Social Structures in High-Fantasy Role-Playing Games
7-26-01
Posted by
Antonius
In my previous article I discussed how a realistic system of governance in high fantasy could give more opportunities for in-depth role-playing. Here is the catch: you need the plausible social structures to back it up.
No system of governance appeared out of the blue. The rise of the feudal system in Europe during the Middle Ages had to do with particular circumstances inherent in the European continent at the time the system was created. No wonder the same system did not appear in India, America or Australia.
Role-playing games are not an exercise in history though. You can safely proceed in the reverse manner if you want to: pick the system of governance first and arrange the social structures of the land afterwards. The advantage is that the heroes interact mostly with the system and less with the reasons behind the system. Make your conscious choices in advance about the system and explain everything by working from the end to the beginning.
Now to the job. In high fantasy we are basically talking about a pseudo-medieval world with magic. Apart from magic, we are still very near the medieval model, so by discarding some of its prominent features we lose in realism thus in opportunities in playing a true political campaign.
The masses. Most high fantasy rpgs in the market exaggerate the role and power of the masses. By ‘masses’ I mean the average hunter, shepherd, farmer who live simply because they were allowed to live by their lord. They were very poor and even their profession was part of a concession from the lord of the land. Most of the time they didn’t own land or cattle, and most of the forests were the lord’s hunting grounds. In that sense, these were truly dependent people. They exercised an activity because they were allowed to exercise it and they were heavily taxed for it. They had no institutionalized say over the governance of their land neither could they revolt. Revolts during the Middle Ages due to social reasons are the exception, if not inexistent. In effect, this is truly the kind of people who in the case of need will turn to their master or the adventurers!
In addition, although the power of the masses is exaggerated, their numbers are greatly suppressed. The need for variety is understandable, but the GM must be aware that historically that was not the case.
The ‘Merchant’ problem. The merchant class is the on the contrary the one that usually sees its numbers and wealth greatly enhanced. In the Forgotten Realms campaign setting, probably the most popular setting ever, the number of merchants is probably higher than the number of the providers of the goods! One wonders where these goods come from!
This makes the feudal system of governance seem bizarre. The French revolution happened exactly because of the rise of the merchant class. Money passed from the feudal lords to the people involved in commerce, initiating the demand for political power. New ideas floated freely as merchants were probably the most mobile people of their time, traveling to places peasants only know as places ‘very far away’. It isn’t logical that the feudal system can survive such an abundance of merchants and free circulation of ideas. If it does, make it a conscious decision and justify it!
The Church. It appears that again the role of the clergy is greatly degraded. In high fantasy churches have unimaginable power, even bringing people back from the dead in some cases. Yet again their interrelation with nobility is almost non-existent, as if the clergy does not demand power of its own.
Relations between churches are usually presented in an awkward and rudimentary manner. During the real Middle Ages the Churches of the three most prominent monotheistic dogmas had extensive contact, not to mention their attempt of subverting what they considered as splinter groups from the original sect. The average high fantasy rpg deals with it with a chart stating which church ‘likes’ which. Well…
Also be aware that the church is one of the very few means of escape a commoner had from the peasant way of life. Religion’s impact on the masses is profound and not subtle as it is today; think of witch-hunts, of superstition, of gargantuan cathedrals in cities where the average house had the height of five to seven metres.
Mages. Adding this variable demands loads of attention that the designers most of the times seem to forget. The first and foremost question is who can become a mage. Is it hereditary? Is it open to commoners like the act of becoming a priest? How many are they in effect? Are they organized in guilds? Mages seem to hold as much power as churches do, if not more. Why do they usually appear in the background then? Answering these questions demonstrates that most high fantasy rpgs are highly unbalanced.
Nobles. In the real world nobles were in charge because they had the most valuable thing of their time: land. Land lead to money and money to political power and military might. They were very few and tried to remain few by marrying amongst themselves. Commoners or clergymen that became nobles are rare exceptions and became more common at the latter Middle Ages, when the feudal system showed its first signs of decline.
The question here is the one posed in by the ‘food chain pyramid’ example: How does nobility survive? What it holds is obviously neither the most important thing of the time nor are nobility’s numbers strong enough to justify them staying in charge. The Churches can invoke avatars of their Gods, the Mages consort with beings of unimaginable strength while the Merchants have the money and circulate the ideas. The French revolution whipped nobility out, exactly because it was unable to keep its strength for more time. Yet this is not happening here although nobility obviously lacks the means of staying in charge!
Rpgs are constructs of our fantasy, so all discrepancies can be explained by the designer’s benevolent need to provide diversity. For players demanding realism and serious medieval political background though, this need kills the game. Players and especially the GM should know the ground they are standing on. As one can’t build castles in the sand, one can’t create realistic political or conspiratorial campaigns set in high fantasy worlds the way they are usually presented. That is what the GM is there for: to make the changes necessary for his party to enjoy the game.
|
|