|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 1, 2020 21:31:52 GMT -6
On page 10 of Men & Magic a simple formula for starting Gold Pieces is given: "Each player notes his appropriate [ability] scores, obtains a similar roll of three dice to determine the number of Gold Pieces (Dice score x10) he starts with," It was noted in another thread that this can be interpreted as your character's Social Status. It has the exact same range 3-18 of all other abilities, is determined the same way, and is in the same step of character creation. Today I was re-reading issue #70 of Dragon Magazine from February of 1983 and stumbled across an article by Gary Gygax describing a Social Status system for Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. He hints that it will be in the forthcoming expansion volume. I assume that became Unearthed Arcana. In his typical Gygaxian way he systematized social status into multiple tiers from Lower Lower Class, to Middle Middle Class, to Upper Upper class and everything in between. Also adding birth tables and corresponding Non-Human races. So taking off from there here is a proposal for a very "white box" Social Status stat: Roll 3d6 to determine your character's Social Status score3-4 Lowest Class 5-9 Lower Class 10-14 Middle Class 15-18 Upper Class 19+ Royalty Lowest Class: These are the dregs of society. Freed slaves, peasants, tinkers, vagabonds, beggars, criminals, common thieves and assassins Lower Class: This is most people. Herdsmen, laborers, peddlers, actors, jugglers, men-at-arms, freemen, tradesmen, petty officers, money-changers, tax collectors, mountebanks, fences Middle Class: Artisans, craftsmen, petty merchants, junior officers, bankers, landless knights, landed gentry, merchants, petty officials, senior officers, landless petty nobles, guild masters, great merchants, military commanders, officials, doctors, priests, landless nobles Upper Class: Great landed gentry, generals and marshals, greater officials, knights, commanders, bishops, lesser nobles Royalty: Great nobles, sovereign nobility, royalty Parent’s Marital State roll 1d121-8: married, character is legitimate 9-10: character is an orphan 11+: unmarried, character is a bastard Birth Order: roll 1d12 twice. The higher number is the number of children in the family. The lower number is the order in birth your character is. First born generally inherits most or all the wealth, land, and titles. Subsequent born inherits proportionately less. In some cultures the children inherit their parent’s debt as well. Your character's starting wealth is Social Status x10 in Gold Pieces. (30-180 GP)
Your class could have an effect, so each 2 or 3 levels you could gain +1 to your Social Status. There would be certain perks associated with them, advantages and disadvantages to each tier. |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on May 1, 2020 23:48:20 GMT -6
Nice idea!
How would you roll a 19+, though? Or is it just included for reference and NPCs?
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 1, 2020 23:53:02 GMT -6
Nice idea! How would you roll a 19+, though? Or is it just included for reference and NPCs? For reference and NPC's. Also "Your class could have an effect, so each 2 or 3 levels you could gain +1 to your Social Status." If the GM wants to allow characters to become royalty at some point in the campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by retrorob on May 2, 2020 3:13:05 GMT -6
Check out "Birth Tables for D&D" in Dragon #3, by Brad Stock and Brian Lane.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 2, 2020 4:57:40 GMT -6
Check out "Birth Tables for D&D" in Dragon #3, by Brad Stock and Brian Lane. That's a good one. I skimmed it, but it's a bit more complicated. |
|
|
|
Post by retrorob on May 2, 2020 7:12:21 GMT -6
A lot of good ideas, inspired probably by EotPT, but as a whole it's too cumbersome.
One could simplify it to one d100 roll (1-30: Commoner, 31-85: Merchant, 86-95: Gentleman, 96-00: Noble).
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 2, 2020 15:34:59 GMT -6
A lot of good ideas, inspired probably by EotPT, but as a whole it's too cumbersome. One could simplify it to one d100 roll (1-30: Commoner, 31-85: Merchant, 86-95: Gentleman, 96-00: Noble). Men & Magic already has a 3d6 roll for Social Status. This is just fleshing it out a bit. No doubt this topic has been done a hundred times a hundred different ways, and you can find it detailed out in depth. I mean there is a whole book called A Magical Medieval Society that does it brilliantly. |
|
|
|
Post by linebeck on May 2, 2020 19:27:07 GMT -6
A lot of good ideas, inspired probably by EotPT, but as a whole it's too cumbersome. One could simplify it to one d100 roll (1-30: Commoner, 31-85: Merchant, 86-95: Gentleman, 96-00: Noble). Men & Magic already has a 3d6 roll for Social Status. This is just fleshing it out a bit. No doubt this topic has been done a hundred times a hundred different ways, and you can find it detailed out in depth. I mean there is a whole book called A Magical Medieval Society that does it brilliantly. I would adjust the range from your initial post to put middle class in the 13-16 range. 3d6 is going to create a bell curve which means by by your chart the majority of the population consists of artisans, etc. that doesn’t seem to track with social Reality or the reality of most fictional fantasy games. The vast Majority of individuals one encounters are commoners. |
|
|
|
Post by retrorob on May 3, 2020 2:56:43 GMT -6
tdenmarkYou mean a roll for gold? I don't consider it a social status. You can be an impoverished noble or a bandit who just robbed some wealthy merchant.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 3, 2020 13:35:01 GMT -6
tdenmarkYou mean a roll for gold? I don't consider it a social status. You can be an impoverished noble or a bandit who just robbed some wealthy merchant. Read the OP. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 3, 2020 13:38:43 GMT -6
I would adjust the range from your initial post to put middle class in the 13-16 range. 3d6 is going to create a bell curve which means by by your chart the majority of the population consists of artisans, etc. that doesn’t seem to track with social Reality or the reality of most fictional fantasy games. The vast Majority of individuals one encounters are commoners. Good point. My original thought was that most players would come from a Middle Class background, but historically there was very little Middle Class (if any). The vast vast majority would be Lower Class. Roll 3d6 to determine your character's Social Status score3-5 Lowest Class 6-12 Lower Class 13-16 Middle Class 17-18 Upper Class 19+ Royalty  |
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on May 5, 2020 15:13:38 GMT -6
First, must Fantasy literature be historically and socially accurate?
Also, which Fantasy literature are we talking about? If we're talking about classical mythology or epics, all characters are royalty.
If we're talking about Arthurian literature, they all are nobility.
If we're talking about icelandic sagas, most are "freemen" (the closest thing of an "upper middle class")
If we're talking about modern Fantasy, characters often are supposedly "small folk" like small landowners , but live suspiciously like modern middle class ...
The class system you choose reflects the type of world you're building and the literary genre you're aiming for.
I very much like what the author of the Warhammer/D&D mix-match "Small But Vicious Dog" came up with, with 3d6 that would be :
18: Highborn Titled: toffs, merchant princes, emissaries, etc.
16-17: Pillars of Society: Burghers, guild notables, Collegiate wizards, etc.
13-15: Respectable Types: Lawyers, physicians, priests, engineers, etc.
10-12: People of the Middling Sort: Apothecaries, initiates, roadwardens, etc.
6-9: Humble Folk: Scribes, militia, peddlers, bounty hunters, etc.
4-5: The Lowly Hoi Polloi: Poor but honest farmers, ratcatchers, day labourers, etc.
3: The Vile Underclass: Thieves, gypsies, corpse pickers and similar.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2020 16:04:43 GMT -6
Then there is Gygax's much later Milieu Building brackets
lower lower class
middle lower class
upper lower class
lower middle class
middle middle class
upper middle class
lower upper class
middle upper class
upper upper class
To these, for coverage I would add criminal underclass
|
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on May 5, 2020 17:06:25 GMT -6
Then there is Gygax's much later Milieu Building brackets lower lower class middle lower class upper lower class lower middle class middle middle class upper middle class lower upper class middle upper class upper upper class To these, for coverage I would add criminal underclass This works really well for Traveller's Social stat. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 6, 2020 0:46:36 GMT -6
18: Highborn Titled: toffs, merchant princes, emissaries, etc. 16-17: Pillars of Society: Burghers, guild notables, Collegiate wizards, etc. 13-15: Respectable Types: Lawyers, physicians, priests, engineers, etc. 10-12: People of the Middling Sort: Apothecaries, initiates, roadwardens, etc. 6-9: Humble Folk: Scribes, militia, peddlers, bounty hunters, etc. 4-5: The Lowly Hoi Polloi: Poor but honest farmers, ratcatchers, day labourers, etc. 3: The Vile Underclass: Thieves, gypsies, corpse pickers and similar. Those are very evocative class titles. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2020 1:34:43 GMT -6
My own house rule/rule of thumb is less complicated, but probably more fitting for RC D&D than for OD&D: Your level is your social status/ die roll bonus for rolls concerning your class, your profession, and your race/national association. If you're Ronnie Random, the valiant young warrior, nobody will know who you are. But if you're already Lucy Level-Ten, then more of your kind will respect you because you've simply done more. This goes for noblemen as it goes for criminals - everyone gets gradually more famous within their social hemisphere, and as the heroic tasks, quests, and deeds necessarily increase with every level gained, people get to know you more. Say, as an Assassin, once you are a few levels up, you're implied to have done your job well. Other assassins will respect that, or at the very least they will be able to judge you according to your gear and to your entourage. Likewise, the town guard will talk differently to a knight in a - literal - shining armor or to a mage who rides in on a wyvern than they will talk to Robie Rustysword. So, the way I run things, the social status and social influence are already reflected and displayed through the level advancement. How the characters try to play this out, whether they decide to go everywhere incognito, whether they try to really rely on it, is their decision. I mainly like this system because it gives the characters a sense of where they stand in the world: To use a classic example, the "Great Svenny", of Blackmoor fame, is simply the best-known and most-beloved warrior in the entire kingdom: When he enters a tavern, his people will cheer to him, and perhaps break into song, the same thing that happens to Jaime Lannister in "Game of Thrones" a few times. Now, if the Great Svenny visits an Orc camp, for whatever reason, then the reaction will be the same - just, within the given context, negative, as he is the one human the Orcs simply hate the most. ...Something like that.  |
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on May 6, 2020 15:40:48 GMT -6
To be honest, in my campaign, adventurers are rabble, regardless of birth or starting fortune. They are grave-robbers and hitmen. The kind of people that are hired to get rid of a goblin infestation.
Not until they have "Name-level" they can gain a social status, and even so, they are the kind of nobility sent in the bordelands to settle at the fringes of Wilderness...
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 6, 2020 23:29:18 GMT -6
Not until they have "Name-level" they can gain a social status I like the idea of tying social status in with level. Provides an extra perk for gaining experience and advancement. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2020 1:56:19 GMT -6
Not until they have "Name-level" they can gain a social status I like the idea of tying social status in with level. Provides an extra perk for gaining experience and advancement. FWIW, level-as-die-roll-bonus is also the way I tend to house-rule Intimidation checks. Those two drunken city guards may simply not realize they're dealing with the Witcher; so, you need to remind them. The bad side of this house rule is that the rolls are going to suck, of course, for a long while. I like that, though, because it keeps the players grounded, usually. - It's nice that they killed the local Goblin King, but... Nobody really cares, three Imperial provinces to the South. |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on May 8, 2020 2:38:56 GMT -6
I've experimented with 2d6+ [half level, round down] used as in Powered by the Apocalypse games: Worked for our group. Of course, there are limits, like demons, undead, sworn enemies etc. probably won't be seduced. It's a mechanic for dealing NPCs who aren't already enemies. The 13+ result might not be suited for all campaigns, I guess, but I liked that "fan" NPCs can be useful and a little annoying at times.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2020 10:57:25 GMT -6
I like the idea of tying social status in with level. Provides an extra perk for gaining experience and advancement. FWIW, level-as-die-roll-bonus is also the way I tend to house-rule Intimidation checks. Those two drunken city guards may simply not realize they're dealing with the Witcher; so, you need to remind them. The bad side of this house rule is that the rolls are going to suck, of course, for a long while. I like that, though, because it keeps the players grounded, usually. - It's nice that they killed the local Goblin King, but... Nobody really cares, three Imperial provinces to the South. Agreed, if I'm understanding the above post. The modern spin on adventurer actions assimilates them into the Imperial milieu, for example - at low levels of achievement, the result is not too much hoopla. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on May 10, 2020 5:30:02 GMT -6
On page 10 of Men & Magic a simple formula for starting Gold Pieces is given: "Each player notes his appropriate [ability] scores, obtains a similar roll of three dice to determine the number of Gold Pieces (Dice score x10) he starts with," It was noted in another thread that this can be interpreted as your character's Social Status. It has the exact same range 3-18 of all other abilities, is determined the same way, and is in the same step of character creation. Your character's starting wealth is Social Status x10 in Gold Pieces. (30-180 GP)
Question: Should social class be dependent on starting funds? I can imagine a penniless noble along with a peasant who won the lottery. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 10, 2020 21:02:01 GMT -6
Question: Should social class be dependent on starting funds? I can imagine a penniless noble along with a peasant who won the lottery. Sure, there is no limit to how much you could complicate this. You could write a whole book on social classes and possible intricacies. Beggar kings and rich beggars! The point here was to utilize an existing mechanic already in the original D&D Men & Magic book. I think there have been some incredibly creative and interesting ideas posted here using that. I'm pretty fond of this one and am thinking of ways to use a version of this in my own games: 18: Highborn 16-17: Pillars of Society 13-15: Respectable Types 10-12: People of the Middling Sort 6-9: Humble Folk 4-5: The Lowly Hoi Polloi 3: The Vile Underclass |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 10, 2020 21:06:09 GMT -6
First, must Fantasy literature be historically and socially accurate? Also, which Fantasy literature are we talking about? No, it needs not necessarily be accurate. This is a game after all with unbounded imagination. In my OP I was assuming the general pulp Swords & Sorcery soup with dashes of historicity that is original D&D. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on May 11, 2020 6:00:09 GMT -6
First, must Fantasy literature be historically and socially accurate? Also, which Fantasy literature are we talking about? No, it needs not necessarily be accurate. This is a game after all with unbounded imagination. In my OP I was assuming the general pulp Swords & Sorcery soup with dashes of historicity that is original D&D. Read the “Scope” of the game in Men & Magic. It’s pretty wide open. Prehistoric, Medieval, the Imagined Future. So, accuracy isn’t a priority. The boundaries are not set for us. Its a remarkable, some say revolutionary, idea for a game. Some would even go as far to say that the concept was sooo far out that it had to be redacted in order to fuel the corporate machine. Wild stuff maaaan. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on May 11, 2020 6:08:47 GMT -6
Question: Should social class be dependent on starting funds? I can imagine a penniless noble along with a peasant who won the lottery. Sure, there is no limit to how much you could complicate this. You could write a whole book on social classes and possible intricacies. Beggar kings and rich beggars! The point here was to utilize an existing mechanic already in the original D&D Men & Magic book. I think there have been some incredibly creative and interesting ideas posted here using that. I'm pretty fond of this one and am thinking of ways to use a version of this in my own games: 18: Highborn 16-17: Pillars of Society 13-15: Respectable Types 10-12: People of the Middling Sort 6-9: Humble Folk 4-5: The Lowly Hoi Polloi 3: The Vile Underclass Interesting, let us know how this works. Here are some thoughts: I wonder what the constraints of being highborn would be. What if a humble person had a child with a highborn parent. Would the child be respectable? Or would the child drop to vile? How does a vile work his way up to pillar? I would assume that a person born vile could never rise to highborn because the appellation of “highborn” is self limiting. Hope you don’t mind this interrogation. |
|
|
|
Post by Aralaen on May 16, 2020 10:30:04 GMT -6
In using money roll as social status I think of it as social origin. I also keep it simple high, low, average with room for flexible interpretation. Once the game starts the PCs move away from this, their social status becomes adventurer. As they increase in level their social reputation goes up. A fighter hitting 9th level Lord has gotten to the point where his/her reputation, wealth and influence is enough for them to be acknowledged as a lord. Either the nobility grudgingly accepts this or they may even go to the length of “discovering “ that the PC is the scion of lost noble family etc, “oh he was noble all along” . As adventurers the PCs are somewhat sideways of the social order, something a hard bitten nobility might fear, the ability of freemen to change their status. It all comes down to how you role play it. If I want tables for status etc And play in historic style setting I can play Harnmaster!
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 16, 2020 15:02:35 GMT -6
Harnmaster. Ugh. You will not find a more wretched hive of pedantry and drivel. I agree with your point. Keep it simple, it is just a starting point. The campaign develops from there as the characters gain a reputation for good or ill. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2020 5:44:07 GMT -6
I like what you're doing here, but I like to point out that the hidden Social Ability is hidden in plain sight in the class titles as one levels up. I always interpreted "class" as "social class", which is why a high level Cleric is a Bishop, arguably a very wealthy and influential person. It also explains why a Dwarf, Hobbit or Elf can never become a Lord. They're second-class citizens in the implied D&D setting. Not exactly slaves or indentured servants but unable to attain the same ranks and privileges as Humans. There are some Humans, NPCs mostly, who are simply born with more...mana, xp or whatever you want to call it, but those who start as Adventurers start at the bottom social strata, like in the more modern literary traditions.
|
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on May 22, 2020 6:00:15 GMT -6
Most of my old characters died as nameless adventurers. Social class really isn’t a concern in my current games. The nvironment is kind of like the old west. I can see how social class, both actual and perceived, would be relevant in a medieval setting. Or a setting like Tekumel or Barsoom. It would be a factor in getting certain types of information, from whom, and under what conditions. But there are so many variables.
|
|
