Greetings!

Oh, yeah, indeed! The Early Medieval Period--say, 500 AD to 1000 AD, was a bonanza for "Commoners" to rise to the top of the local society and make themselves Noble Lords. The early family of the Franks, were essentially chieftains of their respective tribes. They later became regal, Frankish Kings, as seen by Charlemagne. Likewise, however, many ordinary men that were Irish warriors, Saxon raiders, Viking warriors, later Galloglas mercenary Vikings--all set themselves up as aristocrats. They became "Noble" because they had a suit of armor, and a sword. Beyond that, they were good leaders, and skilled in fighting and tactics. These attributes led many warriors to flock to their banner and serve them loyally. This is how much of the early European nobility actually began.

Some similar dynamics existed in Eastern Europe as well. Various Viking warriors, Slav barbarians, and Steppe Barbarians all rose up to contribute and form future layers of nobility, power, and prestige. Later on in the East, after the arrival of the Mongol Hordes, much of Eastern Europe was exterminated, and what was left were broken to the yoke of serving their Mongol masters. However, having said that, it can be seen that new, up and coming Poles, Russians, various other Slavs, Hungarians, all gradually formed new power centers and layers of leadership. Interestingly, more than a few enemy Steppe tribes fleeing from the wrath of the Mongols, also found new opportunities throughout Eastern Europe--not just to become leaders of local areas, but such as in Hungary, they were welcomed into Hungary by the Hungarian King to settle and find refuge--with the requirement that the Steppe barbarians serve Hungary loyally, and also eagerly mix and mingle with the fractured and weakened Hungarian population. The Hungarian King also established one of Europe's earliest charters granting political rights, freedom, and religious equality to the Steppe barbarians.

It should also be noted, that while Castilian Spain was certainly growing stronger and centralizing royal power after 800 AD, throughout their long wars against the Muslim invaders, there was also some considerable fluctuation and social mobility.

There was also considerable social mobility amongst various regions of Italy and Sicily during these centuries as well. Many of the later Italian nobility had their beginnings as priests, mercenary warriors, raiders, merchants, and craftsmen.

Very interesting and dynamic period of time.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 10, 2025, 11:08:17 AMIt does raise the question of where the sheriff and the posse are. If you're going to be true to a Wild West theme for D&D, then every frontier town should have at least a handful of mid-level classed characters whose job it is to deal with traveling vagabonds who get out of hand.

I dunno, a town badly in need of a sheriff -- where the only "mid-level" characters are villians -- is a common theme in the westerns I've seen.

And according to those sources, it's typically a large part of what makes other armed and dangerous outsiders welcome in town.

Basically the inverse.

Quote from: SHARK on May 11, 2025, 06:10:52 AMOh, yeah, indeed! The Early Medieval Period--say, 500 AD to 1000 AD, was a bonanza for "Commoners" to rise to the top of the local society and make themselves Noble Lords...

While I'm not big on actual historical settings, I do like to use elements of them and this aspect of the so-called Dark Ages* is specifically why I set my main game setting right about two hundred years after the collapse of a Rome-like expy. It's still recent enough for some stories of glory days to remain (think the equivalent of stories from the Revolutionary War) and plenty of structures from the past haven't fallen to complete ruin.

But most important was the social mobility of such times. Any man with a sword and suit of armor could, with determination, skill and a lot of luck, write his own destiny and become a King.

I think a lot of people overlook that the English word "Lord" actually derives from the same root word as "Guard" and "Ward" come from. Because the original role of the Lord was not to rule, but to be the protector of a group of people. In exchange for protection the people would give him food and goods he'd need to continue being their protector (such as by recruiting other fighting men).

And the first Lords and Kings were rarely hereditary. The body of his fighting men would elect another from their number to replace them. He might suggest one of his sons (who was no doubt among them having had an upbringing in the fighting arts), but they often voted for a different son or another man entirely if they felt the candidate was weak.

It was all very shades of the way the Germanic tribes elected their chiefs. Until the realms got centralized enough that the struggles over who would next be elected got too violent and the need for a formalized system (i.e. hereditary nobility) arose.

But that was centuries on. For my adventure world any man with a sword and skill to use it could claim to be a lord and be treated as such. Because he has a sword and knows how to use it.

* Named so by Enlightenment-era elitists who viewed it as the dark gulf between the rule of centralized Roman elites and the rise of centralized European elites. Even the early Globalists were doing the "power of renaming things" trick.

Quote from: Zalman on May 11, 2025, 08:00:52 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 10, 2025, 11:08:17 AMIt does raise the question of where the sheriff and the posse are. If you're going to be true to a Wild West theme for D&D, then every frontier town should have at least a handful of mid-level classed characters whose job it is to deal with traveling vagabonds who get out of hand.

I dunno, a town badly in need of a sheriff -- where the only "mid-level" characters are villians -- is a common theme in the westerns I've seen.

And according to those sources, it's typically a large part of what makes other armed and dangerous outsiders welcome in town.

Basically the inverse.

Pretty much this.

Just sub in "monsters" for the Western bandits and outlaws threatening the town and you have D&D Land and the typical reaction to armed HUMANS (demi-humans are close enough) showing up in their town.

As I said previously, they're not going to be scared of the armed PCs, they're going be hoping they can pin the proverbial Sheriff's badge on them and have them deal with the bandit/monster problem.

Quote from: Mishihari on May 10, 2025, 02:17:11 AMSo I'm curious.  The PCs are in town where they aren't fully armed and armored, and there's a fight anyway.  Where is the line between "screwing the players over" and "providing an interesting change of pace?"

In some cases it reads as just an excuse for the DM to fuck with the players.

PCs check in their gear while in town. These are just a few of the things that could happen.
1: Thieves steal the stuff from storage.
2: Some disaster like a fire, etc destroys the stuff in storage.
3: Corrupt officials confiscate the stuff.
4: An attack occurs and the PCs are caught flatfooted.
5: PCs are captured, arrested, or pressganged while unarmed/armored.
and so on.

Can it work? Of course. Does it work. Not as often as one would like because most DMs misuse it or abuse it.
I've seen it work in sci-fi settings like Star Frontiers and Albedo. And it is a thing in the various Star Trek RPGs for example.

Quote from: Zalman on May 11, 2025, 08:00:52 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 10, 2025, 11:08:17 AMIt does raise the question of where the sheriff and the posse are. If you're going to be true to a Wild West theme for D&D, then every frontier town should have at least a handful of mid-level classed characters whose job it is to deal with traveling vagabonds who get out of hand.

I dunno, a town badly in need of a sheriff -- where the only "mid-level" characters are villians -- is a common theme in the westerns I've seen.

And according to those sources, it's typically a large part of what makes other armed and dangerous outsiders welcome in town.

Basically the inverse.

Sure. That's the case in my favorite western (The Magnificent Seven). There are also several westerns where the sheriff is the problem. But there's an equal or greater number where the sheriff is the hero and the ruffians coming into town to make trouble are the problem. All three would make good adventure scenarios; even in the latter, the PCs could find themselves deputized.

Quote from: Chris24601 on May 11, 2025, 08:30:05 AMJust sub in "monsters" for the Western bandits and outlaws threatening the town and you have D&D Land and the typical reaction to armed HUMANS (demi-humans are close enough) showing up in their town.

As I said previously, they're not going to be scared of the armed PCs, they're going be hoping they can pin the proverbial Sheriff's badge on them and have them deal with the bandit/monster problem.

To extend the western analogy, the goblins don't usually come into town to get drunk, grope the saloon girls and kill people over gambling disputes. That'd be either human bandits or adventurers. Admittedly not most PCs, but NPC adventurers for sure. When a party of armed men rides into town, how do you know if they're PCs or not?

Pinning the Sheriff's badge on the adventurers would mean getting them to stay, especially with the higher incidence of threats. That's the western trope too, right? The sheriff is a retired gunfighter. You do see retired adventurers as town bailiffs and the like in modules, and arguably that's what domain level play is supposed to represent. Thinking of it though, you'd probably see more of towns trying to entice even mid-level adventurers to settle down there as protectors.

I just explain that civilization brings its own protections for certain sacrifices. Places that don't means that you don't know who you are dealing with and might (or mob) makes right -- meaning you never get to sleep deeply. So arms control becomes a function of civilization that players will seek out for PC rest and recuperation. Without such "safe zones" things get ugly fast as the village, town, & city is just a mega-dungeon usually aboveground with similar factional compacts to hold a tenuous peace.

I usually impart this in two major ways:

• I never run NPCs as only 0 lvl cannon fodder. There'll always be surprises in your midst.
• Numbers, numbers, numbers. Overbearing is a nice rule, and during a frenzied melee mobs understand this action advantage.

This also applies to magic-users (psionics, etc.) in my games that use magic. You are not the only hero, mind your manners, have some humility. Society has peace by a monopoly on violence and will liberally apply it during duress.

Yes that means certain systems like WotC/PF 3.Xe will be more upfront headache to populate with NPCs. But most other systems it is fine to populate a world with far more lethal force than ANY PC (or team of PCs) could typically field in the standard levels of the game. And that's how I like it: the world's bigger than you. Cope. Make meaning with what you got.

So social mores about doffing armor, tying arms with peace knots, binding gloves that hold down a finger to disrupt somatic casting, or a mouth marble for casters to prevent verbal casting, or whatever other social agreement you can dream up is very much present. They are just expressed as needed given the level of mistrust in a region. e.g. Heartlands see less need for these displays as the rules are internalized, power centers and borderlands more need of overt displays, frontier hinterlands everyone is assumed armed until proven otherwise and politeness is the law of the land.

Just as an aside, Steven Mitchell and SHARK's games sound awesome to me.

Quote from: Mishihari on May 10, 2025, 02:17:11 AMSo I'm curious.  The PCs are in town where they aren't fully armed and armored, and there's a fight anyway.  Where is the line between "screwing the players over" and "providing an interesting change of pace?"

Everyone plays by the same rules. The PCs aren't fully armed and armoured, nor are the people starting the fight. It's going to be fisticuffs, or perhaps knives, clubs or improvised weapons and the best "shield" is wrapping your cloak around your forearm.

Quote from: Opaopajr on Today at 04:54:59 AMI just explain that civilization brings its own protections for certain sacrifices. Places that don't means that you don't know who you are dealing with and might (or mob) makes right -- meaning you never get to sleep deeply. So arms control becomes a function of civilization that players will seek out for PC rest and recuperation. Without such "safe zones" things get ugly fast as the village, town, & city is just a mega-dungeon usually aboveground with similar factional compacts to hold a tenuous peace.

I usually impart this in two major ways:

• I never run NPCs as only 0 lvl cannon fodder. There'll always be surprises in your midst.
• Numbers, numbers, numbers. Overbearing is a nice rule, and during a frenzied melee mobs understand this action advantage.

This also applies to magic-users (psionics, etc.) in my games that use magic. You are not the only hero, mind your manners, have some humility. Society has peace by a monopoly on violence and will liberally apply it during duress.

Yes that means certain systems like WotC/PF 3.Xe will be more upfront headache to populate with NPCs. But most other systems it is fine to populate a world with far more lethal force than ANY PC (or team of PCs) could typically field in the standard levels of the game. And that's how I like it: the world's bigger than you. Cope. Make meaning with what you got.

So social mores about doffing armor, tying arms with peace knots, binding gloves that hold down a finger to disrupt somatic casting, or a mouth marble for casters to prevent verbal casting, or whatever other social agreement you can dream up is very much present. They are just expressed as needed given the level of mistrust in a region. e.g. Heartlands see less need for these displays as the rules are internalized, power centers and borderlands more need of overt displays, frontier hinterlands everyone is assumed armed until proven otherwise and politeness is the law of the land.

How about....no?

Who is "civilization"? What's his name? Does he have an address? How many hit points does he have? "The World" is bigger than me, you say? So who is "the World"? What's his address? What's his armor class? How many hit dice does he have? Can I hold "the World" personally accountable, if I ever get fucked over when I'm armorless and weaponless in your precious "City of Verisimilitude"? What's that, you say? No?

And why would I ever allow a bunch of mouthy NPC Karens to practically hogtie me and force me to take part in a humiliation ritual every time I enter a city?

"Mouth marble"? Are you gonna have me wear a dog collar, a butt plug, and a muzzle too, "my lord"? For the record, I'm being extremely vulgar, in order to make a point. Seriously, what the fuck is the matter with you? Some of you guys on this forum seem to have some creepy DM domination fetishes, and it is very fucking weird. I want to play a fantasy game, but this is absolutely not what I have in mind.

In response, I will just sack your precious city when I'm high level, and nuke the depraved gestapo ruling class.....because policies like this will always be the brainchild of a small minority of corrupt assholes who rule with a hidden hand.

"Mouth marble"? Will you fucking listen to yourself, you weirdo?

Good grief. If I was ever exposed to any of this creepy DM domination fetish crap during the years I played D&D, I'd have quit the hobby a million years ago. Some of the things you guys are posting in this thread are starting to seriously weird me out, because it tells me how you guys really think.....and I do not like it.

Quote from: Kiero on Today at 11:14:43 AMJust as an aside, Steven Mitchell and SHARK's games sound awesome to me.

Quote from: Mishihari on May 10, 2025, 02:17:11 AMSo I'm curious.  The PCs are in town where they aren't fully armed and armored, and there's a fight anyway.  Where is the line between "screwing the players over" and "providing an interesting change of pace?"

Everyone plays by the same rules. The PCs aren't fully armed and armoured, nor are the people starting the fight. It's going to be fisticuffs, or perhaps knives, clubs or improvised weapons and the best "shield" is wrapping your cloak around your forearm.

Fine. I cast fireball. Eat hot death.

Oh, what's that? I can't do that? I guess I'll be a monk then, since fighters are forbidden to have weapons and armor. Those 20 years of martial arts experience really pays off, right?

What's that? What's the best shield? If I wrap a towel around my forearm, how much does that improve my armor class again? What's that? It doesn't improve my armor class at all? Then why did you say that, Mister DM? I'm so confused...

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb on Today at 02:46:49 PMFine. I cast fireball. Eat hot death.

Oh, what's that? I can't do that? I guess I'll be a monk then, since fighters are forbidden to have weapons and armor. Those 20 years of martial arts experience really pays off, right?

What's that? What's the best shield? If I wrap a towel around my forearm, how much does that improve my armor class again? What's that? It doesn't improve my armor class at all? Then why did you say that, Mister DM? I'm so confused...

Are you 12? Because you sound just like a whiny child. I should know, I have several.

This seems a very emotive subject for you, given multiple tantrums on the topic.