PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

[Michael Hopcroft]

One thing Pcs are certain to encounter as they adventure in a fantasy camapign are peasants.

 

It is traditional in fantasy gaming circles to look down on those farmers as ignroant hicks. However, keep in mind that if you are of European extraction you almost certainly have some of these "serfs" in your family tree if you could trace back far enough ( yiou pribably can;'t because of the the fact that feqw people bothered or needed to keep records of such things in the 11th century, but there you hafve it). Fedualism is not a Darwinistic or mertiocratic system, and even the most intelligent person will never learn (for example) to read if his circumstances prevent him from doing so.

 

So who are peasants, and what do they know? And can one emerge from the ranks of the Peasants to become an adventurer, or even a true hero, under the right circumstances?

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

Animal husbandry, horticulture, dairy produce production (infrequent), carpentry (infrequent), pottery (infrequent), sewing, knitting (infrequent), weaving (infrequent), other craft (infrequent), cooking, vetinary (infrequent), riding (infrequent), geology (infrequent)

 

And for settings with wandering monsters-

Desolid vs wandering monsters, area effect (entire farm).

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

And for settings with wandering monsters-

Desolid vs wandering monsters, area effect (entire farm).

Settings with wandering monsters pose a special problem for feudsal societies.

 

Lords have an obligation to protect their land from wandering monsters. If the Lord and his Knigths are away on some other emergency, a peasant miltia will need to be organzied to deal with it. But armed peasants with better-thamn-adequate fighting training are a fedual lord's worst nigthmare. ("Milord, the serfs are revolting!" "I know that, squire. Disgusting breed, badly dressed, smell awful too. Really bad company all round, that's why they never come to our parties. But what are they doing?")

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

It's difficult to justify non-combat peasants if you have wandering monsters.

Unless every farm is heavily fortified and has regular patrols of military men within easy call.

[Kabluey]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

I'm currently in the early stages of a campaign set in Harn, which is a much more realistic take on medieval world than most other published settings. All of my PC's are freemen, though two started out as serfs. One's family actually purchased his freedom from the manor lord, but there is the expectation that he will send money back to compensate them. The other was given his freedom after he saved the lord's wife. My plan is that at least one of these will be given a knighthood, after they've achieved some more noteworthy accomplishments.

 

Also, Harn has a rule that a serf can gain his freedom if he escapes to a freetown and remains there for a year and a day. I don't know if there was a similar tradition in European history, but it does allow the possibility for any serf gaining his freedom. Of course, it's assumed that very few serfs try to escape (the life of a freeman was in some ways worse than that of a serf), and that of those who do the vast majority are caught very quickly.

 

So, yes, I think a serf can become an adventurer and a hero.

[Kabluey]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

It's difficult to justify non-combat peasants if you have wandering monsters.

Unless every farm is heavily fortified and has regular patrols of military men within easy call.

 

I think MM is correct, a manor lord would never want his peasants to be well armed or trained. It would just be too likely that the peasants would turn that training on their lord. Most likely, rather than giving them extra training, he'd just tell them to flee into the keep when monsters appeared. And if a few peasants died? Well, that'd be a shame, of course, but better that than losing his holding to a revolt.

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

That's also assuming the lord is corrupt and universally hated by their serfs and peasants. Which is a big assumption. It seems to be a stereotype that nobles and lords are oppressing the masses, and the peasants are just waiting to throw off the shackles of their slavery. Too much Robin Hood, I guess.

 

I like Harn, but it is a Dark Ages world setting - not Medieval. It's pre-12th century mostly. Many fantasy players like plate armour, so prefer medieval to dark ages

[OddHat]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

Time period and geographic location become very important here if you're trying to seriously simulate pre-industrial Europe.

 

Yes, there were times and places where peasants were treated as little more than disposable property. There were also times and places where a farmer's son had a reasonable chance of becoming a merchant, priest or profesional soldier, and where farmers were expected to make up the bulk of the military, fighting with the same axes and farm implements they used in their daily lives.

 

You can always have a setting where theres a rigid division between virtually enslaved peasantry and "noble" land owners, but it's not the only historical model.

 

As to KS or PS for peasantry, you can make a case for anything that didn't require formal education. For most, PS:Peasant and maybe WF:Axe should cover it.

 

Oh, and "Wandering Monsters". If you have them at all, better assume that every farmer carries a weapon at all times, and that merchants only travel in groups with armed guards. You're looking at a historical period where the nation is either colapsing or just recovering from a colapse; a century or two later in your timeline there should either be no wandering monsters near heavily populated areas or no heavily populated areas at all.

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

I'd go for WF: Knife/dagger. Knives were ubiquitous.

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

I'd go for WF: Knife/dagger. Knives were ubiquitous.

I remembe reading a story where the author used a reference to droit de signeur, the supposed right of the lord to the wedding night of any female who gets married in his domain. Although it is used in fiction (Braveheart, the Marriage of Figaro) the author commented "it does not seem a wise practice in a place where all the women are familiar with the use of fish knives."

 

Knives were ubiqtuous in all such settings, because they were just too useful as tools. And just about any sharp farm impliment can be converted into a weapon, simply by sticking it onto a pole.

 

I'm not quite sure where the idea that the classes are automatically and eternally hostile to each other came from. It must have pre-dated Karl marx by several centuries, but it hardly seems a law of nature that must apply in all settings in all circumstances. The fact that many, if not most, european nobility originated as rovi ng bandits/warriors who settled down in one place might have contriubted to that idea; that may very well not be the case ina fantastical environment.

 

A sort of socially symbiotic relationship may be more appropriate, where everyone has rights and respobilities that are clearly defined and limited if not by law then by custom.

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

I think it's a cultural thing - some folk still have hard feelings over their war of independance and have irrational fears of monarchies or nobility ;-p

Doesn't help that the media caters for misinformation. No doubt most fantasy players also think that children marry at the age of 11-13. Or that they all had bad teeth.

Hmm, makes me wonder if there is a compilation of "medieval misconceptions"

to quicly bring up to speed all the folk that take stuff for granted without ever looking up anything.

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

Ha!

http://www.the-orb.net/non_spec/missteps/misindex.html

 

droit du seigneur

http://www.snopes.com/weddings/customs/droit.asp

[Kabluey]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

That's also assuming the lord is corrupt and universally hated by their serfs and peasants. Which is a big assumption. It seems to be a stereotype that nobles and lords are oppressing the masses' date=' and the peasants are just waiting to throw off the shackles of their slavery. Too much Robin Hood, I guess.[/quote']

 

It doesn't make the assumption that they're corrupt and universally hated. But they are part of a ruling oligarchy, and oligarchies maintain power by limiting the power of those ruled. It's the nature of the beast (unless you're subscribing to a utopian vision of an oligarchy, I guess). The chance for a revolt even for a beloved lord might be small, but a famine, plague, or bad legal decision could easily raise dissent. And at the end of the day, should that dissent break out into armed revolt, it will be a lot easier to put down if they're poorly armed.

 

I like Harn' date=' but it is a Dark Ages world setting - not Medieval. It's pre-12th century mostly. Many fantasy players like plate armour, so prefer medieval to dark ages [/quote']

 

It does have plate, though not full plate as you see in the high Middle Ages. As to timeframe, if anything, I would probably have said Harn roughly equates to about the 12th century, maybe the 11th. Of course, direct correlations are difficult, and it really depends on what part of Harn you're talking about. And bear in mind that Harn corresponds to England, not to France or Italy which are more urban and developed in the 12th century. Still, it's not the High Middle Ages environment that most RPG'ers are familiar with, that's true.

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

It doesn't make the assumption that they're corrupt and universally hated. But they are part of a ruling oligarchy' date=' and oligarchies maintain power by limiting the power of those ruled. It's the nature of the beast (unless you're subscribing to a utopian vision of an oligarchy, I guess). The chance for a revolt even for a beloved lord might be small, but a famine, plague, or bad legal decision could easily raise dissent. And at the end of the day, should that dissent break out into armed revolt, it will be a lot easier to put down if they're poorly armed.[/quote']

I'm not using it as an argument for combat trained peasants - I find the whole concept of wandering monsters to be ludicrious and purile to exist outside of CRPGs.

 

However - oligarchies require separation of authority from populace that generally didn't happen until later in the middle ages (later than the roughly transitional plate period that Harn sits around).

Early feudal societies - especially before they get kings, who is in charge very much depends on how well they can lead or protect land. Those in authority would award land based on merit (as well as for nepotistic reasons now and then).

[OddHat]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

I'm not using it as an argument for combat trained peasants - I find the whole concept of wandering monsters to be ludicrious and purile to exist outside of CRPGs.

 

Well, it is a silly idea in most fantasy RPG settings. You can make it sort of work if you assume that the situation is only temporary. Say, "Humanity is at war with the Goblinoids; their war parties will continue to raid until we wipe them out or they drive us off this land."

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

It works in Perdido Street Station - but that's only because it is a high magic and hostile world in which civilisation has to be hacked out the landscape and rigorously defended.

[keithcurtis]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

This is also the case in Savage Earth, where it is the excuse for maintaining a standing army, and farm laborers are never more than a short run from shelter and or a military outpost.

 

Keith "It's not about realism. It's about a plausible suspension of disbelief" Curtis

[Curufea]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

There is a given level of plausible for each setting though. You gotta be careful not to use up all your plausible in one area, just in case you need a bit more plausible in another area later.

[keithcurtis]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

True. It does depend on what sort of genre you are emulating. For D&D (which really is its own genre), there's quite a large reservoir of plausible.

 

Keith "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain" Curtis

[prestidigitator]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

But armed peasants with better-thamn-adequate fighting training are a fedual lord's worst nigthmare.

Not necessarily. Whatever the roots of a feudal society, a healthy feudal system is one in which the peasants would hardly think of rebelling. They have their responsibilities to their lord, and their lord has responsibilities to them. The lord provides protection, legal judgement, and--when necessary--military leadership. Everyone knows their place; not necessarily to be constrained by it, but to know how it is they best contribute to the whole. Why would a lord fear his subjects? They are the blood of his land. Why would the subjects fear their lord? He is their wisdom and protection.

[input.jack]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

I find the whole concept of wandering monsters to be ludicrious and purile to exist outside of CRPGs.

 

I disagree. Campaigns which have low civilized populations can easily support the "wandering monster" model. Heck, Middle Earth is pretty "empty" by the late Third Age; the concept of small communities of civilized people being occasionally threatened by marauders of less civilized ilk (Goblins, Trolls, Orcs, etc) does not seem far-fetched, at all.

 

So long as the GM keeps in mind that the typical community should be fortified or walled in some way, everythings fine. Even Bree had a wall and gate.

[Frenchman]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

Also remember that even if peasants are skilled in fighting against monsters, that doesn't mean they can challenge their leiges. Peasants may rely on certain forms of combat or certain weapons which are ineffectual against highly skilled and armored warriors. Reduced Penetration and Normal Damage weapons (like most farm implements) are all but useless vs. almost any metal armor.

If I recall correctly, there were a few occasions in "fuedal" Tokugawa Japan of peasants revolting - peasants who were trained in martial arts and wielded farm implements just as nasty as those available to Europeans - and they were easily and brutally crushed by much smaller forces of fairly inexperienced (some of these rebellions occurred in the 3rd and later Tokugawa generations, when real warfare was almost nonexistant) Samurai wielding traditional weapons (swords and armor, as the gun had dissappeared from Japan by this time)

It seems to me that, even in a fantasy setting where peasants can learn powerful martial arts, they would be no match for their (at least) equally powerful and much better equipped leige-lords.

[Frenchman]

TB: Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

So who are peasants' date=' and what do they know? And can one emerge from the ranks of the Peasants to become an adventurer, or even a true hero, under the right circumstances?[/quote']

As for the actual questions which started this thread...

 

Who Are Peasants?

In most fantasy settings, the word "peasant" means either a farmer attached to the land he works, but does not own, and little better than a slave (Serf), or anyone who is not nobility, 'classed,' and/or wealthy. Since Serf is more technically correct, I'll address this answer towards that.

A peasant is someone who has a quality of living which can range from that of modern Amish (Pretty Nice, really), to one more akin to The People Who Live Under The Highway Overpass. Depending on the setting and the GM, of course.

Those who are better off will likely 'own' (they technically belong to their Lord in most settings) a few large animals (~50kg+), several pairs of clothing, farming tools sufficient for their field, and maybe even a cart or wagon to take things to town in - they generally won't have to worry about feeding themselves, except maybe in the dead of winter, but they're not really in danger of starving to death even then. Their village most likely has a mill or other important structure centrally located.

The 'average' peasant may 'own' a pig or three, but larger animals (like horses and oxen) will be used by the whole community, as will many of their farming implements and structures- especially the expensive ones like plows, wells, and barns. They'll have only one spare set of clothes, if that, and their single pair of shoes are likely one of their most cherished possessions. Because of the fees they are charged for hauling (by the one man who does have a cart), milling (by their lord who owns the mill inconvienently located in a defensible position), and selling (stall fees in the marketplace are collected by the lord, or they take a loss in selling everything directly to a merchant) their produce, they are often barely able to make ends meet over the course of the year. Thankfully, they are likely intelligent and lucky enough to have a small vegetable or herb garden as well, which can supplement their diet and occasionally earn them a few extra coins as well - so they don't actually risk starving to death except in hard years, but will most likely go on tight rations for the winter monthes.

The really poor, Monty Python-esque peasants are generally only believable in areas and times of extreme hardship - such as under unreasonably evil tyrants or during famines, wars, plagues, or other calamities. They rarely possess a full suit of clothes, and the ones they have are always filthy. They're lucky if they own a malnourished dog, let alone a chicken or pig. Their home is in ill repair if it is still standing, and if their fields are fertile, they lack the manpower to cultivate them properly. These peasants will almost always be background dressing in games, and will be usually end up being comedic if they are explored in depth.

 

What Do They Know?

Again this relates to the flavor of your world. Peasants can be ridiculously uneducated (probably inbred) rural morons, highly skilled survivors, or crafty opportunists. Since the dumb kind of peasants don't know anything, I won't spend time telling you what they know - oops, I allready did.

'Realistic' peasants will know, as a bare minimum, quite a lot of practical knowledge about agriculture of all kinds - few peasants cultivate only a single crop for their entire lives, especially if crop rotation is practiced - in a fantasy game where, "civilisation has to be hacked out the landscape and rigorously defended," (Curufea) this practice will arise much, much earlier than it did in Europe, where land was considered a nigh limitless resource in the middling ages. Therefore giving peasants knowledge and skills of Farming, Animal Husbandry, and other agricultural skills is virtually a requirement.

Peasants also have, contrary to popular belief, quite a bit of free time - there are whole seasons where they are either trapped indoors with nothing to do, or waiting for their crops to grow. Even during harvest time, they usually cannot continue working after sunset (simple magic could change this, and shorten harvest time a bit), and have little to do but sit around and watch the stars or tell stories during the night (Nightime at 50 degrees north latitude - Berlin - lasts for 14 hours in October). Therefore, peasants may learn a great range of skills to pass the time, most of which will aid them in being self sufficient. But some peasants, especially children, will spend their free time having fun - be it playing sports or exploring the surrounding area. In a world with magic & monsters, they may spend part of this time learing to defend their village or how to cast spells. Skills such as Hunting, Storytelling, Legends and Lore, or even Occult Lore may not be uncommon among decently prosperous peasants.

Because of this, some peasants will be experts on their local area and the beings that inhabit (or haunt) it. Area Knowledges, knowledge of local plants and animals, navigation skills, and the habits, tactics, and weaknesses of the local monsters could all be appropriate.

 

How Can a Peasnat Advance Socially?

A serf usually has the ability to buy his freedom, if (big if) they are able to save up enough money to do so. If a peasant runs far enough away (a few counties over) they may be able to start a life as a craftsman or tradesman, since they aren't really important enough for their leige to invest much effort into finding them. Besides, a peasant who runs away may be willing and/or able to start a rebellion against the local leader, so it's better that they're someone else's problem anyhow.

A peasant who develops a particularly useful skill to a high level, especially an artist, tailor, or metalworker, may find himself in the direct employ of his leige, or his leige's leige, and thus able to quickly purchase his and his families freedom.

It's possible (very remotely so) that someone of a higher social status (usually nobility) may bestow favor upon a peasant. The reasons for this can vary - the peasant could save their bacon and earn their gratitude, they may fall in love with the peasant, or the peasant could be a tool of convienence - such as a ruler without an heir claiming some promising-looking peasant as their illegitamate son (see last week's news about Grimaldi for something similar). The end result is the same - the noble takes the peasant in as a servant, employee, or even adopts or marries them, instantly raising their social status.

Finally, there is the most prevalant sort of advancement: War. In just about all societies (including modern America) military service does wonders for one's social progression. A peasant who is skilled and a bit lucky can find himself on the winning end of a few battles and in the good graces of his commander. This can, and has, led to peasants eventually becoming powerful warlords or even legitimate rulers - and often their first action is to attempt to quash the social mobility that allowed them to get there (Hidiyoshi, anyone?).

 

As always, I am too long winded, too lazy to go back and summarize or streamline it, and wishing that I could make my post have footnotes.

Hope I helped some, and I'm looking forward to being corrected by those of you who are more knowledgeable than I.

Now I must sleep.

[Lucius]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

Also, Harn has a rule that a serf can gain his freedom if he escapes to a freetown and remains there for a year and a day. I don't know if there was a similar tradition in European history, but it does allow the possibility for any serf gaining his freedom. Of course, it's assumed that very few serfs try to escape (the life of a freeman was in some ways worse than that of a serf), and that of those who do the vast majority are caught very quickly.

 

So, yes, I think a serf can become an adventurer and a hero.

 

Harn took that rule out of European history. Yes, it was a real tradition.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Herding Palindromedaries

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: PS: Farmer in a Fantasy Campaign

 

Being in a fantasy world could also serve to make farmers/peasants and their societies more prosperous.

 

Having access to magic that helps crops grow, magic bags of neverending seed, enchanted horses that never tire pulling plows, hoes that weed on their own, scarecrows that actively chase pests away, weather and water magics to fight droughts, etc. can all help production immensely. Access to magical healing can help get the injured farmer back to work or heal the sickly milk-cow.

 

This could even be the reason for and one of the main functions of the manor lords - providing the magic that keeps the system going so well. Either as spellcasters themselves, or ensuring a supply in the area devoted to such tasks.

 

Say production is 20% more efficient baseline with such methods available. Probably also means then that a single farmer can work more land, so say 30% net productivity increase. This means you can take some of those farmers/agricultural laborers out of the system and turn them into other things, like men-at-arms, adventurers, priests and the like. If you take 20% to do this, you still come out ahead.

 

Heck, maybe you can get the local pixies to do half your spinning by leaving out a bowl of milk overnight.

 

Add in the benefits of having active sky gods and harvest goddesses you can enlist the aid of, and a farmer's life can be pretty good.

 

In a reasonably high-magic fantasy world, I'd expect most farm communities to look more like Tolkein's Shire than oppressed serfs hacking at hard ground with sticks.