Just play hardcore Chivalry & Sorcery and strictly enforce true medieval social norms. This does have the downside of very limited "supernatural" encounters and any scuffles within a walled town will probably just be with drunks or thieves. But that's realistic vs. fantasy RPGs that presume hordes of orcs, giants, goblins, dragons, undead, etc.

Quote from: jhkim on May 08, 2025, 12:47:25 PMRegarding "civilisation involves a monopoly on violence" -- I generally presume that the PCs are part of that monopoly. i.e. They have status equivalent to nobility and/or military. If they are homeless common strangers with no connections or rank, then a logical civilization wouldn't tolerate them gearing up in the city with arms, armor, and other specialized resources - regardless of what they are wearing.

In other words, if adventurers come into a civilized city to buy the equivalent of assault rifles, grenade launchers, and body armor - then that will be restricted even if they keep the gear out of sight as they walk around the streets.

Logically, the state would either shut them down or co-opt them - using the equivalent of letters of marque or similar.

Given the way many players choose to conduct their characters, and their allergy to being tied to the social structures in a world, generally homeless strangers is more appropriate than members of the elite.

Quote from: Kiero on May 08, 2025, 01:53:38 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 08, 2025, 12:47:25 PMRegarding "civilisation involves a monopoly on violence" -- I generally presume that the PCs are part of that monopoly. i.e. They have status equivalent to nobility and/or military. If they are homeless common strangers with no connections or rank, then a logical civilization wouldn't tolerate them gearing up in the city with arms, armor, and other specialized resources - regardless of what they are wearing.

In other words, if adventurers come into a civilized city to buy the equivalent of assault rifles, grenade launchers, and body armor - then that will be restricted even if they keep the gear out of sight as they walk around the streets.

Logically, the state would either shut them down or co-opt them - using the equivalent of letters of marque or similar.

Given the way many players choose to conduct their characters, and their allergy to being tied to the social structures in a world, generally homeless strangers is more appropriate than members of the elite.

There's a chicken-and-egg issue here. Players conduct their characters based on how the GM sets things up.

In my experience, GMs frequently have PCs treated like crap which is where players develop their aversion to social connection. Social structures are frequently used to limit or tie down PCs and not as ways to empower them. I think that's behind a lot of the negative reactions you've gotten on this thread - where posters interpret your arms control as ways to trick and screw over players.

I find that players generally love it when they are treated with respect and can rapidly gain stuff through social connections.

Quote from: jhkim on May 08, 2025, 02:58:55 PMThere's a chicken-and-egg issue here. Players conduct their characters based on how the GM sets things up.

In my experience, GMs frequently have PCs treated like crap which is where players develop their aversion to social connection. Social structures are frequently used to limit or tie down PCs and not as ways to empower them. I think that's behind a lot of the negative reactions you've gotten on this thread - where posters interpret your arms control as ways to trick and screw over players.

I find that players generally love it when they are treated with respect and can rapidly gain stuff through social connections.

Which brings me back to "don't play with dicks". Fortunately, I haven't had to since I was at school.

Quote from: jhkim on May 08, 2025, 02:58:55 PM

Quote from: Kiero on May 08, 2025, 01:53:38 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 08, 2025, 12:47:25 PMRegarding "civilisation involves a monopoly on violence" -- I generally presume that the PCs are part of that monopoly. i.e. They have status equivalent to nobility and/or military. If they are homeless common strangers with no connections or rank, then a logical civilization wouldn't tolerate them gearing up in the city with arms, armor, and other specialized resources - regardless of what they are wearing.

In other words, if adventurers come into a civilized city to buy the equivalent of assault rifles, grenade launchers, and body armor - then that will be restricted even if they keep the gear out of sight as they walk around the streets.

Logically, the state would either shut them down or co-opt them - using the equivalent of letters of marque or similar.

Given the way many players choose to conduct their characters, and their allergy to being tied to the social structures in a world, generally homeless strangers is more appropriate than members of the elite.

There's a chicken-and-egg issue here. Players conduct their characters based on how the GM sets things up.

In my experience, GMs frequently have PCs treated like crap which is where players develop their aversion to social connection. Social structures are frequently used to limit or tie down PCs and not as ways to empower them. I think that's behind a lot of the negative reactions you've gotten on this thread - where posters interpret your arms control as ways to trick and screw over players.

I find that players generally love it when they are treated with respect and can rapidly gain stuff through social connections.

Greetings!

Very true, Jhkim. Kiero has some excellent points though, as presenting dynamics. For example, in central, highly-civilized regions of my Thandor world, the large, powerful cities frequently embrace some form of "Arms Control" including restrictions on mystical, spell-casting characters. Out on the frontiers, in border areas, few if any such restrictions are embraced. Out there, it is very much "The Wild West" kind of environment.

In large, powerful cities in Thandor, well, indeed, the "Powers that Be" are primarily concerned with maintaining and securing their power--but also tend towards being strictly authoritarian in maintaining public law and order, and discipline. Whole regiments of templars and professional soldiers may readily be deployed and very ruthlessly, to ensure trade routes are secure, vital economic assets are protected, and so on. That kind of assets and infrastructure is an absolute essential foundation to the elite's wealth, but also the prime lifeblood of the economy and trade. Somewhat obscured by these more obvious elements, is an underlying and massively powerful motivation, whether I am dealing with the Vallorean Empire, the Chang Empire, or somewhere in between, which is the critical importance of maintaining Legitimacy. Governments will use armies, teams of assassins, economic dynamics, lawfare, just about anything, to support and maintain their prestige and legitimacy. The people's continued support, discipline, and loyalty, is absolutely predicated on the foundational principle of Legitimacy.

As the DM. I am quick to use these elements to highlight and contrast the deeper cultural dynamics between huge, civilized and heavily-fortified cities, as opposed to frontier towns, isolated backwaters, the dense, mysterious forests, or the wind-swept Steppes.

Huge fortified cities provide vast wealth, opportunities, education, technology, and fantastic luxury--but at a cost. There is great strength, order, discipline, court systems, and security--as well as control. There are some freedoms--but the depth and nature of such freedoms in such an environment are very different from that which exists out on the frontier, or in the great Steppes.

This duality of conflict sheds light and provides energy to the fierce struggle and opposition of barbarian tribes living amidst the forests or out on the Steppes, as well as a sizeable segment of civilized peoples living on the frontiers and borderlands. Those borderland civilized peoples can see, feel, and smell the difference in freedom and autonomy, even if such concepts are out of reach for the urban masses living within the walls of civilization. The barbarian tribes, obviously, are violently opposed to civilized realms for precisely these reasons, and more.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb on May 08, 2025, 11:06:13 AMSigh. I really miss the use of forum emojis at a time like this.

So what amazing rpg are you playing that ignorant plebes like myself do not appreciate?

Reads like Fantasy Wargaming. You are either a noble or a peasant and if you are a peasant you have practically no rights. What excitement! Hurray!

Quote from: Omega on May 08, 2025, 10:08:46 PM

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb on May 08, 2025, 11:06:13 AMSigh. I really miss the use of forum emojis at a time like this.

So what amazing rpg are you playing that ignorant plebes like myself do not appreciate?

Reads like Fantasy Wargaming. You are either a noble or a peasant and if you are a peasant you have practically no rights. What excitement! Hurray!

And then there's a shock when the people in power have a playerpeasant revolt.

Quote from: Kiero on May 08, 2025, 01:53:38 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 08, 2025, 12:47:25 PMRegarding "civilisation involves a monopoly on violence" -- I generally presume that the PCs are part of that monopoly. i.e. They have status equivalent to nobility and/or military. If they are homeless common strangers with no connections or rank, then a logical civilization wouldn't tolerate them gearing up in the city with arms, armor, and other specialized resources - regardless of what they are wearing.

In other words, if adventurers come into a civilized city to buy the equivalent of assault rifles, grenade launchers, and body armor - then that will be restricted even if they keep the gear out of sight as they walk around the streets.

Logically, the state would either shut them down or co-opt them - using the equivalent of letters of marque or similar.

Given the way many players choose to conduct their characters, and their allergy to being tied to the social structures in a world, generally homeless strangers is more appropriate than members of the elite.

Imagine making that the norm for how NPCs operate in the world too...

OK, it would very likely look like some post-apocalyptic anarchic nightmare, but maybe the players would enjoy a taste of their own hooch.

I also have to wonder why IRL, people from Britain aren't all badass monks/martial artists since they can't carry weapons or use magic. I mean, clearly they're being depowered otherwise...

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 09, 2025, 09:33:51 AMI also have to wonder why IRL, people from Britain aren't all badass monks/martial artists since they can't carry weapons or use magic. I mean, clearly they're being depowered otherwise...

I have over 20 years of martial arts experience. Never touched a gun in my life, besides an air rifle a few times.

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 09, 2025, 09:33:51 AMI also have to wonder why IRL, people from Britain aren't all badass monks/martial artists since they can't carry weapons or use magic. I mean, clearly they're being depowered otherwise...

Most of those of adventurer-stock left to conquer and establish the realms of the New World. Thus, Europe today has a disproportionately high rate of NPCs.

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 09, 2025, 09:33:51 AMI also have to wonder why IRL, people from Britain aren't all badass monks/martial artists since they can't carry weapons or use magic. I mean, clearly they're being depowered otherwise...

I know, right? And then I start wondering, why can't the people from Britain cast magic missile either? I mean.....after all, it's only a first level spell, and they can't even manage that.

Those silly Brits.

Quote from: Kiero on May 09, 2025, 10:09:57 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 09, 2025, 09:33:51 AMI also have to wonder why IRL, people from Britain aren't all badass monks/martial artists since they can't carry weapons or use magic. I mean, clearly they're being depowered otherwise...

I have over 20 years of martial arts experience. Never touched a gun in my life, besides an air rifle a few times.

Please tell me you got the joke...

Quote from: Kiero on May 06, 2025, 05:56:25 AMDo many settings actually consider that kind of thing, or is it more in the realm of how a GM presents their game?

*I* definitely enforce it, regardless of the setting. By "it" I mean whatever is necessary to maintain the status-quo. Even in settings that don't specify it, I will do that.

Since I run a lot of old-school Forgotten Realms the rules for this can be different in different places. Cormyr for instance has laws about keeping weapons peaceknotted. I also enforce the economic reality of having weapons and armor. Someone doesn't just run around in suits of plate and mail, or hell, even having horse.

The modern fantasy ren-faire does a disservice to the idea of earning a lot of this swag. It's taken for granted that "Fighters all wear platemail" and live in it (because you never know when the GM is going to jack you in the middle of the night!"

The other side of that is I enforce social etiquette. If you show up wearing full battle regalia to everyday in-city social settings, unless you're in some battle-hardened frontier town/fort/outpost - people will look at you like someone walking into a bar wearing full tactical gear with a kitted out M-4/M-16 ready to slam it on. I have NPC's treat "those PC's" accordingly until they learn. The city watch looks at them as potential troublemakers, people of import may not want to deal with you for safety concerns, or conversely - you attract the wrong kinds of patrons because to them you flaunt the social order.

As you point out, living in ones armor is not comfortable. I give my players all the leeway required to establish their modus operandi when out in the field. I hit them with penalties if they keep it up. In Savage Worlds you get hit with Fatigue, which suuuucks. It's like walking around in d20 with a -4 to all your rolls.

Invariably when I get new players they trip through all the wires - wear armor all the time, draw weapons at the drop of a hat (Because don't all encounters require murdering all NPCs at all times?) they're *always* ready for combat - even at the local Magistrates soiree where they're trying to rise in social station and *might* have a delicate matter one of the PC's could help with - but they show up with the gang, and one or more PC's are "Ready to rock!!!!!" (and they get stopped at the entrance and left out of the scene).

So yeah, the onus is on you to establish what is or isn't appropriate. I don't expect players to understand the historical reality of these things. Just show, and don't tell (outside of session zero).

Quote from: tenbones on May 09, 2025, 10:47:39 AM

Quote from: Kiero on May 06, 2025, 05:56:25 AMDo many settings actually consider that kind of thing, or is it more in the realm of how a GM presents their game?

*I* definitely enforce it, regardless of the setting. By "it" I mean whatever is necessary to maintain the status-quo. Even in settings that don't specify it, I will do that.

Since I run a lot of old-school Forgotten Realms the rules for this can be different in different places. Cormyr for instance has laws about keeping weapons peaceknotted. I also enforce the economic reality of having weapons and armor. Someone doesn't just run around in suits of plate and mail, or hell, even having horse.

The modern fantasy ren-faire does a disservice to the idea of earning a lot of this swag. It's taken for granted that "Fighters all wear platemail" and live in it (because you never know when the GM is going to jack you in the middle of the night!"

The other side of that is I enforce social etiquette. If you show up wearing full battle regalia to everyday in-city social settings, unless you're in some battle-hardened frontier town/fort/outpost - people will look at you like someone walking into a bar wearing full tactical gear with a kitted out M-4/M-16 ready to slam it on. I have NPC's treat "those PC's" accordingly until they learn. The city watch looks at them as potential troublemakers, people of import may not want to deal with you for safety concerns, or conversely - you attract the wrong kinds of patrons because to them you flaunt the social order.

As you point out, living in ones armor is not comfortable. I give my players all the leeway required to establish their modus operandi when out in the field. I hit them with penalties if they keep it up. In Savage Worlds you get hit with Fatigue, which suuuucks. It's like walking around in d20 with a -4 to all your rolls.

Invariably when I get new players they trip through all the wires - wear armor all the time, draw weapons at the drop of a hat (Because don't all encounters require murdering all NPCs at all times?) they're *always* ready for combat - even at the local Magistrates soiree where they're trying to rise in social station and *might* have a delicate matter one of the PC's could help with - but they show up with the gang, and one or more PC's are "Ready to rock!!!!!" (and they get stopped at the entrance and left out of the scene).

So yeah, the onus is on you to establish what is or isn't appropriate. I don't expect players to understand the historical reality of these things. Just show, and don't tell (outside of session zero).

Fuck the "people of import". Who cares what some mouthy NPCs think? The player characters are the "people of import".

NOT NPCS.

And frankly, what you're saying here is:

"Don't play fighters. Play wizards or monks."

I understand.

And yes, I also understand that's not really your conscious intention, but....incentive promotes behavior.

For example, if you create a disincentive for players to become a fighter (by taking away their armor and weapons, every time they walk into town), then your players will not play fighters. I mean, why would they? Right?

Nobody fucks with the Wizard, Gandalf, and his "mere walking staff", or with the Druid and his "mere walking staff", or even with the Diet Coke version of Goku (the weaponless party monk), but the fighter with armor and weapons gets targeted? So why am I playing a fighter then?

I understand the desire for "verisimilitude", but you're playing a FANTASY GAME. Therefore, you're taking the verisimilitude wankery too far.

As a response to this, all the characters (if they're smart) would probably just wear "glamered" armor (armor disguised as clothes), and hide their weapons in portable holes (or whatever). Or perhaps they'll choose classes that do not need weapons and armor to be effective. Or maybe they'll just avoid the cities entirely, and deep-six the DM's railroad....in order to avoid dealing with unnecessary DM power-tripping and DM dickery from "the people of import".

Seriously though....why would I ever become a fighter in such a campaign, when fighters are already weaker than primary spellcasters anyway? And now you want to make fighters even weaker and less effective, by depriving them of the tools of their class? Oh, but you want to do it in the name of "verisimilitude", so that suddenly makes it acceptable.

Well, how about....no?

In that case, I'll stick with the frontier towns and the dungeons then. That way, there are far fewer "Karen busybodies" trying to dictate terms to me.....

.....in a fantasy game.

Quote from: Kiero on May 09, 2025, 10:09:57 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 09, 2025, 09:33:51 AMI also have to wonder why IRL, people from Britain aren't all badass monks/martial artists since they can't carry weapons or use magic. I mean, clearly they're being depowered otherwise...

I have over 20 years of martial arts experience. Never touched a gun in my life, besides an air rifle a few times.

Kiero, how is it humanly possible that you completely missed my point? Am I talking to a wall? You live in a country that is literally controlled by a tyrannically evil government that wants to prevent you from owning and carrying weapons, so your response to this is to acquire over 20 years of real life martial arts experience. Isn't your real life story a rough approximation of what I said was a logical response to your precious "verisimilitude"?

Unless fighters can become martial arts masters of weaponless combat in your game (which bans armor and weapons), then why would I ever become a fighter?

Do you get the point? Do you understand that I get the point?

You're playing a fantasy game. You do not have to behave like a real-life nanny-state Karen. Let your players have a small amount of wish fulfillment and empowerment. Your world will not implode if that happens.