Dnd Demographics

[Laereth]

Hey all !

Maybe I'm writing up too many details for my campaign world ? But one of the players will be a member of an old noble house (Count level) in a Holy Roman Empire-ish country. I was just wondering how much land (and therefore people) does one Count own/rule ? If his castle is near a mid size town (3500) does that cover it ? Or does he own also the countryside. If so how many villages does it require to support such a town ?

I just like to know the details for one noble, the character's Dad (who is plot important), and from there I can extrapolate for other nobles if needed over the campaign (if politics and warfare get involved).

[Else Fangorn]

As I recall, this document doesn't have a ton on what specific ranks of nobles should control, but it should have information on things like how many villages would be necessary to support a town. If the Count controls a town of 3,500 people, you could easily say that he rules all of the countryside required to support it, using the data you get from this link: http://www222.pair.com/sjohn/blueroom/demog.htm

Hope that helps!

Edit: According to the math I did, it looks like if he rules that city, he should probably have 20-25 square miles of territory aside from it, perhaps more if the much of the land isn't dedicated to agriculture.

[Daishain]

When not speaking of an honorary or administrative title, a count in the late roman empire age is a frontier military commander. Typically in charge of an army of around 200 men.

Such a force requires a great deal of support, though a town of 3500 with plenty of agricultural support should suffice.

[Ninja_Prawn]

I'll second Medieval Demographics Made Easy. It's a great resource.

According to the DMG, a Count ranks between a Marquess and a Viscount. That's a high rank. A count would likely not rule anything directly, but have a network of lesser lords sworn to him. Their holdings might contain several towns or even a city. It's worth noting that any landowner would be primarily concerned with owning productive land - that is, farmland, forests, mines, etc. Towns and cities don't really mean much to the medieval lord; they're not what generates his wealth (though they may enrich other people), just a necessary evil that seem to rise unbidden from the land. Rich merchants are a different matter, but in D&D, you tend not to consider them 'nobles' in the true sense of the word.

I picked two random real-life counts. One owned 4,441 square miles (3x the area of Rhode Island), the other 2,678. That's huge. Counts were major players on the international stage.

Oh, and if the details are plot relevant, it's good to be nailing them down early. Just don't go overboard (as I am prone to do). For the campaign I'm currently working on, I've got an excel spreadsheet detailing 59 noble houses, 19 baronies and 21 lesser lordly holdings, as well as two family trees (including birthdays), three coats of arms and a multi-layered map showing various political groupings and geological features. I've even got a stat block here the main villain's (drunken and embarrassing) great aunt...

[Shining Wrath]

I'll second Medieval Demographics Made Easy. It's a great resource.

According to the DMG, a Count ranks between a Marquess and a Viscount. That's a high rank. A count would likely not rule anything directly, but have a network of lesser lords sworn to him. ... SNIP ...

I picked two random real-life counts. One owned 4,441 square miles (3x the area of Rhode Island), the other 2,678. That's huge. Counts were major players on the international stage.

I think the Count would have a mix in a feudal system - owning some properties directly, and then exacting taxes from other subservient lords. Even today the Queen of England owns some property that has been "in the family", so to speak, for ages.

Regarding cities, I think any lord worth his salt is going to be taxing trade coming and going to the city.

[Ninja_Prawn]

I think the Count would have a mix in a feudal system - owning some properties directly, and then exacting taxes from other subservient lords. Even today the Queen of England owns some property that has been "in the family", so to speak, for ages.

You're right, but I would have thought the vast majority (like 95%) of the land would be indirect. Lands ruled directly by a Count are going to be curious exceptions, private residences and castles.


Regarding cities, I think any lord worth his salt is going to be taxing trade coming and going to the city.

Yes, but the lord doing that taxation is going to be at Baron or a Knight level. Or a reeve / mayor / sheriff / steward / deputy who answers to a Baron or Knight.

[Shining Wrath]

You're right, but I would have thought the vast majority (like 95%) of the land would be indirect. Lands ruled directly by a Count are going to be curious exceptions, private residences and castles. ... SNIP ...

I may be wrong, but I think there are many instances of kings creating nobles, and nobles creating lesser nobles, and giving them a grant of land to rule over. If you've got all the land in a country allocated, the only way to create even a knight is for someone to say "Here's some land, rule it". And that land comes from someone's supply.

[Ninja_Prawn]

I may be wrong, but I think there are many instances of kings creating nobles, and nobles creating lesser nobles, and giving them a grant of land to rule over. If you've got all the land in a country allocated, the only way to create even a knight is for someone to say "Here's some land, rule it". And that land comes from someone's supply.

This is getting complicated and maybe should be continued elsewhere (though I'm not really interested enough to bother with that).

Yes, kings &co create nobles by granting land. Sometimes this is from their own supply, which for a monarch is probably more like 10 or 15% of their total land. Just as often, though, it would come from stripping someone else of their holdings, either because they were an enemy, they fell out of favour, or they died without an heir.

And once all the land is owned and there's none left to grant to people, you start creating paper nobles. In real life the House of Lords in my country is stuffed with just such paper lords. Do you think The Lord Sugar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Sugar) was given a packet of farmland to fatten himself off?

[Shining Wrath]

This is getting complicated and maybe should be continued elsewhere (though I'm not really interested enough to bother with that).

Yes, kings &co create nobles by granting land. Sometimes this is from their own supply, which for a monarch is probably more like 10 or 15% of their total land. Just as often, though, it would come from stripping someone else of their holdings, either because they were an enemy, they fell out of favour, or they died without an heir.

And once all the land is owned and there's none left to grant to people, you start creating paper nobles. In real life the House of Lords in my country is stuffed with just such paper lords. Do you think The Lord Sugar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Sugar) was given a packet of farmland to fatten himself off?

Eh, we're done. And paper lords are an interesting idea for NPCs; the players meet the Viscount McGuire in a tavern, and find out he's penniless and a pickpocket.

[Safety Sword]

Eh, we're done. And paper lords are an interesting idea for NPCs; the players meet the Viscount McGuire in a tavern, and find out he's penniless and a pickpocket.

Just remember the golden rule:

If you're a Count and part of your surname is "von" then you're probably a vampire.


I was going to colour the golden rule yellow... but that colour is hideous.

[Laereth]

Just remember the golden rule:

If you're a Count and part of your surname is "von" then you're probably a vampire.


I was going to colour the golden rule yellow... but that colour is hideous.

Given the Empire is based on the Holy Roman Empire (HRE)...there is going to be a LOT of vampires running amok in there...

Thanks for tips guys ! I'll look up the Medieval Demographics Made Easy.

Was intending the system to be close-ish to the real HRE. As in the Emperor holds but minor control over the Dukes who are Kings but in name. Margraves (marquesses) are Counts who hold territory on the borderlands (a March) and generally enjoy a bit more freedom. Some of them enjoying Imperial Immediacy, which makes the Emperor itself their sole overlord (instead of swearing fealty to a duke who himself swears fealty to the emperor).

Counts would have therefore been the lowest level in the hierarchy. A Count being essentially a Baron who holds a county's capital (a la CKII) and can essentially own every fief in the county's borders. Manning more than one Castle can prove tedious for one man, hence why many would name Barons or Viscounts to hold such settlements in their stead. They would in turn swear fealty to the Count and provide him with troops should there be a need for such a thing.

[KorvinStarmast]

Start with a manor and work your way up. Per the Medieval Demographics assist already offered, you have X square miles of arable land that one manor governs/manages/rules. Low level noble or bannerman. Work your way up from there, as most villages in this area will be small, less than 100 people in them.

When you get to a town of 3500 people, that's a sizeable concentration of population for that model of agrarian economics and should have a non trivial number of craftsmen and merchants.

[Stan]

Regarding cities, I think any lord worth his salt is going to be taxing trade coming and going to the city.

It depends on the details of the setup. In some places/times, cities existed due a charter from the king and would have paid taxes directly to royalty. Kings some times felt restricted by feudalism and liked direct sources of income without all the restrictions of feudalism. It helped for things like paying for armies that didn't go home after 40 days. In this case, the local count might hate the city with no ties to them but which sits in the middle of their territory. In such a case, the city would have a sheriff or similar royally appointed person.

The HRE generally had weak federal-level power so the count might have only small restrictions to their superiors. Time and marriage also changed things so that formal titles were not a perfect measure of power - a rich baron might have more informal power than a duke. Maybe the count has lost most of their directly held lands and get little money from those beneath them due to a weak form of feudalism. Or the count could have moved up and be the real power for the whole reagons.

[Laereth]

It depends on the details of the setup. In some places/times, cities existed due a charter from the king and would have paid taxes directly to royalty. Kings some times felt restricted by feudalism and liked direct sources of income without all the restrictions of feudalism. It helped for things like paying for armies that didn't go home after 40 days. In this case, the local count might hate the city with no ties to them but which sits in the middle of their territory. In such a case, the city would have a sheriff or similar royally appointed person.

The HRE generally had weak federal-level power so the count might have only small restrictions to their superiors. Time and marriage also changed things so that formal titles were not a perfect measure of power - a rich baron might have more informal power than a duke. Maybe the count has lost most of their directly held lands and get little money from those beneath them due to a weak form of feudalism. Or the count could have moved up and be the real power for the whole reagons.

The way I have it set up the theoretical hierarchy of the Empire would be

The Emperor

Prince Electors

Nobles with Imperial Immediacy or Princes of the Empire
- King
- Archduke
- Duke
- Landgrave (Margrave with a large territory who has Imperial Immediacy)
- Prince of an Imperial City (sort-of city-state within the Empire)
- Imperial Count (count who has Imperial Immediacy)

Nobles without Imperial Immediacy are subordinated to one of the Princes of the Empire or their hierarchical "superior":

- Margrave (sub to Duke and up), Margraves are in essence Counts who rule on the Borderlands.
- Counts (sub to Duke and up)
- Baron (sub to Margrave/Count), lowest level discounting Knights or unlanded/titled nobles

I emphasizes on the theoretical part because as for the HRE, the Emperor's power is severely limited over the Princes of the Empire. He mostly has to rely on his own desmene if he has to control an unruly vassal through force. This makes the Dukes more or less independent.