilt, so it's up to the DM to determine if this has any basis. A cleric attempting to heal someone who is guilty might find their spells don't work.
Compurgation
Compurgation, also known as trial by oath, was a defense an accused could use to take an oath of innocence along with 12 of their friends and allies. The idea being that a person of good character wouldn't lie about committing a crime. It was not, notably, about whether or not the 12 knew if the person was guilty.Compurgation was sometimes used by influential people to get around trials by ordeal. It was also a means of ensuring those of higher influence could easily avoid criminal charges, by relying on their reputation. The dispossessed, mentally ill, and underclass might not be able to muster the resources available to someone of higher rank. Additionally, compurgation made it possible to accuse someone of being a changeling or a witch; those who couldn't defend themselves would be susceptible to trial by ordeal instead.
Compurgation is trickier for PCs to circumvent, but with the right application of charm spells it can be overcome. Conversely, doppelgangers and shapeshifters can wreak havoc with compurgation, as a person's reputation trades on consistency and the accused could theoretically kill with impunity with enough allies willing to attest to their innocence. Unpleasant and unpopular PCs might find themselves surprisingly vulnerable to compurgation.
Just the Facts, Ma'am
Early societies didn't rely on facts so much as divine intervention (trial by ordeal), personal skill (trial by combat), and a good reputation (compurgation). PCs who decide to break the law might be surprised to learn that facts matter less than their relationship with their deity and their neighbors.Your Turn: What sort of justice systems do you apply to your fantasy societies?
