Worlds of Design: Baseline Assumptions of Fantasy RPGs

You can write a set of fantasy role-playing game (FRPG) rules without specifying a setting, but there’s a default or baseline setting assumed by virtually everyone when no setting is specified. Moreover, some rules (e.g. the existence of plate armor, and large horses) imply things about technology and breeding in the setting.

You can write a set of fantasy role-playing game (FRPG) rules without specifying a setting, but there’s a default setting assumed by virtually every FRPG. Moreover, some rules (e.g. the existence of plate armor, and large horses) imply things about technology and breeding in the setting.

fantasybasics.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

The Basics of FRPG​

All FRPGs start with some assumptions built into the setting, some of them so innocuous that gamers might not even realize they're assumptions to begin with. For example the assumption that there are horses large enough to be ridden, even though for thousands of years of history, horses weren’t large enough for riding (the era of war chariots from about 1700-1000 BCE, and the era before that of infantry only).

Familiarity vs. strangeness is an important question for any worldbuilder to answer. What are gamers familiar with? That tends to be the default. J. R. R. Tolkien’s works (Lord of the Rings, Hobbit, etc.) are nearly a default setting for many, as in the dwarves and elves who are quite different from traditional stories of dwarves and elves. You could argue that the default setting is more Tolkien than it is medieval European, but he largely adopted Late Medieval European (1250-1500), so I prefer to refer to that.

The question is, do you want your ruleset, or your campaign setting, to follow the default? An early example of great deviation from the default was the wonderfully different world of Tekumel (Empire of the Petal Throne, and a few novels). A “different” FRPG might posit no monsters at all, perhaps not even elves and dwarves, just a lot of humans, yet never explicitly say so: if you leave out rules for monsters and humanoid races other than humans, you have a different-than-baseline setting, even if you didn't consciously make that decision. But be warned: too much unfamiliarity may make some players uncomfortable.

Are there baseline assumptions for science fiction? There seems to be so much variety, I wouldn’t try to pin it down.

The Baseline

What ARE the baseline assumptions? In general, they are mostly late medieval (not “Dark Ages” (500-1000) or High Medieval (1000-1250), as FRPGs tend to be magic grafted to later medieval Europe. In no particular order here is a list of categories for baseline assumptions that I’ll discuss specifically:
  • Transportation
  • Communication
  • State of Political Entities
  • Commonality of Magic
  • Commonality of Adventurers
  • Commonality of Monsters
  • Length of History and Rate of Change
  • Level of Technology
  • Warfare and the Military
  • Religion
  • Demography
  • Climate

Transportation

Wooden sailing vessels, late medieval style. In calm waters such as landlocked seas and lakes, galleys; in wild waters (such as oceans), small sailing vessels. River barges much preferable to poor roads and carts. And are there wonderful roads left by or maintained by an Empire (Rome)? See "Medieval Travel & Scale."

Communication

Proceeds at the rate of travel, by horse or by ship. In other words, very slow by modern standards. Even as late as 1815, the Battle of New Orleans was fought after the War of 1812 had ended (in 1814), but before news of the treaty had reached Louisiana from Europe.

State of Political Entities

Monarchies and lower level independent states (such as Duchies) ruled by “the man in charge” (very rarely, a woman). Nobles. States, not nations (the people rarely care which individual is actually in charge). Castles are so defensible that it’s fairly easy for subordinate nobles to defy their superiors. There are small cities (5-10,000 usually), not really large ones (over 100,000 people).

Commonality of Magic

Magicians are usually rare, secretive folk. Few people ever see any manifestation of magic. In some cases the church or the government tries to suppress magic. See "The Four Stages of Magic."

Commonality of Adventurers

Magicians, knights, powerful clerics, all are rare. 1 in 500 people? 1 in 10,000?

Commonality of Monsters

Human-centric. Monsters are usually individuals rather than large groups. Intelligent monsters are rare. (Here Tolkien’s influence, the great orc/goblin hordes, often overrides European influence.) Undead may be common. Dragons are “legendary.”

Length of History and Rate of Change

Slow pace of change of technology. Awareness of the greater days of a “universal empire” in the past (such as Rome), now gone. Technology changed much faster in late medieval times, than in Tolkien’s Middle-earth.

Level of Technology

Late medieval, or possibly less. (Late medieval for the technology necessary to make full plate armor, if nothing else.) See "When Technology Changes the Game."

Warfare and the Military

Wars rarely changed borders much (Late Medieval) - the great migrations have ended. Wars certainly aren’t national wars, the common people are spectators. See "The Fundamental Patterns of War."

Religion

What we’re used to in later medieval times is a universal monotheistic church (Catholicism), though with foreign churches of different stripe (Orthodox Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist). But in games, more often the setting seems to derive from older, pantheon-based, religions.

Demography

Density of population is low. Depends on whether the local area is frontier or settled. Cities are population sinks (high mortality rates). There may be stories of a Great Plague (later-1340s and onward in Europe).

Climate

Temperate medieval European (more often, English (governed by the Gulf Stream)), with fairly cool summers so that full armor is not impossibly hot. (Imagine wearing full armor when the average summer high is 91 degrees F, as in northern Florida.) But winters are much less severe than in the northern USA. (Modern European climate is currently getting much warmer than in late medieval times.)

Your Turn: Do you see the default setting as different that what I’ve summarized?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio
Meanwhile other people seem to be assuming that wizards are the only people capable of magic and that other venues of magic or spellcasting are not available.
They are. And the general assumption is that none of them are common. It takes more than a prayer to become a cleric and not every troubadour is a bard.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Aldarc

Legend
They are. And the general assumption is that none of them are common. It takes more than a prayer to become a cleric and not every troubadour is a bard.
I think you are assuming a general assumption that has not been established, as I would argue that contemporary D&D assumes a fairly significant amount of magic and spellcasters in the game, and not merely the PCs. You may prefer less or a rarity of spellcasters as per your aesthetic, but I think that D&D has been increasingly drifting to more magic than the Greyhawk side of things.

As to your last point, I don't think that any one is actually arguing this. Not every scholar is a wizard. Not every swordsman is a fighter. And clearly not every assertion is a meaningful argument.
 

Same here.

It is possible that there are 2 baseline assumptions when it comes to learning magic.

One where learning magic is easy but expensive so anyone of wealth or long life span would become spellcasters.

Another where learning magic is hard and time consuming so only those who can ignore all other duties or live centuries can learn magic at significant skill before advanced age without adventuring.

Because ultimately there is little difference gameplay wise between a noble fighter NPC with a wizard hireling and a cleric adviser and a noble wizard NPC and a fighter bodyguard and a cleric adviser.

Only really matters when the party does hostile actions to the lone noble.
There is also the 3rd assumption: Not everyone can become a PC class.

Not everyone can just learn to become a wizard. Not every priest with faith has their prayers answered. Not everyone who makes a deal with a devil for fortune, or love, or power gets spell slots.

This is actually the route that Eberron, the setting with probably the highest proportion of people who use magics in, takes. There are magewrights all over the place, but people with the potential to actually have spell slots and learn multiple spells as a Wizard PC class are very rare
 

Aldarc

Legend
This is actually the route that Eberron, the setting with probably the highest proportion of people who use magics in, takes. There are magewrights all over the place, but people with the potential to actually have spell slots and learn multiple spells as a Wizard PC class are very rare
Sure, but Eberron still presents Magewrights as blue-collar jobs and shows how even low powered magic can transform societies in ways outside of a typical D&D setting. This is to say, even if not everyone can be come a full wizard or full PC class, they can still attain some magical training and it's often considered as capital in the world.

Plus, many settings presume human kingdoms of high sorcery that existed in the past, suggesting that this commonality of magic is possible and not necessarily inherent about the human condition.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
So, there would be a noteworthy amount of wizards.

How?

You have stated that a wizard needs to spend 20 years of dedicated study with no time for anything else to become a level 5 wizard. Who can afford to do that?

Only the wealthy, like the nobles.

I always thought it was a master-apperentice chain of one rich son or nephew being supported to be a wizard, then they take on apprentices and support them, whose apprentices take on there own apprentices...

then one apprentice says "I'm tired out the politics. Imma live in a swamp". And that creates the swampy wizards.

and one apprentice goes EVIL and amasses the richest and gold and servers to fund a dozen evil necromancers.

Speaking of necromancers, they tend to be dirty, thin, and grimy. All that study keeps you from earning the cash for regular food and baths.
 

Chaosmancer

Legend
Some people seem to be assuming that you can just send any random person to a wizard school and they become a wizard. Now it can work like that, but it doesn't have to, and I'd argue that in most D&D settings it doesn't as evidenced by the rarity of wizards. Under the rare wizard paradigm becoming a wizard requires the person to be exceptionally gifted. This doesn't necessarily mean any supernatural 'spark of magic' but merely the sort of mindset suited for mastering the arcane. There simply are things you cannot teach in realistic amount of time if the person doesn't have exceptional aptitude to begin with. Some people are born with a perfect colour vision, absolute pitch, eidetic memory, superior capability to abstract mathematical thinking etc. In rare wizard paradigm mastering wizardry requires something like that.

Now you can easily have a setting where this doesn't apply, and learning to cast spells is no harder nor require any more special aptitude than learning simple algebra or a foreign language. But the other interpretation is not logically incoherent. Ultimately it is about what you want your setting to be like, and then coming up with a coherent justification for that.

True, you can alter the setting in a multitude of ways.

But, there is a challenge in presenting wizardry as being the same as having something like perfect pitch, and that is a lack of mechanical support. Everyone can learn wizardry, by RAW. You don't need an Eidetic memory, or Keen Mind would be a prerequisite.

And, while natural ability like Perfect Pitch, color vision, "super math" skills are helpful, they don't prevent people from being stars in their respective fields. Being a great musician does not require Perfect Pitch. Sure, it helps, but you can do it without that. You can learn pitch.


And again, yes, settings can be written to say X,Y,Z is true. But, looking at the 5e mechanics learning the most basic of magic doesn't require anything special. And, at worst, you can say that you need an INT 13 to be a wizard, due to multi-classing rules... But you don't need it to become an Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster, who also learns magic.

So, writing the setting to include X,Y,Z ignores that those elements do not exist within the framework we are given. They make sense, in some ways, but they aren't there.


They are. And the general assumption is that none of them are common. It takes more than a prayer to become a cleric and not every troubadour is a bard.

But, if 0.5% of a population are wizards, 0.5% are clerics, 0.5% are Bards, 0.5% are Druids 0.5% are Rangers, 0.5% are Paladins, 0.5% are Warlocks and 0.5% are Sorcerers (which by the way, the chart where the wizard came from in the example that led to these numbers had wizards as the least common option) Then you are looking at 4% of the population being spellcasters at a minimum

And that ignores all martial subclasses that use magic.

Not common, but not rare either.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I always thought it was a master-apperentice chain of one rich son or nephew being supported to be a wizard, then they take on apprentices and support them, whose apprentices take on there own apprentices...

then one apprentice says "I'm tired out the politics. Imma live in a swamp". And that creates the swampy wizards.

and one apprentice goes EVIL and amasses the richest and gold and servers to fund a dozen evil necromancers.

Speaking of necromancers, they tend to be dirty, thin, and grimy. All that study keeps you from earning the cash for regular food and baths.

None of this addresses any point I made, but here is an interesting thought.

Master takes on an apprentice, that apprentice becomes a mage and takes on their own apprentice. What does the Master do?

Takes on another apprentice.

Let us say that they can only take on three apprentices before they get tired of it.

So, 1 -> 3 ->9 -> 27 -> 81

That paints a very different picture than the idea of

1 -> 1 -> 1 -> 1 -> 1

And, two or three apprentices is not uncommon in literature, and even if the occasional wizard drops off to go swamp living, another will enter into politics to get tax breaks on magical reagents. And if the evil necromancer can fund a dozen apprentices, then the good necromancers can do the same thing. And if they can teach a dozen students effectively and quickly enough to become a threat within a time period of the plot... then why are we saying people can't learn magic fast enough to do that and politics?
 

But, there is a challenge in presenting wizardry as being the same as having something like perfect pitch, and that is a lack of mechanical support. Everyone can learn wizardry, by RAW. You don't need an Eidetic memory, or Keen Mind would be a prerequisite.
That's bizarrely confusing how the rules are written with the fictional reality. By the rules any character can be an elf, this doesn't mean that people in the setting can can just choose to be elves! That your character is a wizard ipso facto means they have whatever fictional quality is required to be a wizard.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
And, two or three apprentices is not uncommon in literature, and even if the occasional wizard drops off to go swamp living, another will enter into politics to get tax breaks on magical reagents. And if the evil necromancer can fund a dozen apprentices, then the good necromancers can do the same thing. And if they can teach a dozen students effectively and quickly enough to become a threat within a time period of the plot... then why are we saying people can't learn magic fast enough to do that and politics?

The point is that the masters have to be already established wizards who have turned their skill into a sustainable lifestyle before they take apprentices. And the master progression stalls as apprentice seem to catch up to the masters.

And again, not everyone can become wizards. Many editions have requirements to be a member of a class or weaken class features if you don't meet requirements. Intelligence being the most common.

It's it worth a near decade of study to not be able to ever get past level 1 spells? Is it worth it to be a wizard if your DCs will be terrible? Is it worth being a wizard if you don't get the XP bonus and can fail learning spells so easily?

This is probably why every high elf isn't a wizard. They rolled bad for INT or used the default NPC array. "Sorry Aergeon. You rolled 8 in INT so you have a total of 9. But cheer up. That 17 DEX becomes 19. Here's a bow and light armor."
 

Chaosmancer

Legend
That's bizarrely confusing how the rules are written with the fictional reality. By the rules any character can be an elf, this doesn't mean that people in the setting can can just choose to be elves! That your character is a wizard ipso facto means they have whatever fictional quality is required to be a wizard.

You miss the point, but let me put it this way.

I can make any PC and have them meet the requirements for learning arcane magic. Now, maybe every PC ever made is in fact a capable abstract mathematician with a head for 4th dimensional geometry. But, if I'm playing an INT 6 Barbarian, that is unlikely to be the case, and I can still take Magical Adept or Ritual Caster at level 4.

That is what I meant by any character. Not that I can make level 1 wizards, but that I can take any existing character and find a way to add arcane magic to their repertoire. And there are almost no limits on that. No feat chains, no Int prereqs, so saying that to learn arcane magic you need to have some special skill... it just is not supported by the mechanics.

You can add it in the lore, sure, but there is nothing to support it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The point is that the masters have to be already established wizards who have turned their skill into a sustainable lifestyle before they take apprentices. And the master progression stalls as apprentice seem to catch up to the masters.

It might be because it is late, but this doesn't make any sense in regards to my post.

Yes, masters are people who are established. That is an obvious fact.

No idea what you mean by "master progression stalls as apprentices seem to catch up" Unless you are talking about levels? But that has nothing to do with the number of wizards being trained, which was my point.

And again, not everyone can become wizards. Many editions have requirements to be a member of a class or weaken class features if you don't meet requirements. Intelligence being the most common.

And other editions don't have requirements to choose a class, nor features heavily based on your Intelligence which pose an impediment to the type of magic we are talking about.


It's it worth a near decade of study to not be able to ever get past level 1 spells? Is it worth it to be a wizard if your DCs will be terrible? Is it worth being a wizard if you don't get the XP bonus and can fail learning spells so easily?

This is probably why every high elf isn't a wizard. They rolled bad for INT or used the default NPC array. "Sorry Aergeon. You rolled 8 in INT so you have a total of 9. But cheer up. That 17 DEX becomes 19. Here's a bow and light armor."

Well... I've only been talking about how useful level 1 spells are. So yes, seems worth it. Who cares about DC? You don't need a DC for Mage Armor, Alarm, Shield, Find Familiar, Sleep.

Even if I went back to older editions, lots of spells that don't require a DC.

Not sure about this "failing to learn spells thing" must be another obstacle that only existed in older editions. But, it also likely wouldn't be a major problem.

Again, we aren't making a wizard who is going to be going out and fighting orc hordes or banishing demons. I'm looking at low level simple magics. How much money do you save on repairs to very expensive dresses and tunics with prestidigitation and mending? That alone could potentially save a noble family hundreds of gold over a few decades. For very very little cost.
 

Aldarc

Legend
Again, we aren't making a wizard who is going to be going out and fighting orc hordes or banishing demons. I'm looking at low level simple magics. How much money do you save on repairs to very expensive dresses and tunics with prestidigitation and mending? That alone could potentially save a noble family hundreds of gold over a few decades. For very very little cost.
Or even pick Bard, and nobles would get access to Cure Wounds and Healing Word.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top