Land and Wealth

[GrimJesta]

I have a quick question. I like to make wealth in my games based more on assets than gold pieces (thats too video games for me). How would you translate the wealth table into land square-footage? Or trade assets? Any ideas?

 

-=Grim=-

[Barwickian]

As a very rough rule of thumb, 15 acres is enough to support a family of 5 at subsistence level using medieval open-field techniques. A standard knight's fee was 1200 acres (though talking of 'standard' in the middle ages is somewhat perilous).

 

In the middle of the 12th century, the lands of English barons (those holding their lands directly from the king) averaged around 50 knights' fees, but ranged from just one fee to nearly 300 fees.

 

Work out what level of income you'd like a subsistence-level peasant to have and what you'd like a knight to have, and you can build a rough landholding model.

 

Note that magical yield-improvement (such as a Bless Crops spell) will mean a family can subsist on fewer acres. If such a spell is used infrequently holdings will prbably stay the same size, and there'll be a year of plenty when the spell is used. If it's used every year, the ultimate effect will be to reduce the size of land-holdings and increasew the density of population.

[Sociotard]

So the characters will barter with deeds of ownership? Interesting. How do you plan on handling everyday transactions? It's not like every shopkeeper has change for 10 hectares when you're in the mood for a mug of grog.

[Barwickian]

Wealth and housing in game terms

 

Originally posted by Sociotard

So the characters will barter with deeds of ownership? Interesting. How do you plan on handling everyday transactions? It's not like every shopkeeper has change for 10 hectares when you're in the mood for a mug of grog.

 

Chuckle. No, I'd expect people to link landholding in to the wealth table on Fantasy Hero p317, and possibly the Desmesne Table on FH p101.

 

For instance, the following might work for some campaigns:

 

Destitute (beggar; no land)

Poor (Cottar/bordar; 5 acres)

Middle Class (Half-villein; 15 acres)

Well-off (Villein; 30 acres)

Wealthy (knight; 1200 acres, of which 300 is demesne)

Filthy Rich (baron; 60,000 acres+)

 

That gives a rather jolly, Merrie England, happy peasants feel. Campaigns with a grimmer theme might drop the incomes and landholding down a notch, so a cottar with 5 acres is destitute and a knight is well off, and so on.

 

To design a peasant landholding as a base, look up Bases in FREd p317-321 and the demesne tables on FH p101.

 

A typical peasant longhouse, such as a 13th century half-villein or villein might live in, is approximately 4.5m by 20m (90 sq m), so would cost 10 points. It stands in a toft (plot) of about half an acre (0.2 hectare, or 2000 sq m); our base grounds are the same dimensions as the house (90sq m), to the toft will cost an additional 4pts (for 1440 sq m, but rounded in the character's favour).

 

A half-villein's lands of 15 acres work out as 6 hectares (60,000 sq m), which is an additional 5pts. Add an extra point for a villein's 30-acre landholding.

 

In the lowland, agricultural belt, this house will most likely be in centralised village (class as suburbs, +0 points), in an area with average resources (+40 points), and in a difficult to defend location (-10 points).

 

So far, a villein's longhouse will cost 10 (house) + 4 (plot) + 6 (lands) + 40 (resources) -10 (defence), for a total of 50.

 

However, serfs in England had to belong to a society called a frankpledge, a group of men sworn by law to keep each other on the straight and narrow, and report any offences to the manorial lord or king's court. Not only the peasant but his house will be watched by neighbours and officials. This is a 20-point disadvantage (Hunted: more powerful than PC, extensive non-combat influence, Very Frequently (14-), Watched).

 

You might want to add another disadvantage (must be paid for by rent if free lands, or labour if unfree lands), but since everybody except the king in a feudal society had to pay some kind of rent or service for their holdings, I'd rule this as a campaign-required +0 disadvantage.

 

So our villein's longhouse and lands cost him (50-20)/5 = 6 points.

 

An isolated holding, such as an assart (clearance) in woods or marshlands, would be worth 10pts (an Isolated location, +10 points; the Watched drops down to Occasionally (8-), for a total of (60-10)/5 = 10). A peasant can get away with many more minor infractions in an isolated holding.

[tkdguy]

Nobles also have several estates and hire stewards to run them. Remember: land = wealth = status, so kings sometimes award land to favored retainers as a reward.

[Barwickian]

Originally posted by tkdguy

Nobles also have several estates and hire stewards to run them. Remember: land = wealth = status, so kings sometimes award land to favored retainers as a reward.

 

True, and so do lesser nobles (if you're a baron with 50 knights's fees, you may be able to reward someone with one fee, either out of your own desmesne, or if one of your knights-in-service dies without an heir).

 

Rewarding with land works pretty well if you're running a fantasy campaign where the borders of the kingdom are surrounded by wilderness. But most of western Europe was very heavily settled. In many cases there simply wasn't enough spare land to reward your faithful servants.

 

So there are alternatives. This is where the equation land = wealth = status begins to break down - and it's also a fecund source of rivalry, skullduggery and adventure. So forgive me if I go into a little detail which may inspire GMs.

 

First, you can give faithful subjects administrative rights over lands held by minors. This happened throughout the middle ages in England, and was often regarded as a licence for exploitation. Since you only have control of the lands for a limited time, you don;t have to worry about their future, so you cut re-investment to a minimum and reap what short-term rewards you can. This was a major source of resentment among the land-holding nobility, and several clauses of Magna Carta were intended to prevent this happening. They were largely ineffectual. In medieval England, widows without children were considered minors until they re-married, in which case their lands went to their husband. Problems: (1) Any one of your loyal subjects is eligible for this favour, and those that don't get it may start to resent you, so be fair about how you dish the favours out. (2) Minors who inheret a much-depleted estate on their majority aren't going to be too happy with you. This is one of the reasons for the baronial revolt that ended with those clauses in Magna Carta.

 

Second, you can reward your loyal subject by giving him the hand of a widow in marriage. Obviously, this is only an option in campaigns that feature (ahem) medieval attitudes to gender rights. A classic example is William Marshall, who made his reputaion as a skilled knights in tournaments in France, became Marshall of England under four kings, and was eventually rewarded with the Earldom of Pembroke through marriage to the widow of the old Earl of Pembroke. Problems: (1) Only your unmarried faithful subjects are eligible for this, unless they can get a divorce. (2) This can be a pretty big reward if the widow in question has huge tracts of land; best keep a pool of widowed heiresses of varying degree to fine-tune your rewards. (3) If the widow dies unmarried, her lands revert back to you. Could be a big factor...

 

Third, you could reward by giving status in your government. Unless you want an unstable government, you'll only want to offer this reward to the most able of your faithful servants. And you have to accept that they'll reap some of the bribes that would have otherwise come to you. Problems: Appointments by merit in a feudal society? This isn't going to please the members of the aristocracy.

 

Fourth, as lord you may have some control over religious appointments. Manorial lords claimed control over the appointment of parish priests; the king of England claimed control over appointments to abbacies, bishoprics and archbishoprics as they became vacant (a little like the US president's right to appoint supreme court judges). Problems: This may lead you into conflict with a higher church authority, if there is one.

[L. Marcus]

OK, Mr AndyStaples . . .

 

Mind if I worship you a bit? I got a little space left in the house shrine, next to the statuettes of Ben Seeman and Stevie Long . . .

 

Seriously, though, I've been looking for this kind of info for I don't know how long! It is going straight into my campaign, I tell you . . .

[Sociotard]

Widows as Rewards! I love it!

 

GM [roleplaying King]: Well done, ye noble adventurers! I have your reward ready and waiting.

 

Player 1: Ah, yes, the 60,000 gold pieces.

 

GM: Even better!

 

Player 1: How so?

 

GM: Well, there are 5 of you, and as it happens the dragon left a number of widows in its wake. I present each of you with one such widow in marriage.

 

Player 2: Um, are they hot?

 

GM: No, they're all over 50, but their lands together have an estimated value of over 90,000 gold pieces.

 

Player 3: Hey! I'm playing a female elven archer!

 

GM: Not to worry. This is a forward thinking kingdom.

[assault]

Some thoughts:

1. A lot of medieval noble families tended to die out after a few generations. Few of the present British aristocratic families go back beyond the Tudors, if that far. Often, of course, families would rise in importance during one king's rule, and fall during that of his successor - or later in his rule once he withdraws his favour.

 

2. There was a tendency in medieval England for land to be consolidated into the hands of a few families. There were far fewer English knights and barons in the 15th Century than there were in, say, the 12th. Of course that could be offset in other areas by customs that divided land relatively evenly between heirs. On the other hand, various "Esquires" and other non-noble landowners had emerged to largely replace the original knightly class.

 

3. Sinecures were a big deal. Appointment by "merit" was very common. This also often applied to clerical appointments.

 

4. A data point: at one point in the reign of Henry V of England, there were 11 Earls and 4 Dukes (in England). Pretty much all the Dukes were royal princes or their immediate descendents. Most of the Earls were related to the royal family too, although generally at slightly greater distances, or through much more junior bloodlines. There were only a few dozen major barons at this point too, although the "holding land directly from the King" definition probably had broken down at this point.

 

5. Finally, at times you found "household knights" and so on, where service wasn't necessarily directly associated with land. This happened quite early on. Of course, ultimately the wealth that supported this system was derived from similar feudal underpinnings.

[Vondy]

HarnManor.

 

Enough said.

[Eosin]

I think that there are a couple of ways you could do money butmost important is how much work do you want it too be?

 

Andy has come up with some nice clean stuff that is pretty simple and strait forward. I really like it.

 

You could do a few other things:

 

1. Do a Birthright type of thing and assign the value of X to each province [X is a 1-10 number that reflects population and ifrastructure]. The province then has X number of Temples, Guilders and Law Holders as well as the "Assarted Lord" if you will, since Law Holdings and Ownership are not the same thing in BR. Then place a relative value on each "wealth position" that is 1 point of wealth is equal to having a level 1 temple, law or guild holding. 5 Points of wealth is = 10 levels of holdings (in any combination). 10 points of wealth is equal to 25 Levels of Holdings (these are Dukes, Petty Kings and such.....huge merchent princes) Finally, for those with 50+ Levels in Holdings get the big +15 Wealth. In the Birthright game --- Anuire the largest "Holder" is Prince Avan with something like 95 holdings [Lands and Law] this gives him titles such as, Prince of Avanil, Defender (read vassals) of Taeghas and Brosengae, Govenor of Mieres and holder of lands and titles in 6 countries.

 

He got some bank roll That really gets pretty complicated but BR can be loads of fun if you ever want to step up and manage domains.

 

2. Buy Fields of Blood by Eden Games. It is damn good and includes another domain system equal to if not superior to Birthright in domain management. Same draw backs as BR but a really elegant system that is not set within a world so it is pretty generic [Generic enough that I recommend it to Hero players].

 

3. Decide that 80% of your players wealth is tied up in lands or ventures and that it is not liquid cash...."Yes, you have 1,000,000 GP but 100,000 of that is in live stock. 200,000 is supporting the recent mining venture in zymbabwe and 500,000 was loaned to the king to finance the last war with the Martians. The crown has declared an extra tax for the next 30 years in order to pay you back." This way the players have tangible commodies but it is pretty nebelous and easy to manipulate. It also provides some cool plot hooks...Remember thst ship that you invested 25,000 gp in? It is overdue."

 

4. Convert to an easier to manage finance chart baed off of the sp or even cp. Use anachronistic pricing so that the price are instinctive if not "realistic." I have a silver based gamewith a list that does this....Want a really sweet ride, tricked out? 40,000 sp will get you the lexus of horses. 100,000 sp will get you a horse that is the envy of the nation. Want a heavy hitting sword? 600 sp, want a sword with laser sites and AP rounds - 18,000 sp...dinner for 2....40 sp you get the idea. It works well and the players get it also...I can ask them their standard of living

 

gutter trash poor = 5 sp per day

poor = 20 sp per day

middle class = 50 sp per day

well off = 100 sp per day

millionare = 500 sp per day

Rich = 1,000 sp per day

Filthy rich = 10,000 sp per day

Rock Star Crazy Rich = 25,000 sp per day

 

This price list includes living arraingments, food, basic items for life like clothes and furniture....it does not include war horses, armor, weapons, hiring sages etc.....

 

 

I have the whole thing in word if you want it.

 

5. Harn Master is also a good and detailed way to go but IMO some of the HM stuff dips just into the tedious level of bookwork. It is still a great read and some good education. Speaking of which....A magical Midevil Society Western Europe is also a good read. As are some non fictional scholarly works....it all depends on taste.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[GrimJesta]

Sweet. This thread answered more than enough of what I needed.

 

So the characters will barter with deeds of ownership? Interesting. How do you plan on handling everyday transactions? It's not like every shopkeeper has change for 10 hectares when you're in the mood for a mug of grog.

 

Im not running that kind of game, the one of standard fantasy staple. You dont find gold coins laying around in forgotten lairs (well, you might once). You DO find that the Orcs have alot of bales of cotton, 4 barrels of mead, three crates of copperware, and a few barrels of preserved meat, all of it looted from raided caravans and the nearby village. I dont like having monsters horde gold coins for two reasons:

 

1) Where are they going to spend the cash, realistically? The nearest settlements hate them. But supplies are much more valuable.

 

2) Where would they get all that coin if the world runs on barter systems and favors? Only some transactions use gold and silver, usually in ingot form, and those are usually performed by governments or large organizations.

 

Strangers rolling into town looking for a drink can either expect hospitality or better have something to give. Some larger cities use coins as the barter system is hard to do in large populations, especially with foreigners and transients in large numbers. But the average town and village doesnt use coin.

 

The world Im running doesnt have many large cities anyway. I prefer to use land and sundries as rewards.

 

But the widow thing is funny. I may have to use that one.

 

-=Grim=-

[GrimJesta]

I have the whole thing in word if you want it.

 

Yup yup. Hit me up via email? If hats the preferred way, Im grimjesta@yahoo.com (who'da thunk?!?). Just make the subject obvious or Ill delete it as Spam, cuz Ive been getting WAY too much recently.

 

Way too much.

 

-=Grim=-

[Eosin]

Give me a bit....I just relized that I saved over the original with the d20 version.....wieghts got doinked and stats are a little different in the weapons section.

 

 

A day or two at most unless you don't mind d20?

 

I have to convert it back anyway now that I have moved in mind to FH.

[GrimJesta]

I dont mind d20. Whichever works for you. If you think to yourself, "No, I can never let anyone see this atrocity called d20" then Ill wait, lol.

 

-=Grim=-

[Chris Goodwin]

Andy -- why haven't you turned all of this stuff into a Digital Hero article and gotten paid for it?

[Eosin]

Board ate my post. Dang. Too long to re-type.

 

 

I will post the doc on my website so that you can down load it since it does not appear that DOCs are allowed to be posted here.

[Eosin]

Ok, the DOC is now up on my site.

 

EOG Main

 

Just a side note - the list only contains appropriate weapons. Plate is just in development in my world and given that many creatures have additional armor versus piercing type weapons - nearly none have developed. Definately non have developed in the region of the game.

 

Trollkin and similar tend to use hacking weapons like the kopesh and scimitar so humans will rarely purchase them or even have them for sale fearing that they will suffer if they profit off of the foul creatures.

[Barwickian]

Originally posted by archer

Andy -- why haven't you turned all of this stuff into a Digital Hero article and gotten paid for it?

 

Because I'm only just starting to get to grips with the Hero System.

 

And I'm only in the process of subscribing to Digital Hero - I haven't read any of it yet. I don't like writing for publications I haven't read first.

 

However, if you want a taster of the kind of things that interest me, try my medieval agriculture pages:

 

http://www.minarsas.demon.co.uk/harn/farming/index.htm

[Barwickian]

Originally posted by L. Marcus

OK, Mr AndyStaples . . .

 

Mind if I worship you a bit? I got a little space left in the house shrine, next to the statuettes of Ben Seeman and Stevie Long . . .

 

Sure. Just remember to polish me every once in a while.

[LordGhee]

niffy site

 

hey got a post coming but take a look at this site to create a kingdom

 

http://www.rpglibrary.org/utils/meddemog/

 

hope it helps

 

Lord Ghee

[GrimJesta]

Yo Ghee, thats a freakin dope site. I just sat here playing with it for a while and its awesome.

 

-=Grim=-

[GrimJesta]

Oh yea, Eosin, whats the URL of the cartography website? The link in the map section is coming up dead for me, but its prolly my uber-crappy ISP. Cuz those maps are awesome...

 

-=Grim=-

[Galadorn]

Re: Land and Wealth

 

Originally posted by GrimJesta

I have a quick question. I like to make wealth in my games based more on assets than gold pieces (thats too video games for me). How would you translate the wealth table into land square-footage? Or trade assets? Any ideas?

 

I don't know if this has been said before, I'm not going to read every post. But land is money. Yes, that's an oversimplification, but I'm saying it to make a point.

 

All assets an individual owns has a monetary value. Money is just a medium of exchange, so in short, land is money. If we didn't have money, we would be trading goods instead, and that would be tooooo tedious - that's why a monetary system was invented in the first place.

 

So, economically, if you would rather have a barter system stronger then a monetary system, just research the early Middle Ages in England (6th-11th centuries); that's how their economic system was set up anyway.

[assault]

Re: Re: Land and Wealth

 

Originally posted by Galadorn

I don't know if this has been said before, I'm not going to read every post. But land is money. Yes, that's an oversimplification, but I'm saying it to make a point.

 

Actually it's dead wrong.

 

The whole point of feudal societies is that land is not a commodity. That is, it can not be exchanged - bartered or bought. It can not be bought with money. Therefore it is _not_ money.

 

Of course, there were exceptions - but they _were_ exceptions.

 

The conversion of land to a commodity was one of the key elements in the rise of capitalism. Because of that it should be avoided in a feudal setting as a discordant element.

 

In late feudalism money became the predominant form of rent paid to a landowner, but what was being bought here wasn't the land, but rather the right to make use of the land.