The case for democracy* in RPG settings

[GMMichael]

Deposing democratically-elected President Evilguy Puppykicker who won office in a free and fair election on the other hand means the PCs now have to deal with the fact that the majority of Happyland voters decided that evil was the way to go and nonvoters felt that the threat posed by Evilguy Puppykicker wasn't worth voting against.

Oh, you're assuming one of the choices presented by Happyland's democracy was not evil?

 

[Dire Bare]

Adding democracy to your games could be a benefit for a different reason . . .

Typically, in a more good-vs-evil campaign, the "good" kingdom is an enlightened monarchy. How about replacing that with an enlightened democracy? Seems more aspirational to me that way.

Of course in a more nuanced campaign, any governmental system can be all sorts of complicated and morally grey.

 

[delericho]

I tend towards preferring a weak monarch who is 'advised' by various nobles - there are therefore a number of factions that battle to pull the strings, with the goal to become the power behind the throne. PCs can then throw their lot in with one of the existing factions, form a faction of their own, or just overthrow the whole thing if they prefer.

I tend to avoid democracy, partly because players will then bring a whole load of modern views as to how democracy works (which may or may not be the case), but also because I prefer not to deal with the faceless mass of the electorate - easier to put faces and names to things with a smaller number of named factions.

 

[Aldarc]

One thing that often gets forgotten is that the Middle Ages actually had a LOT of various democracies, republics, and city councils, including the Hanseatic League, the Italian City-States, the Novgorod Republic, and the Most Serene Republic of Venice, which lasted ~1100 years as a republic. If you need a head honcho, then you just deal with the Doge.

Also, the election of an emperor was very much a part of the process for the Holy Roman Empire, though it later became de facto primogeniture. Nevertheless, many of the big nobles of the HRE often also had the title of "Elector" for that very reason.

 

[KYRON45]

Interesting post!

I have two points to make.

1. I think that one of the reasons "fantasy" and "D&D" is so successful as a TTRPG is because it doesn't feature democracies. Why? Because fantasy worlds have autocracies (usually monarchies) that we can use without worrying about it too much.
And I think this gets to the heart of why monarchies and autocracies are so common in RPG games. The emphasis is on the game, on the conflict. And conflicts and stories work best with identifiable personalities.

Generally, people want to interact with a single point of contact- and rulers ... whether they are kings or queens, autocrats or generals ... they allow streamlined play and roleplay. They make the game easier to run, and for many tables, more fun to play. It's not just a trope of fantasy- it's a crutch of a lot of storytelling. It's easier to play when you're dealing with a small group of people or leaders, than it is with a sprawling democratic system.


2. I will note that GREYHAWK has all of the government systems, including various types of democracies. So if you're looking for political diversity, I have a setting for ya!

Is this the beginning of the Zagygagian revolution?!?!?

 

[DrunkonDuty]

I definitely have democracies in my games.

My home game (the one my wife and I play) has featured several stories all about interaction with democratic governments. Mostly the government of Greyhawk, which IMC, is an actual democracy with elected city councillors.

If I was at home and had access to a real keyboard I'd go into (too much) detail. But am on my phone so I'll just say: bards are real handy when it comes to running political campaigns.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Is this the beginning of the Zagygagian revolution?!?!?

 

[John Dallman]

In the circles where I've played fantasy TTRPGs, un-enlightened monarchies have a strong tendency to be removed by adventurers. Small polities tend to have a reasonably enlightened ruler with a council of advisers. Larger ones tend to be moderately enlightened oligarchies.

One city-state developed into a kind of representative oligarchy. It was founded by a dwarven tribe, fleeing a world where Azathoth had manifested. Surprisingly, the world was still there and most of its inhabitants had not gone madder, but the dwarves weren't assuming that would happen again. They found an abandoned city in another world whose DM was happy to have them, and moved in, absorbing the few assorted inhabitants that were in the city. Then human refugees who had been displaced by a large war in that world a couple of decades previously started turning up.

The dwarves thought about it a bit and decided that as wealthy refugees - but still refugees - it would be wrong not to help these other refugees, and besides, the city was way larger than they needed and a refugee camp outside it would be untidy. So they took them in and put them to work, initially repairing housing, and soon in all kinds of other work. The economy took off, and things worked out well. The dwarves feel that's a demonstration of practical Lawful Good alignment.

The dwarves' government had been tribal, with a chief advised by a council and serving as the magistrate for his tribe. The council got expanded into a council for the city, with the dwarven chief as chairman, and an appointed city manager to run the details. Political, religious and social groups now have a customary right to request representation on the council, which has led to reshuffles a few times. It seems to work.

 

[KYRON45]

I have never engaged with government beyond the local mayor or sheriff if you will.
I tend to keep games at the "street level". A lot of this comes from the fact that games usually don't last into the higher levels. In 40 years i've never seen a character make it to a double digit level.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

A lot of this comes from the fact that games usually don't last into the higher levels. In 40 years i've never seen a character make it to a double digit level.

... to quote the second-greatest actor* of our, or any, generation, Keanu Reeves .... woah.....

This requires a story. Probably requires you to start a thread. I am rarely gobsmacked, but I don't know how to understand this.



*His lord and excellency, Nic Cage, hallowed be his name, is, of course, the greatest.