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

[Voadam]

As for peasants, they will always get the shaft in return for their taxes.

Knight in heavy armor rides up. "Serf! See this land your family has lived on and worked for 300 years? It is mine, so half this harvest goes to me. Oh and send along some of those sheep to my keep, I think roast lamb will be to my taste tonight."

The serf eyes the knight's platemail, sword, and back up men-at-arms and then his paltry sickle. The serf lowers his head. "Aye milord."

 

[barsoomcore]

Of course, on Barsoom, all the wizards are completely insane, and there aren't any clerics, druids, sorcerers or other spellcasters so THAT'S alright.

But you'd think that, say, a first-level wizard would be able to make himself a pretty fine living casting spells for locals.

Read Steven Brust's Dragaera novels for a great look at how magic might affect an economy and how a government might be structured around it.

 

[Feliath]

It made me wonder why people pay taxes and tithes if they never see any of the benefits that this wealth can bring.

I may be wildly misunderstanding the question here, but in my campaign world, serfs and peasantry pay the taxes because well-armed people threaten them. The peasantry has no power, no pull, nothing. If they don't work the farms, the nobility kills them. If they pay no taxes, same thing. They get nil in return for handing over their tithes, except that they can keep living.
The nobility and certain priesthoods (specifically, the ones that can hit back) are exempt from taxation. It's that simple. In a feudal society, taxes are a form of extortion by the nobility.


/Feliath

Update: Well, dang. Voadam said it first. Oh well, that's what I get for not updating the window after opening it simultaneously with five other, long, threads.

Update update: Oh, look! I can't spell worth diddly squat!

 

[barsoomcore]

In a feudal society, taxes are a form of extortion by the nobility.

And in modern society, taxes are form of extortion by the peasants.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Why is this so hard?

I always assumed that spellcasters were normal people, just with magical abilities. What does this mean? It meant that they pay taxes and tithe too, with service.

Now Clerics get a certain number of spells/ day. They can't save them up for an end of the year bonus, they're either used or lost. So, I always assumed that Clerics cast their spells to benefit their worshippers (since its the worshippers prayers that give their gods power). This means that congregation members are entitled to Cure Wounds spells when injured, Cure Disease spells when the plague strikes, and Control Weather spells when the draught (or whatever) threatens to destroy the harvest.

As for Wizards, I think that the single greatest concept that can be applied to how Kingdoms collect "magic" taxes is the Spellpool from the Masters of the Arcane Order, Tome & Blood book. Wizards in the same boat as Clerics to the effect that they get a number of spells/ day, use 'em or lose 'em. Extra spells at teh end of the day are payed into the National Spellpool, which the Royal Wizards have unlimited "Admin" access to to act in the defense of the Realm, and for the purposes of building national infrastructure (like Wall of Stone roads, and Fabricate bridges).

These Royal Wizards may have a level or two of Expert, or at least 5 Ranks in Craft (Masonry) or Knowledge (Engineering) of course. Do you really think that an Imperial Rome with Wizards would never draft them into the Army Corp of Engineers. You'd have to be kiddin' me.

Druids, of course, get their power from Nature, and work to maintain Nature's power. IMC this can be confrontational (when the powers that be just want to rape the land for resources) or cooperative (when the powers that be work with the Druids on "eco-farming" ventures). Anything's possible.

I was about to make some real-world reference for why this could work, but wouldn't want to make the thread go "klunk".

Anywho, ...

Psions, same thing. Use the Power Points or Lose 'em. Telepaths might be expected to pass messages along for the government to far away outposts. The would replace the Pony Express. So would Nomads of course. The others have their uses.


What is the moral of my story? Taxes in the middle ages were quite varied, but I have heard numbers like 50% bandied about. Imagine that half of a spell casters spells every day (or a third if you are uncomfortable with half) are cast for the government. Now you can think of some things that commoners might see. Remember your D&D statististics ... 1 in 100 is a spellcaster. That's 2-4 in every village. They're as common as shoemakers, more common than butchers.

Irda Ranger

 

[s/LaSH]

Well, the feudal model was based on a heirachy of protection and allegiance. The serfs farmed the land and gave stuff to the heavily armed guys because they would get protection from Vikings or the heavily armed guys in the next district. Of course, soon the heavily armed guys began to think that they were owed this kind of treatment. After a few centuries, the French Revolution came along.

But yes, the tax money largely goes to protection, public works and the enrichment of the Grand Poobah (king, emperor, whatever). Roads were built so you could reach the landing Vikings more quickly on your horse. Walls were built around villages so your serfs stayed alive (they're the ones who kept you fed).

In a fantasy mileau, however, you've got to consider magic and monsters. Now, some might say magic would greatly improve the lot of your common peasant - cheap lighting, instant transportation if you can afford it, that sort of thing. I disagree. In my campaign, I've limited 'common' magic to resemble the technology of the time. Magic Missile is simply a replacement for bows (still doesn't need to roll to hit, though), and Fireball is only known in far distant lands (like China, because they had gunpowder). More powerful spells are completely unknown, and planar theory is centuries away from the common scholar. In fact, I've weakened some spells so Continual Flame only burns for a few days before it 'breaks' and dissapates.

This doesn't mean that there's no useful magic, however. A low-level mage can be very useful in industry; they can create intense flame or intense cold, repair simple objects with a few words, lock doors or grow items to a great size - all at first level. IMC, there are a few low-level mages in each city working with blacksmiths, artificers and scholars.

The Church, which recieves copious donations and income from owned land, is supposed to improve the lot of the poor, but doesn't always do so. They're building a new Cathedral instead. However, priests are officially supposed to offer their gifts to anyone in need. A sick peasant can show up and request a cure, and if they don't have someone with Cure Disease memorised they can give him a cot until the morning. There is little money for the common peasant, but they do get the occasional benefit.

Monsters, now. Monsters and evil overlords are common in fantasy worlds. You need a strong military to fend off goblins and orcs, which is a good investment of tax and tithe. Bigger monsters are more troublesome. This is why the Grand Poobah keeps a reserve in treasury: to hire adventurers to Slay The Dragon, because a hundred common soldiers couldn't put a dent in its hide before being burned to a crisp.

I don't know the exact proportions of funds allocation. I'd guess ten percent at least goes to the Grand Poobah's personal funds, and the rest is spent on protection, upkeep and hiring adventurers.

 

[Celebrim]

"...but in my campaign world, serfs and peasantry pay the taxes because well-armed people threaten them."

That is probably the best answer that can be given to this question. It is slightly more complicated than that, but basically that is what it comes down to.

The next degree of complication up from that is that the peasants would rather give to these particular well armed people, because the alternative is to be conquered by those well armed people -who appear to be, or are at least rumored to be, worse.

The next degree of complication up from that is, there are a few countries that do have a degree of what we would call 'nationalism', and the peasants of these countries give out of pride in thier leaders or nation as well as fear.

There are a few ancillery benifits of having a wealthy lord. He is likely to build roads about the country (and charge you a toll for using them), but roads are usually worth it despite the cost. He is likely to not want anyone but himself robbing you, and this can be convienent so that you know ahead of time who is going to rob you, and when, and by how much. He is likely to pay troops to protect him from other lords, so that you are generally less likely to have to pick up a pitchfork and go fight the other lords armored knights. He is likely to hold spectacles, festivities, and so forth, some of which you may be even allowed to attend so that you can witness just how magnificent all your work has made your leige. He is likely to endow churchs, which can be handy, and perhaps if he is the better sort, he will make some show of endowing orphanages, libraries, public baths, and half a dozen other things just so that you and the lesser nobles will know just how noblely he is able to spend other peoples money. He is likely to have Dragons and other undesirable things driven from your front yard, on the grounds that he thinks your front yard is his property and thus needs protecting. In more enlightened places, you might see canals, locks, sewers, aqueducts, irrigation projects, courier services, and so forth constructed chiefly to keep the Lord comfortable and increase his wealth, but incidently tending to keep food on your own table.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Benefits to Feudalism

Something that's missing from this debate is the fact that Feudalism is at its roots a contract system. There are a lot of variations and corruptions of this idea, but since we're talking lawful good here consider the following:

Even the best Feudal systems featured areas of flagrant abuse or inadequacy, but even the worst systems served their peasants better than the poor capitalist systems that replaced them.

The urban poor of early industrial England were much worse off than their medieval ancestors and the nobility far wealthier.

If we take the best medieval model, taxes would be lighter than they are in most first world nations today.

tithe=10% random secular fees: rents, tolls, and head=15%
10%+15%=25% peasant pays if there is accurate record keeping and low corruption.

Compare that to America where Federal Income Tax alone is around 30% of income or higher. Plus sales and state taxes.

Most of the nobility and clergy only recieve a minor portion of their income from taxes. The majority of their wealth is in thier owned estates. The value of peasantry is that they will work these estates in return for services and protections.

Their labor is key to everything.

They often got:
-military protection -assurance of salvation -right to competing secular and church courts -limited access to professionals -more vacation than modern Europeans or Americans, count the number of Saint's days -access to public resources the likes of which are non-existent in Western societies

Anyone who messed with these rights directly could expect heavy ineffeciencies and a smack down from the competing secular or ecclesiastical authority.

Later peasants could just leave and join the local town.

There was heavy competition on the part of authorities to treat these peasants right. Labor was critical and there was no system of large scale slavery or farming.

While the threat of invasion or raid was real, peasants did not live in trembling fear.

Every European authority was basically living within a population that could seamlessly and instantly become a localized guerrillla army.

So I think, again given the idea of the best real model, that magic would definitely come back to the common man. Priests and Knights definitely need the populace and Wizards need the coin that Priests and Knights could dole out.

The major complication I see is that the huge expense necessary to the creation of even a minor magical item would create a huge drain on national and personal resources. I don't see the creation of modern infrastructure, but I do see a necessary edge in a constant struggle against forces that are essentially more evolved than you are.

If paying ten percent to a god helps support a cosmology where there is only one tarrasque and things like drow and Illithid are mysteriously absent from the surface, then my money is well spent.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Well, there is always money. On the other hand, the rulers in my world also take life energy from their subjects, which they use to power mighty spells or create magic items...

 

[Celebrim]

"Even the best Feudal systems featured areas of flagrant abuse or inadequacy, but even the worst systems served their peasants better than the poor capitalist systems that replaced them.

The urban poor of early industrial England were much worse off than their medieval ancestors and the nobility far wealthier.

If we take the best medieval model, taxes would be lighter than they are in most first world nations today.

tithe=10% random secular fees: rents, tolls, and head=15%
10%+15%=25% peasant pays if there is accurate record keeping and low corruption.

Compare that to America where Federal Income Tax alone is around 30% of income or higher. Plus sales and state taxes.

Oh good grief. Don't tell me which books you've been reading. I probably could dig through the literature and hazard a guess. Please don't romanticize a horrible system of slavery.

I'm sorry, but this is horribly bad research that ignores a half dozen things. I'm no fan of European Socialism by a long shot (which is a gross understatement), but its hard to argue that the 'peasants' are better off in the middle ages than they are now in Europe - even under (nay, especially under) Sweden's 90%+ theoretical taxation rate. Please don't try to tell me how well off the serfs were under the fuedal system. And please don't try to tell me that the high water mark of the common man was the guild system either.

Tax rates for peasants in the feudal system were as high as could be imposed without starving them to death. That's the bottom line. In many cases, this was as high as 50% and nowhere was it as low as 15%, but I defy you to find a tax rate anywhere in the first world which is so high that it leaves the taxee with only a subsitance level income.

And strictly speaking, the feudal system does not apply to peasants and serfs. The feudal system specifically describes the contractual obligations between lords.