What Do Your Fantasy Societies in D&D Get For Their Taxes and Tithes?

[the Jester]

Great thread!

This thread is fantastic!

That said, imc tithes go to keep you in good standing with the Church, and the main empire is theocratic (more or less) so it's also required by law. If you don't tithe, you're technically guilty of an offense against the law. This law is ancient and little-enforced these days, but it's still there.

Taxes: the Forinthian Empire spends its money on building infrastructure, increasing trade, stationing garrisons and constantly trying to expand. What the average peasant sees out of this is a certain amount of safety from the horrors that dwell in the wider world. When the goblins come raiding, the Forinthian Legions are there to oppose them (unless they're off conquering new islands, of course!)

Different societies handle it all differently- there's another major kingdom that's trying to rehabilitate their entire continent with druidic help, there's a magocracy with all kinds of magical stuff integrated into society... it just varies. One common thread is definitely maintaining a military force, though.

 

[Irda Ranger]

<SNIP text saying how lousey Priests were in the middle ages>

There is no reason why characters in a D&D world should fare any better, unless the deities take a more interventionist role than God does in the administration of his Church.

Regards,


Agback

But of course they do take an interventionist role. Spells/ day are only granted to true followers of the deity. This is better than "historical" religion in two ways.

1. Religious positions don't go to people because of nepotism or other connections. There is true upward mobility for poor peasants who hear the call of vocation. Being able to heal with a touch is a strong sign of God's will.

2. No selling of indulgences or wasting of tithes. Anyone who did that often would lose their spellcasting ability to allignment shift. I don't think that it would be too much of a stretch to assume that spellcasting would be a required proof of God's favor to receive the benefits of being in the Clergy.

Of course, this only applies in countries that have religions of good allignment.

Irda Ranger

PS -

This thread is fantastic!
snip

So, Jester, where are you writing this from? Anywhere interesting or has the journey not officially started yet?

 

[Chrisling]

There is no reason why characters in a D&D world should fare any better, unless the deities take a more interventionist role than God does in the administration of his Church.

Unless, of course, the game didn't take place in a world modelled after the worst of the Middle Ages.

In my original post, I did say that I wanted to focus on those sorts of societies that were inclined to be "for the people" sort of governments -- lawful good, neutral good, lawful neutral and perhaps neutral -- and avoiding governments that didn't have the infrastructure to assist the people (chaotic governments) or the willingness to assist the people (evil governments).

European feudalism is a pretty wicked sort of government, and pretty chaotic, too. It's precisely the sort of government that I <i>wasn't</i> referring to.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Lawful Good

Well, I still maintain that there is room for and precedent for a lawful good Feudal system.

On the whole, however, I find it very difficult to picture what a Lawful Good government would look like. There are just too many basic questions of morality to answer before you hit how a government of that alignment would act.

Would they be comfortable executing criminals for instance? Magic could certainly be helpful in creating the large prison or exile system that would result from their saying no.

Would they see public morality as legislatable or encouragable?
If they see it as legislatable you would be looking at sumptuary laws and some bizarre and strict standards of family law.
If it's encouragable then you might see free counseling in better behaviour being offered to people who were suspected of adulteryor child abuse.

I do agree that the idea of theocracy has a whole different slew of connations in a magical setting.

I knew someone who thought you could actually make Plato's Republic work well using DnD parameters.

A big issue is that Medieval societies were much more concerned with environmental impact and code than we are, or rather were.
I think magic would probably work into this very well, and you would probably see Druids being given a measure of authority in most Lawful Good societies with a lot of thought being given on how to make sustainable as opposed to individually profitable.

Ah, a big issue I always had is that Orcs should be alot more successful then they are. Strength matters a LOT in a low tech setting, and I think that humans are at a much bigger disadvantage vs fighting them at night than they would be fighting us during the day.

And I bet they, just like German barbarians, have no trouble using camoflauge and dispersed infantry tactics to deal with fireball slinging mages.

 

[GuardianLurker]

Re: Re: What Do Your Fantasy Societies in D&D Get For Their Taxes and Tithes?

1. Religious positions don't go to people because of nepotism or other connections. There is true upward mobility for poor peasants who hear the call of vocation. Being able to heal with a touch is a strong sign of God's will.

Actually, I've seen many similar comments here; basically "spellcasters would be the rulers", or magic has a huge effect.

To the first I'll offer the following observations:
1) People in most fantasy worlds are just like people in this one.
2) Modern society's standard of living is almost completely based on the efforts of chemists, physicists, and engineers of various stripes.
3) Modern chemists, physicists, and engineers are the equivalent of the fantasy magician, both in rough terms of percentage of population, and in terms of personalities drawn to the professions. IMO.
4) Modern society is NOT ruled by the modern magicians. (And speaking as a modern magician, this is sometimes HIGHLY frustrating.)

The conclusion that affects the first point is, hopefully obvious.

To the second, I'll point out that magic, even magic enabled through item creation just does NOT scale well. Primarily because it requires the presence of the magician (in some form) every single time the benefit is gained. This is not true of technology.

Computer programs are probably the best example of the differences in the scaling abilities of technology and magic. One computer programmer creates an application <A wizard creates a magic item> usable by anyone. After the initial program is developed <after the first magic item is created>, the programmer can copy the program an arbitarily large number of times <the wizard must recreate the magic item a single copy at a time>, and the program is usable as often as the customer desires <and the item is probably only usable a limited number of times> ,in fact, there is an *increased* cost per item for limited use <there is a *significant* increase in cost for unlimited use>.

If we're not dealing with magic items, but instead are working on a per spell basis, the situation is worse.

Moreover, most "infrastructure" spells just don't have the capacity to deal with the large scale problems. Contrast the Teleport Circle's transport volume with the volume of an 18-wheel trailer truck. Now, calculate the volume of food it would take to feed a city large enough to have the appropriate level spellcaster. Pick a distance to deliver the goods to. Assume the truck travels an average of 50 miles/hour. The truck probably has a advantage. It almost definitely does when you give it a "reasonable" ratio of trucks to circles (which I'd say is 20:1, for a guess).
Now, to make matters worse, the circle is send-only (IIRC), but the truck can transport both ways.

 

[s/LaSH]

Re: Re: Re: What Do Your Fantasy Societies in D&D Get For Their Taxes and Tithes?

I've seen many similar comments here; basically "spellcasters would be the rulers", or magic has a huge effect.

This is why I equate magic with science. Virtually nobody has the luxury and inclination to practice it, but when they do, they discover really neat things.

Look at how many scientists you had in medieval society. Virtually nil, and most of them had the wrong idea. Applied scientists were a little more common, such as blacksmiths (metallurgy is a high science in this setting) or bridgebuilders (a keystone is an important engineering principle, but good luck finding a peasant that can explain why) or scribes (enscribed paper would be worth its weight in silver at least). These 'applied scientists' could do a very few things, but because they did them themselves they did them at low volume. Much like magic.

When the Renaissance came, with such things as the printing press and increased public education, suddenly you had a lot more specialists. The 'industrial process' came along a little later, and the information revolution after that. These all made creating complex things a lot easier.

In a magical society, the rough equivalent is education producing more mages - as I've said before, a Renaissance fantasy would have everyone in a city with a few levels of spellcaster. Proceed from there, and somebody is sure to discover a new method of spellcasting with nigh-infinite power. Wands that never run out of charges. Golems that can build a house and never go berserk. Casters that can cast any spell they know repeatedly. That's the sort of thing you'd be looking at five hundred years after the Renaissance. (What about a national power net that generates magical energy from sunlight or burned coal?)

So basically, we're not playing in a Renaissance setting. If we were, magic would be completely different.

That said, magic should probably be handled with tongs in normal campaigns. Rare and low-level. The truly powerful magi are shunned and live in the wilderness, where they experiment recklessly with bizarre things.

I just had a really cool idea. Must run.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Wizards are not like Scientists

I think the differences between Wizards and Scientists give the magic users a big advantage over scientists in terms of power in a society.

Essentially, we only need scientists at certain stages of the production process, and then they aren't immediately useful anymore. Scientists are only rarely needed in the development of cars or roads for instance.

Wizards on the other hand must be present for the entirety, or at least the entirety of the parts that matter, of the process of the creation of a +1 sword.

The Wizard can't just set up a plan for creating magic carpets and then hire lots of less skilled labor to weave them in bulk.

Wizards are both a lot more valuable than Scientists and represent a limitation on production.

Ditto with Priests, who, in fact, offer an equity advantage that scientists can't touch.

I mean if I am smart person in say America. And I have great potential to become a scientist, but I go to the wrong schools, the counselor and my parents have no idea how to send me to the right schools, and then I still don't get to be a scientist with all the benefits that entails.

If, on the other hand, I am a guy with no special talents or experiences, but I develop a good attitude than Pelor will 'send' me to the local temple and I will have a decent livlihood, do a load of good if I'm in a Good religion, and have the potential to get a lot of power that I, honestly, deserve.

Way better than a scientist, who doesn't even have to have the morality of weasel in order to do his or her job well, but does have to have most of the benefits of education in order to even be considered for a position.

 

[GuardianLurker]

Re: Wizards are not like Scientists

I think the differences between Wizards and Scientists give the magic users a big advantage over scientists in terms of power in a society.

Hmm. I see the argument you're making. I'm not sure I agree with the numbers part, as I imagine that "driven priests" would just about balance out with "missed scientist".

However, it did spark a realization in me; there is a big difference between the power of the spell-casters, and the prevalence of magic.

As we've both pointed out there's an inherent limit to the prevalence of "artificial" magic in a fantasy world, just because of the way they "magic production" works.

However, spellcasters (Wizards and Sorcerors in particular) would be *very* wealthy relatively. (At least if you don't use the Vanilla rules for spellbooks.) And wealth almost always translates into social power, especially if the owner/weilder happens to be people-oriented (like Sorcerors).

However, social power does not necessarily make a person part of the ruling class, especially in a feudal culture. The powerful merchant princes of late medieval Europe weren't members of the nobility (by and large), but woe to the ruler who tried to work against their interests.

This would mean that you'd have high local concentrations of magic around spellcaster's residences, and almost nothing away from those concentrations. Cities of light, dread, and wonder, and a countryside of ignorance. The wealth disparity would be even larger than that of our own medieval Europe. Depending on how extreme you make the gap, there might even be separate cultures in the cities and countryside. The city cultures might even be unified if rapid magical transport is common enough.

Also, even though the spellcasters would be wealthy, note that most of their wealth comes from "free necessities", not actual income (unless they become traders or merchants). This means that the spellcaster will have very little *real* luxuries, despite what appears to be a lavish lifestyle. This also places a limiter on their social power, as anyone who's ever been "house-poor" can tell you.

Originally posted by S/LaSH
So basically, we're not playing in a Renaissance setting. If we were, magic would be completely different.

Actually, most of the changes responsible for our modern lifestyle are a result of the Enlightenment, not the Renaissance. This is not to knock the importance of the latter, I'm just pointing out that it took a LONG time (as humans measure things) to make that state change.

It would actually be very, very reasonable to play in a Renaissance Fantasy world; this is essentially what FR is. As for what your magical society looks like 600 years later, check out Dragonstar. And just to be complete, I'd put Greyhawk as roughly equal to pre-plague Europe, which was surprisingly wealthy (and healthy).

 

[the Jester]

Re: Re: What Do Your Fantasy Societies in D&D Get For Their Taxes and Tithes?

PS -


So, Jester, where are you writing this from? Anywhere interesting or has the journey not officially started yet? [/B]

Heh... I'm behind schedule, I'm leaving tomorrow (prolly about 8pm). I had one final task to take care of before I left.

 

[Chrisling]

As a note, if one puts the "invention" of magic in the Middle Ages, the odds are that wizards would be in the same class as the aristocrats and priests, given they were the only people with reliable access to education.

If one puts the invention of magic in remote antiquity, the Middle Ages would never have played out like it did in the first place, of course. I mean . . . imagine a neolithic society with access to the whole plethora of wizard, clerical and druidic spells.