Social Mobility in a Game

[The Grumpy Celt]

Based on previous threads posted here, it appears that not only is there little to no support for games where the PCs can try to become rulers (and make social changes for the better) or settings with democracies, but most players and DMs are against such things. They actively do not want games where players take on social issues. They actively do not want games that include democracy.

Add to this the TLC the RBDMs get.

Now, those elements taken together begs a related question.

How much social mobility is allowed in your game?

To put it another way, if a character is a peasant, does the DM ensure they will always be a peasant, regardless of experience points/level? (i.e. the character dies or is otherwise made unplayable, or the DM forces a new character to be created rather than allowing social status to be increased.)

This is not a matter of “There is always a bigger fish.” There is a scale of ranks, not just Peasant and God. Moving up in social status is not automatically the same thing as becoming Emperor of the Mountain.

How much social mobility is allowed in your game?

People really need to be consistent.

 

[Corinth]

It's not about mobility. It's about autonomy.

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

It's not about mobility. It's about autonomy.

The amount of autonomy granted depends of what the DMs allows and what the players put up with but it comes back to being close to social mobility. Do you allow it or not?

 

[DamnedChoir]

Democracy sucks.

If I was a 20th level Paladin I'd decide that for the good of the people, they must be told how to live, have their lives scheduled, and be forever watched by Golems created by the party's Wizard. The Rogue would set up the secret police, and the Fighter the army to crush all opposition that might threaten safety or security.

The Bard, tragically, would have to be executed for spreading anti-peace propaganda.

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

Which is kind of my point.

 

[palleomortis]

Democracy sucks.

If I was a 20th level Paladin I'd decide that for the good of the people, they must be told how to live, have their lives scheduled, and be forever watched by Golems created by the party's Wizard. The Rogue would set up the secret police, and the Fighter the army to crush all opposition that might threaten safety or security.

The Bard, tragically, would have to be executed for spreading anti-peace propaganda.

Ah the dream of every party

I personally don't think it gets much popularity mainly becuase it's hard to award role play points. How do you variate what was done well or not, how do you overcome a task? combat, on the other hand, is MUCH easier. I don't mind at all if they jump up in ranks, or even take on social actions. But it HAS to be done in SOME sort of physical manner. If you want to solve world hunger, then become Evil, and kill off the surplus population. For every round spent dealing with "polotics", there should be ten more spent in action. SOMEHOW, the character needs to incorperate more than their own persanol intelligince. The game is no longer the game when you're not making checks every so often. Or if, despite being a fighter, you havn't picked up a sword in an hour of game play. I think I speak for most all when I say D&D is fun, for a large part, becuase we do things in game we can't in real life. If we start talking about social issues, then we've stopped doing what made it great in the first place.

 

[Rechan]

The book Powers of Faerun actually deals with this stuff.

Yes, it's an FR book, but only in that all the examples used in it are FR-based. The book itself is a great tool.

It explains how to run King's court based, Military Based, Church-based, Frontier and Merchant based games. The information involved tells you how to have PCs move up the ranks within the organization.

For instance, if your character is a priest, and he wants to move up the church hierarchy, the book explains how to do that.

The king's court and merchant parts of the book might be what you want.

 

[palleomortis]

The way I see it, and maybe this is a ways off, but if they want to move up in a church or try to get to king, they would do it through "Trails". "Prove your faith by recruiting and hosting a crusade." or "Prove yourself worthy to rule by killing the OTHER guy that ruled." Seems like it would keep it simple, and any "social issues" they wanted to deal with would be done quickly, letting them get on to the other things that would be considered more "D&D ish"

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

The book Powers of Faerun actually deals with this stuff...

Rechan, you are missing the point. Pay more attention. I did not ask about what books cover this? I asked what DMs allow it.

If we start talking about social issues, then we've stopped doing what made it great in the first place.

I could not disagree more.

 

[palleomortis]

I could not disagree more.

How so?