Should Castles Even Exist?

[clark411]

If we go by the numbers, roughly 94-97% of the population are NPC classed, meaning just a percentage of as little at 3% of the world's civilized population are wizards or clerics. Sure, that little percentage often has more ability to cause change then the rest of the world put together, but that percentage is split... Usually in the favor of the monarchs who build the castles.

However, defending it isn't as productive as making a list of what a monarch with a monarch's resources would do to help a castle.. maybe renaming the thread "1001 ways to make a better DND Castle" would provide some more ideas.

 

[Umbran]

It is "expensive" (mostly in an attrition kind of way) to get PC race into the high levels, but once there, they are ridiculously cheap for what they can accomplish and entirely self-sufficient.

If they are stupid, yes, they are cheap. But the DMG notes that NPCs aren't just stat blocks that cast spells for gold. They are people. Despite what the DMG says about the cost of spellcasting, the negotiations are more likely to go something like this -

King: I want you to lay waste to my enemy's capitol city!
Wizard: Yes, I can do that.
King: Good! How much will it cost me?
Wizard: Half your kingdom.
King: What?!?!
Wizard: Better yet, give me half your kingdom, or I'll lay waste to your captiol city...

This is part of the "difficult to use" portion of HL characters as weapons. The leader who uses them is putting himself in danger of using a weapon that will very likely turn on him. When a cannon goes awry, it kills it's crew. When the HL caster goes awry, he takes the throne...

A single HL wizard flying high above a city, at night, under the cover of improved invis. and mind blank could rain unholy terror that would decimate a city with impunity.

I think your HL casters need to look up the definition of the word "impunity". Yes, he'll be hard to reach in the middle of the fight. But a character with an 18 Intelligence or Wisdom will take a slightly longer view.

Let us say that a caster performs such a service. He'll destroy the city, but he won't touch the HL casters that live there. This effectively permanently costs him an 8th level spell slot, as he must now cast Mind Blank on himself every day for the rest of his life if he wishes to avoid retribution. [Note on costs- if the caster expects to live another 20 years beyond this fight, at 1240gp per casting, this adds about 9 million GP to the cost of the service.] And that's no guarantee. Mind Blank won't protect someone finding out who did it and where they live by the mundane expeidient of spreading around gold and asking questions.

This is not to mention the risk to the leader who employs such tactics - you think his enemies won't have it in for him, right quick? What's the point of destroying your enemy's capitol when you know that means some magical assassin will come along and kill you and your entire bloodline?

...I could easily see a world in ruins after years and years of HL wars involving PC races, powerful, intelligent monsters and spawn-creating undead.

Go watch the movie "War Games". The fact that you can imagine it is exactly why it won't happen. In the real world we already figured this one out with nuclear weapons, and the majority of us don't have the Int or Wis of a high level caster. It's obvious that nobody wins such a conflict, so you don't start it. There's darned little point to destroying your enemies or taking over the world if you have to turn the world into a wasteland to do it.

Okay, so the spawning undead might (and that's only a might) still want to destroy the world, but they have the power of pretty much every other intelligent creature in the world against them, and that seems like a reasonable balance.

 

[tzor]

I think that castles will always exist whatever the relative level of magic in the campaign world. How that castle will look, and even what that castle is called will change significantly however.

Someone mentioned that the canon was the death of the castle. Actually the canon caused the castle to evolve. The square castle evolved to a lower five sided structure which would eventually become known as a "fort." These stone structures were common into the early 20th century.

A more common strucutre is the keep. Smaller than a castle, this fortification can serve as a early warning defense system around the outter borders. Attackers have to decide on attacking the keep or going around the keep. Doing the former will cause the enemy to know of your invasion, and it will waste some time, even with the earthquake causing clerics on your side. Doing the latter will risk the potential of having your forces flanked as reinformcements are teleported to the keep's location.

In fact, magic helps the castle more than it hurts it. When you can open a portal to the plane of water, and when clerics can conjure food from the air, who cares if you are being seiged? High magic is highly beneficial to gurrelia war tactics, so unless you are beloved in the lands you are in, your forces will be constantly bothered until they loose all morale.

The castle becomes more symbolic than functional, a location for diplomacy rather than for defense. Castles evolve to mannor houses where the more complex warfare between governments, churches and guilds takes place. More complex defenses are still needed for prisons, however, and these structures still look like castles or keeps. (The tower of London and the Bastille are two examples of such prisons.)

Still, troops need roofs over their heads that will at least allow them to get a good night sleep. The basic elements of the castle will still be there. The castle will evolve to meet the needs of the campaign world but as long as there is a desire for man to make something big huge and impressive, there will always be castles.

 

[Darkness]

Let us say that a caster performs such a service. He'll destroy the city, but he won't touch the HL casters that live there. This effectively permanently costs him an 8th level spell slot, as he must now cast Mind Blank on himself every day for the rest of his life if he wishes to avoid retribution. [Note on costs- if the caster expects to live another 20 years beyond this fight, at 1240gp per casting, this adds about 9 million GP to the cost of the service.]

LMAO!

Seriously, though, that's not the most cost-effective way to protect the caster.

Instead, get an amulet of proof against detection and location (35,000 gp) for constant protection.

'course, a caster level of 8 might not be enough and one with a higher caster level would cost proportionally more.
And the caster might insist on an item that doesn't take up a magic item slot.
But in any case, say, 100,000-200,000 gp will do the trick.

Edit: Modify these numbers accordingly if the caster himself needs to create the item (i.e., the cost in materials is only half of the market price, but he'll also want to be compensated for his time and the xp he needs to spend.)

 

[Darkness]

High magic is highly beneficial to gurrelia war tactics, so unless you are beloved in the lands you are in, your forces will be constantly bothered until they loose all morale.

Right. Of course, high magic is also highly beneficial to anti-guerrilla tactics.


Case in point:

Augury (Clr2; 25 gp in materials) - lets you know in advance whether your plan has a good chance of success, whether you should follow the enemy into the forest, and so on. (Guerillas can also put this spell to good use, of course.)
Alarm (Wiz1) - warns you if anyone enters the warded area.


So, again, it all depends on which side (if any) has spellcasting superiority.

 

[Storminator]

I think it depends on the ratio of spellcasters with 3rd level spells to mundane soldiery. A castle siege/assault without fly, fireball etc looks a lot like a regular medieval siege/assault - I ran one recently for 4th level PCs and the attempts to storm the breach, scale the walls etc were all quite lifelike. A previous castle assault with 2 9th-level Monk PCs accompanying a hobgoblin horde attacking a small castle also worked out quite similar to what I'd expect IRL, apart from the relative ease with which the monks got onto the walls.

If every force of 100 soldiers has a 5th level Wizard (with access to Fly & Fireball) or better, I agree that large stone castles may not be worth the effort. A smaller wall or wooden palisade is probably still worth it to keep the grunts out, though. A lot depends on the defenders - IRL a medium-size castle might have been defended by only 30 men-at-arms, but they can be high-quality troops - in D&D terms, say 20 low-to-mid level Fighters, 5 Clerics, 3 Wizards & 2 Bards ought to be able to hold off an attacking force of at least several hundred, assuming the attackers have no one of vastly higher level than the highest level defenders.

What you're talking about is the assault of a castle, not a siege. A siege is mostly sitting around waiting for the defenders to run out of food. That will never happen in D&D. The sieging army is far too vulnerable to counterattack.

And I think assaults are quite different as well. They are over very quickly. Castles fall or repulse the defenders in a single day.

I ran a fairly large scale assault on a keep recently, and the HLers ruled the day. One low level wizard with a wand of fireballs strafed the walls, and terrorized the defenders. The defenders in turn had a Forbiddance that slaughtered attacking mooks wholesale. The HL assaults on either side determined progress. The rate at which ordinary soldiers died was more like WWI than a medieval battle.

PS

 

[Umbran]

Instead, get an amulet of proof against detection and location (35,000 gp) for constant protection.

Not good enough. When the local archmage or archcleric is gunning for you for toasting his entire city, he'll be willing to expend the Wish, Limited Wish, or Miracle to find your butt and snuff it like a candle. The Amulet just won't do the trick.

 

[Darkness]

Ah, confused the spells, there. Sorry, Umbran.

So... Unless you can get an item of continuous mind blank (which would probably cost, like, 150,000-200,000 gp and take up an item slot - assuming it's available at all, that is), you'd better be more powerful than the city's most powerful archmage.
Otherwise you just shouldn't take the job in the first place, correct?

 

[A'koss]

Originally posted by Dark Jezter:

The FRCS actually answers this question on page 94-95. I'll sum it up briefly here.

This has been beaten to death many times before. A castle can be fortified with enough magic to be a pretty safe place. It's not cheap, but it can be done.

However... it does nothing to protect the populace of your kingdom. While the king may be save in his spell-impregnable fortress, his people are like sheep to the slaughter.

And that said, no matter how good your defenses, anything can be circumvented by a dedicated and resourceful enough foe. Any defense you put up can be dispelled and a coordinated attack by HLers will breach any castle. Also, your castle will quickly become your prison - you're only safe(ish) while inside it.

Originally posted by Umbran:

If they are stupid, yes, they are cheap. But the DMG notes that NPCs aren't just stat blocks that cast spells for gold. They are people. Despite what the DMG says about the cost of spellcasting, the negotiations are more likely to go something like this -

I think you illustrate pretty well why those who rule countries would be the strongest, intelligent and most resourceful people available. Rule by meritocracy is something I've always considered to be the ideal in a D&D world. I also think you're not considering patriotism as a motivator in one's own country. The HLers of a particular kingdon are very likely to great and well-respected heroes and have sentimental ties to the people and places they grew up in. Not all, of course, but history has shown that patroitism goes a long, long way. Go to war, and you can have your pick of the spoils - including your own territory, support of the kingdom or even just a lump of the conquered's treasury & magic.

Let us say that a caster performs such a service. He'll destroy the city, but he won't touch the HL casters that live there. This effectively permanently costs him an 8th level spell slot, as he must now cast Mind Blank on himself every day for the rest of his life if he wishes to avoid retribution.

First of all, you kinda missed what I was getting at. I merely showed what a single HL wizard can accomplish, that wasn't to say that's what you would do if you were a ruler. I suggest it would more likely to be coordinated squads of HLers to do the job. You also assume that the attacker and the defenders in this case are of equal strength and that the wizard actually need fear retribution (he is protected by the ruler(s) of the country he lives in).

[Note on costs- if the caster expects to live another 20 years beyond this fight, at 1240gp per casting, this adds about 9 million GP to the cost of the service.]

If the wizard really fears retribution you could always get an item of mind blank 1/day out of the deal (if the HL wizard doesn't own one already - which would be very prudent for any HL character). Since the spell lasts 24 hours all you need to do is create a 1/day item, and that will run you 48,000 gp (@15th level caster level). Quite reasonable really for what you get.

This is not to mention the risk to the leader who employs such tactics - you think his enemies won't have it in for him, right quick? What's the point of destroying your enemy's capitol when you know that means some magical assassin will come along and kill you and your entire bloodline?

You assume that whomever was attacked is in any position to deal with, or even possesses knowledge of (if the attacker(s) used mind blank), the attackers. It could also be just a tactic to lure out the defender's best HLers and wipe them out on their terms. Sure, the wizard reveals himself (or "allows" the defenders to find him) and waits in place of his choosing for the defenders best and brightest to come get him.

Go watch the movie "War Games". The fact that you can imagine it is exactly why it won't happen. In the real world we already figured this one out with nuclear weapons, and the majority of us don't have the Int or Wis of a high level caster. It's obvious that nobody wins such a conflict, so you don't start it. There's darned little point to destroying your enemies or taking over the world if you have to turn the world into a wasteland to do it.

Remember that D&D is largely a game of Good vs. Evil and Law vs. Chaos which, unlike in the real world, are forces that shape the universe and all that jive... Conflict comes right out of the box...

Okay, so the spawning undead might (and that's only a might) still want to destroy the world, but they have the power of pretty much every other intelligent creature in the world against them, and that seems like a reasonable balance.

The overwhelming majority of Undead seek to seek to destroy all life, so that really not a question of if, the only question is - can you contain their spread. We had discussed this topic at length and decided in the end it's better to just handwave this threat aside. Otherwise, civilizations would be geared explicitly towards preventing this this threat - a la Final Fantasy.

Cheers,

A'koss.

 

[Angcuru]

If your enemy develops a weapon that can cut through plate mail like wet cheese, would you go into battle naked? No. You'd put on the armor, so that you'd be protected against the guys who DON'T have that weapon.