Class in Fantasy

[Michael Hopcroft]

No, I'm not talking about classes in the D&D sense. I'm talking about people's place in the social order, particularly when that place is settled based on factors outside the individual's control.

 

Most fantasy worlds are pseudo-feudal. This means that there is a very small ruling class at the top, a soldier/warrior class that serves them, a small and barely-tolerated middle class, and a huge laboring class that is little better off than cattle but who do all the actual work in the society. In many worlds there is a class of "non-people" underneath that who perform neccesary but distasteful tasks such as handling the dead.

 

the class you were born into usually dictates the entire course of your life. if you were born a poeasant, then by God you stayed a peasant until the end of your days. Doing anything to improve your own social standing was a capital offense, and your death was rarely swift and clean. And anyone of a higher class could do anything they wanted to to you with impunity. Life was an unbearable burden until you died a miserable death.

 

If you were a ruler or a warrior, on the other hand, life was pretty good all things considered. You can do pretty much whatever you want to anybody of a lower class than you, because they exist solely for your benefit.

 

And these are the "good guys" in a typical fantasy story!

 

Are there ways around the feudal paradigm to make fantasy worlds a little bit better places to live in -- especially for non-priveledged types?

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

well, you can always go for an expanded tribal/clan structure. It's fairly simlar to the feudal model, but because duties and obligations tend to run along extended family lines the lower working class generally was treated better. A common English complaint abpout Scottsmen as late as the 18th century was that even a pauper carried himself as if he were a king. Partially this is also due to vigous attention to lineage, including fosterage ties. You may be a rock farmer, but If you know that your great great grandfather was the brother to the founder of the clan you can still hold your head up in pride. There still may or may not be a slave class, but the slaves are usually prisoners of war or criminals and usually their children were born as freemen. The Celts and Norse both had similar systems. In fact, the pre-christian, pre-feudal celts had an EXTENSIVE legal system that pretty well eliminated most of the gross injustices found in humanity. The Norsemen we're quite so nice, but even so thier culture was a lot more enlightened than most romantic scholars give them credit for.

The breaking point is usually when the ruling class beings to see power as a right rather than a responsibility.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

Well, to begin with, I wouldn't exactly call your description feudal, since it could also apply to places like caste-bound India or Imperial China. But I get the gist of your question, so I'll stop being nitpicky and try and say something useful.

 

I have a similar problem in my Savage Earth campaign. In setting up the social structure, I borrowed concepts from the Elzabethan Chain of Being, in that there is a social order in the universe that ranges from God through Man right down to the rocks. I have since softened the emphasis on it during play, since opressed PCs tend to make the theme of the campaign "Fighting Oppression" which is exactly the opposite of what I intend. I was setting up a backdrop for their society, not intending for the backdrop to become the main action.

A couple of things can be done to alleviate the effect.

 

1. Allow limited movement. After all, one of the most powerful men in Henry VIII's England was Cardinal Wolsey, a butcher's son. This movement could be widened even further where PCs are concerned. After all, exceptional people are exactly that: the exception to the rule.

 

2. Play up the restrictions inherent in the upper classes. No matter how much he might have wanted to, King Arthur couldn't go on the Grail Quest. He had responsibilities. The knights were expected to, and page boys naturally were there, too.

 

3. Civil Strife. In times of social upheaval, many laws are thrown out and trampled upon. Look at the dramatic turnaround during the Terror, or England's civil war between King Stephen and the Empress Maude. Once the PCs are useful to those who desperately need effective fighters/magicians/negotiators, they may find themselves elevated.

 

4. Make "Adventurer" a class. Those who follow a certain code, wear armor and weapons and travel from place to place might develop a certain niche in society. An example of this is the Old West Gunfighter archetype. He would never get elected mayor, but the mayor would certainly hire him to keep the Cattle Barons from murdering the Sheep Farmers or vice versa. A the same time, he can associate freely with the Town Drunk or the Hooker with the Heart of Gold. Restrictions to this social class is that no one wants you around once the trouble is gone.

 

All of these things assume you are talking about the PC's place in society. If you want to make things better for the poor powerless slob at the bottom, there are other solutions.

 

1. Camelot! The campaign takes place in a land where the ruler passionately believes that Might Serves Right and that there is such a thing as Social Justice. This is an excellent solution for role-playing if there are powerful factions who see themselves as becomeing disenfranchised.

 

2. Land o' Plenty. When times are prosperous and essentials are comonplace, the guy at the bottom gets a trickle-down effect. Of course, there isn't much for heroes to do in a place like this. So you could keep the best of both worlds by assuming a strong, well-defended prosperous interior to the kingdom, and things breaking down slowly as one approaches the frontiers. Or have the stability threatened and that's what the PCs are trying to preserve.

 

3. Acceptance. Things were crappy in the Roman Empire for anybody who wasn't a Roman Citizen. Life was about as cheap as you can imagine, but few people seemed to really care. Tens of thousands flocked to gladitorial games that were about as evil as anything you could imagine. Even Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot didn't have massive public executions accompanied by bands, parades, billboards (yes, billboards), and call it family entertainment. In this scenario, things are horrible for the lower classes, but everytime a player brings it up, you remind them that this is the Status Quo and no one but them seems to give a darn about changing anything.

In my Savage Earth game, whenever anyone says something like "Wow, that's a harsh punishment!", or "Pit fighters are forced to fight to the death, while these creeps joke about it and make bets?", the standard response is "Yes, it's a Savage Earth."

 

Keith "Social Engineer" Curtis

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

2. Land o' Plenty. When times are prosperous and essentials are comonplace, the guy at the bottom gets a trickle-down effect. Of course, there isn't much for heroes to do in a place like this. So you could keep the best of both worlds by assuming a strong, well-defended prosperous interior to the kingdom, and things breaking down slowly as one approaches the frontiers. Or have the stability threatened and that's what the PCs are trying to preserve.

 

Keith "Social Engineer" Curtis

This one is an excellent point. I suspect the reason Brehon Law and Irissh culture was so tolerant and enlightened is because they had abundant resources available to them, and fairly low population density. The norse culture was a lot harsher,. but as they spread they mellowed, as they gained access to greater resources and melded in cultural traits from colonized areas (like Ireland and eastern England)

[Eosin]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

Are there ways around the feudal paradigm to make fantasy worlds a little bit better places to live in -- especially for non-priveledged types?

 

 

I am falling in the Keith category of who are you talking about it being better for?

 

For society in general there are tons of methods to do this but even in todays world being a "wage slave" is expected of 75% of us. Those not in the WS bracket fall into the destitue/untouchable lifestyle or more rarely one of the nobility. We just have the luxury of being able to quit our serfdom and apply for new serfdom elsewhere ---- oh yeah, we get to choose our mate (in the first world at least) but we still pay hidious death taxes, marrige penalties, and most folks expect a dowry of sorts (brides family pays for the wedding). We changed the window dressing and guyssied up the place but the rules are basically the same.

 

Social mobility implies freedom of movement and nothing promotes that like a new frontier. Even a feudal culture undergoes tremendous intra-social mobility when there is a "gold rush" and people make good based on merit rather than birth.

 

A nice method to avoid the whole issue regardless of birth station is to have ultra-elite societies that ignore sex, race, and birth. The World of Darkness Dark Ages does this very well (but only for sicko whack jobs). You could base a game around similar concepts with the players belonging to a "special group" and warring with other special groups.

 

Finally, as mentioned adopt the norse/slav type model where society is dominated by a tribal/raiding structure and each person is weighed on the merit of his/her prowess.

[Markdoc]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

The other possibility, if you wnat to keep the familiar feudal structure is to realise that things *weren't* as cut and dried as laid out in all places and at all times. Class did not really settle into a fixed pattern until the later middle ages in most places and in the countries marginal to Europe (Scandinavia, Ireland, the Baltic) not until much later. In many areas such a pattern never really gelled at all. You could easily choose one of these areas as a model.

 

If you choose the frontier model

 

In both Ireland and the Baltic, you had a small feudal elite who were unable to hold down the country by themselves. They relied on alliances with tribal leaders from the provinces whose followers were as haughty as any noble - and who didn't necessarily get there by right of birth. They also relied on support from quite large urban populations who were distinct from the tribal groups (Norse-Irish in Ireland, Germans in the baltic) AND from the nobles. Intermarriage wasn't common in the upper levels of such societies, but it did happen, suggesting some social mobility. The townsmen demonstrated significant political power on occasions. And there were no serfs.

 

In Medieval Germany (at least the Rhineland, Saxony and the Palatinate) not only were there no serfs, but there was whole group of knights and landowners who were NOT nobles, but of common birth (the ministerales). Some of these became as powerful as noble lords and intermarried with them (though again, this was rare). Essentially you have a militarised "middle class" alongside the townsmen.

 

In the Low Counties - and in Switzerland - you have feudal nobles owning the countryside (or at least some of it) but the real power lay in the hands of an elected council with all major issues being settled by participatory democracy (at least, if you're a guy) in Switzerland or by an elected town council in Flanders and the Netherlands, which could include Nobles but which was normally made up of middle class townsmen. Not only did townsmen fight en masse on foot (for a while, they they were much in demand as mercenaries), but they fielded contingents of "knightly" horse made up of commoners and hired their own companies of mercenaries.

 

Over the top of these different social structures you can lay religious orders - as noted a number of royal advisors were drawn from men of humble birth who rose though the church. There are others who rose to political power through guild structures.

 

That's not to say that class is unimportant - people seemed to have been aware of it all the time, in every way. I'm just pointing out that it is no barrier to social mobility, in a medieval setting. In the real world, Robert Guiscard came to Italy a poverty-stricken adventurer - and 30 years later he dictated policy to the Pope and proposed marrying his son to the daughter of the Emperor of Constantinople, the most prestigious house in Europe - and they took the offer seriously enough to consider it. They were all too well aware of the *impropriety* of a daughter porphyrogenitus marrying a jumped-up near-commoner: but politics dictated they didn't reject the idea out of hand.

 

cheers, Mark

[Curufea]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

Every culture, from ancient to modern, has a class system. It's inherent in the way we organise ourselves socially and communally.

 

Sometimes the differences aren't obvious to an inside observer, only to the objective outsider.

 

Beauty, money, political power, skin colour, occupation, even the type of television show you like watching and the kind of art you like all determine class.

 

Harvard Graduates, Starlets, Rockstars, Politicians, Millionaires, Cop families - all these are classes. They determine respect given, responsibilities ascribed, preferential treatment or ostracism.

 

If you look at peasants as a class in the generic fantasy setting, there would be subclasses - the skilled occupations, from the unskilled, the socially unacceptable occupations, from the revered.

[Sword-dancer]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

The first Salian Empereor asked a bishop, who tried to sell his peasants, do you think they were Animals?

 

In the Medival Feudal System even the unfree had rights, rights their Lords were oathsworn to defend, as well as their safety.

A free man, had the right of a legitmiate court,this was one of the essentials which make the difference between free and unfree.

 

Another Point is, that the freeman were armed men, expected to fight as yeomanry or militia.

Barv´barossasswabians, the englich Longbow(and bill)men, the flamish militias or theswiss Pikeniers are all examples of it.

The flamish and the swiss fought and won against nobility on their own, a french king allied with the swiss against burgung.

Some noble found their end through the hangman in some free town.

 

An Unfree Peasmat who fled to a free city was free after a year and a day.

 

The German knightclass, the ministeriales were mostly at least unfree.

[ThothAmon]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

My own fantasy world has many more governmental structures than just the standard feudal model:

 

Republic - modelled on post-revolution France with no slavery, no sexual division and a pseudo-democratic voting system

 

Iron Fist Feudal - a solidified, stratified, male-dominated feudal Empire drawn on medieval Germany in which exists a powerful middle class and a guild / family structure

 

Commune - Communism happened in some areas during the medieval period, with an underlying matriarchal familial / clan structure

 

Divine Empire - modelled on classical Rome with Imperial bloodline passing on psychic traits as well as the right to rule, citizenship can be 'obtained' in a number of ways

 

Celtic Clan - as Amanda has already suggested, modelled on the classic (Ulsterian) model in which rulership is not a right but a burden of responsibility (go read the 'Slaine' comics or the Sister Fidelma novels for a quick fix)

 

Amerind Tribal - a societal model for the cat-people of the game world, drawing on Amerindian ideas

 

Eastern Clan - modelled on Genghis Khan's meritocratic Mongol Empire but with equal rights for women

 

Highly Stratified Empire - based on classic Confusionist China before the rise of Buddhism (see Barry Hughart novels for reference)

 

The feudal model of society is probably a consequence of the geographical layout of Western Europe. There is a rather good non-fiction book which discusses this fact in some depth but the title eludes me ATM as I got it on inter-library loan many moons ago. Perhaps someone can refresh our collective memory?

 

It's amazing how many people think of fantasy in terms of multiple races, magic etc yet fail to consider diverse political structures. Big mistake and a big loss of potential plotlines

[sinanju]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

It's already been said, but it bears repeating: emphasize that in a feudal society, rights and responsibilities run BOTH ways. Yes, the upper classes have greater power, but they also bear duties to the people who serve them. It's the whole Spider-Man thing: with great power comes great responsibility.

 

The feudal system in Russia was, for a long time, less rigid than in western europe (from what I've read) because peasants in Russia could simply vanish into the immense forests or wide open spaces of the steppes and set up housekeeping elsewhere if their lord was too obnoxious. In crowded, thoroughly settled England or western europe, that wasn't really much of an option. So the frontier option works.

 

If magical ability appears at random, with no regard for the class or station of the individual, that will tend to moderate things. When any random peasant (or a member of his family) could turn out to be a powerful wizard or sorceror, treating him (or his family/loved ones) like dirt isn't a good idea.

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

It's already been said' date=' but it bears repeating: emphasize that in a feudal society, rights and responsibilities run BOTH ways. Yes, the upper classes have greater power, but they also bear duties to the people who serve them. It's the whole Spider-Man thing: with great power comes great responsibility.[/quote']

But wouldn't human nature also suggest that great power would give the lord the chance to be a real ass towards his inferiors?

 

The feudal system in Russia was, for a long time, less rigid than in western europe (from what I've read) because peasants in Russia could simply vanish into the immense forests or wide open spaces of the steppes and set up housekeeping elsewhere if their lord was too obnoxious. In crowded, thoroughly settled England or western europe, that wasn't really much of an option. So the frontier option works.

On the other hand, Eastern European serfs really were the property of their lords, so any such peasant who fled and got caught would have to consider himself lucky if he were only killed outright....

 

If magical ability appears at random, with no regard for the class or station of the individual, that will tend to moderate things. When any random peasant (or a member of his family) could turn out to be a powerful wizard or sorceror, treating him (or his family/loved ones) like dirt isn't a good idea.

But it would also be possible for the Lords to ruthleslly destroy any peasant who displayed possible magical ability. Remember Joan of Arc? She was burned at the stake because she had "visions" (it seems more likely she was simply schizophrenic, but the point stands).

[sinanju]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

But wouldn't human nature also suggest that great power would give the lord the chance to be a real ass towards his inferiors?

 

Certainly. I'm talking more in theory than in practice.

 

On the other hand, Eastern European serfs really were the property of their lords, so any such peasant who fled and got caught would have to consider himself lucky if he were only killed outright....

 

That's probably true too. Nonetheless, the russian serfs _had_ wide open spaces into which they could flee. English serfs? Not so much.

 

But it would also be possible for the Lords to ruthleslly destroy any peasant who displayed possible magical ability. Remember Joan of Arc? She was burned at the stake because she had "visions" (it seems more likely she was simply schizophrenic, but the point stands).

 

Depends on exactly how things are organized. But if lords in _neighboring_ nations go out of their way to find, cultivate and employ mages in service to the kingdom, lords who do that sort of thing are at a serious disadvantage.

[Outsider]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

Joan of arc did manage to raise quite a stir before they got her tied to that stake, though. Now imagine that such magical manifestations among the peasantry are not so uncommon as that and sometimes take much more deadly forms.

 

Lord Peasantstomper : "What happened to the 50 men I sent to Mud Village to stamp out that peasant mage?"

 

Lackey Snivelus : "They were melted, my lord."

 

Lord Peasantstomper : "Well, I suppose we need to send in the court magician, then, if its a melter we have on our hands."

 

Lackey Snivelus : "Ah, my lord, the court magician was turned inside out last month at Stick Village. We've been trying to fill the position, but 95% of the fighting sorcerors out there come from peasant families originally, and they dont care to work for us."

 

Lord Peasantstomper : "..."

[Sword-dancer]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

But it would also be possible for the Lords to ruthleslly destroy any peasant who displayed possible magical ability. Remember Joan of Arc? She was burned at the stake because she had "visions" (it seems more likely she was simply schizophrenic' date=' but the point stands).[/quote']

 

The Maid of Lotharingen was killed by theenglish for very obvious reasons, it would be an insult, an shame to no end, that the englisch kings had fought against the will of god.

A maid commanded by god and some of his saints who brought the word"Who fights against france, fight against god" and who win battles was unbearable.

 

Anotherr thing aLord or King who raised taxes without good reason, did a grave sin, for which ´god would punish him in the afterlife.

 

 

Lord Peasantstomper : "Well, I suppose we need to send in the court magician, then, if its a melter we have on our hands."

 

Lackey Snivelious: Ah the Abbot of the Lassarin Abbey of this bishopric strongly disapproves of our doing his brethren and pupils are strictly preached not to help serve or aide us in anykind, every magician taking service with us are forbidden the use of their library and school, and then is there thepoint of the the anathema of Bishop Grim, for your....

 

Bishop grim arrives with an etourage of Priests, monk and no less than 5 knights with their squires and man at arms.

 

Bishop Grim: For your crimes and illdoings against the peace of god, murdering peasants in the field, robbing their oxen, .... you Sinner Peasantstomper are therefore excommunicated til you change your ways and show rue in the eyes of our holy mother the church and all men who hold to you, are also thrown out of the herd of the faithful.

[Barwickian]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

I'd like to re-emphasise what Markdoc said: things weren't so clear-cut in the middle ages.

 

There may have been limited scope for social improvement, but there was scope.

 

The following applies to medieval England, which which I'm most familiar.

 

1) There was mobility. Not as easy as today, certainly, but even among serf families people moved between villages (and lords) over two or three generations. As the period progressed, there was increased movement towards the fledgling towns and markets.

 

2) There was access to royal justice for all freeborn and all those who served an a manor that was, or ever had been, held by the king.

 

3) There was the potential to buy one's freedom by payment of a special tax (either a big one-off tax, or a monthly or quarterly payment called chevage).

 

4) The ability to read and write Latin opened up many avenues. Not only could you claim (truthfully or not) to be a cleric, thus immune from secular prosecution, you could pursue a career in the church or secular government (sometimes both). From the 12th century onwards, a career in the government bureaucracy could bring high rewards.

 

5) Knighthood was not technically hereditary, though it became practically so from the late 11th century onwards. Still, technically a commoner could become a knight.

 

6) Nobility, though theoretically hereditary, was not practically so. Thus, the free-lance tournament knight Sir William Marshal rose to become Earl of Pembroke (and evenutally Regent of England) through marriage.

 

I'm not saying that the feudal system as practised in medieval England wasn't restrictive. It was. But it wasn't totally restrictive. There were cracks through the social heirarchy through which an ambitious or lucky individual might slip.

 

When gaming a feudal system, you can choose whether to emphasise the restrictions (which is the traditional 'hardcore historical' approach), or to emphasise the potentials, particularly for the PCs, which is something of a post-modern hardcore approach.

 

The other option, of course, is just to ditch the feudal system and go for a bland D&D fantasy feudalism.

[Markdoc]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

6) Nobility' date=' though theoretically hereditary, was not practically so. Thus, the free-lance tournament knight Sir William Marshal rose to become Earl of Pembroke (and evenutally Regent of England) through marriage.[/quote']

 

And - to think like an FH player for a moment - because he could kick *anybody's* ass!

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

The variation in the status at the bottom of the heap varied widely too. Michael Hopcroft is right about the status of the serfs in Eastern Europe (especially in Poland, which back in the day was much larger than it now is) - they had very few legal rights and almost no way to enforce them since the courts were composed entirely of landowners who were related to each other. A major complaint in the 13th and 14th centuries was about serfs who escaped onto lands owned by the religious orders: although their rules for treatment of serfs have survived and seem incredibly brutal today, they did grant some basic protections - making the orders look like a good deal to many serfs.

 

In contrast, although the peasants' revolt failed in England, continuous minor revolts led to the rapid decline in villeinage around that time anyway - and serfdom was already obsolete. So by the high middle ages, there were very few people who fell into the category of serfs/villeins in England. That's why the bulk of their armies were made up of free yeomen. And as noted, many countries never had serfdom - while in Denmark, sefdom was finally abolished only about 200 years ago (no, I'm not kidding!)

 

In my game, the possibility for powerful individual figures to arise has made social mobility much easier in all cultures: the idea of "social rise based on merit" is always there. Lord Knobbyknees is likely to be happier about the idea of his daughter marrying Dorf the sturdy peasant lad, if Dorf and two of his mates have just reduced the army of his rival Lord Nochin to so much compost. In that regard, it's different from medieval "real world" cultures.

 

cheers, Mark

[LoresLost]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

Slightly off topic / Or very on topic. I found a lecture from a professor at the University of Kansas that is very intresting. That person compares the rise of the Feudal system to the rise of the American Mafia, Implying that feudalism is a protection racket caused by the breakdown of centeral government. Here is the link to the website.

[Markdoc]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

Interesting article. I agree with the basic idea, although the author overstates the degree of organisation of the Mafia a bit- the reality seems to have been a bit messier, with some powerful individuals outside the "fief" system.

 

He also overstates the "chaos" of the early middle ages a bit with comments like " It should be noted that money -- silver or gold coins -- had gradually vanished from use and that Europe and had adopted a barter system to meet their basic economic needs." which we know was not true.

 

Mints and minting rights were eagerly sought items, throughout the medieval and feudal periods, as was possession of silver and gold mines from which coins could be made (the Hapsburgs built their entire empire off the possession of silver mines) and we possess literally tens of thousands of medieval coins - a tiny fraction of what must have been in circulation. The Knights Templar and the cities of Siena and Florence (among others) got wealthy off their international banking businesses, based not only on the issuing of loans against non-money assets but also on the difficulty of transporting large amounts of coin. Surviving banking documents from the medieval era sometimes speak of cash transfers involving literally hundreds of thousands of coins. I've seen Pedro the Cruel's treasury at Almodovar del Rio. It's a big room and was reputedly filled more than 2 metres deep with coins and gold... There are also plenty of coin hoards from the medieval period. These were not the possessions of wealthy lords - almost all hoards that have been found are from agricultural areas and appear to have been buried in or around farms belonging to moderately wealthy farmers.

 

Cheers, Mark

[Jkeown]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

I use a modified form of feudalism in the Empire of my campaign. Nobility are born to their station, but others may be invited to join one House or another. Clearly, this is the mobility Keith was talking about. The various Houses are often looked at as a goal or reward by the lower classes. This makes the game very political. My players are less inclined to play the political end of things, but it does make a nice backdrop.

[teh bunneh]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

In my world, the greatest hero of the ages was born a peasant and became a king. He married a former slave-girl and made her his queen. His descendents are not allowed to take the crown until they have lived for 5 years as a commoner -- so they can see what life is like from "the other side."

 

The Elves practice a type of democracy where any full-blooded Elf can theoretically become their King.

 

Hey, it's a fantasy world. You can make your societies look like anything you want -- you don't have to model European-style feudalism.

 

Bill.

[Cancer]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

Class also wasn't strictly a matter of ranking. I haven't noticed in this thread anyone referring to the clergy in the feudal system, which was approximately a parallel structure which the clergy tried hard to keep out from under the authority of the lords/kings. At least officially, it was also non--heriditary. Yes, there was a coupling between the clerical heirarchy and the secular feudal one as lords could buy offices for their relations (though technically this was the sin of simony), but joining a clerical order was both a way out of the rat race (that is, a place for a noble to retire to) and a way for a bright lower-class lad to rise by work and ability, at least nominally free from secular authority. There were plenty of ambitious clerics, and many of them lacked a noble pedigree.

 

Those with technical skills of clear worth always have been able to get (often grudging) acceptance from their social "betters". Miners were always despised, but no one abused the mine foreman who produced a regular flow of silver (or tin or copper). Shipbuilders and bellmakers also were valued; since bellmakers were the people who first cast artillery pieces, at the right technological era, they could rise drastically in the social order.

[Curufea]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

I'm personally hoping that in my campaign setting, giving the Church the greatest magical powers, the second greatest political power, and the means and incentive to enforce legalisation of non-church magic will force the players to give the Church the kind of class-conscious respect that was actually given during the European middle ages ;-p

 

I really have to quash the concept of Cleric = healing. And enforce Cleric = a better social class.

[Cantriped]

Re: Class in Fantasy

 

Very very interesting thread, Somthign I feel must be commented on though is that social class, at least innitially, is nearly always determined by one factor... Power, it may degenerate to a chaste system, but these governments are almost always formed by those few who had greater power then the average human, either they were cunning tacticions, prodigious leaders, or mighty soldiers.

bareing that in mind I find it hard to imagine that, in a world setting where magic can pop up, the vast majority of governments wouldn't be at least partially magocratic (ruled in by those with the most powerful magic). in such settings bloodlines known to produce powerful Mages would be highly sought after. Certain taboos would also develop, such as Mage+NonMage couplings.

Religion is another point that should be adressed, the early religions usually developed to explain things that humans didn't understand, where as some later religions developed to consolidate power.

 

Thus what you really get would depend on era, an early era world would likely be a very fudal Mago-theocracy, in which he positions of power were held by the Mage-priests and Ill-informed peasentry treated the ruling class as somthing akin to Gods.

In later eras, when magic has been more thourghly studied and mages are more common, Mages would be treated as somthing more similar to brillant scientists, and power would have shifted to the middle class, Somthing similar to a Magocratic-Rebublic might develop, in which all Mage-gifted were treated as the Upper Class and given and equal vote. The Peasants would still be in essentially the same position they were before, however its much harder to think of a Mage as a god when there is a chance your own child could be born Mage gifted, and when chances are you work (albeit distantly) with the area's local Mage, and know perfectly well that he's mortal.

 

Of course infinite exceptions to this could exist, depending on entirely on whatever the GM desides to do.