Medieval Mafia

[Sir Daniel]

So, I would like to put a group of organized criminals that are basically the mafia in my D&D game. Technically, I´m running D&D 3.5, but that should not matter. I have two questions: Do you have any ideas for gimmicks that the Medieval Mafia uses to operate? And how long can I string along my players without letting them find the big boss and kill him? Also, here are my thoughts: A spell that, when specific requirements are met or on command, causes the target to burst into flames, turning to ash. It requires a special tattoo or mark beforehand. And a box that has a solar powered ward that protects it and a fingerprint lock made of wax. The only fingerprint that works is the fingerprint of the maker, who has been dead for over a century. The Medieval Mafia (I am thinking of calling them ¨The Ravens¨) have possession of his hand.

[Honest Tiefling]

I assume you mean medieval europe, so why not go with the idea of a Robber Baron? It actually happened, and you can make it a more covert connection. It would also would explain why the criminal organization can function without the guards being able to do anything about it. If your players are unfamiliar with the concept, it'll be a nice twist. If they are familiar with it, then you can present a variety of nobles that might be secretly aiding in this organization to either plot with or against. And nobles are known for being rich enough to reward adventurers! So they can either be recruited or rewarded by a rival noble.

[Sir Daniel]

Great idea! Maybe a couple of the quest giver nobles have ties to the medieval mafia, but there isn't enough evidence to prove their guilt.

[Thrudd]

The "medieval mafia" would basically be every lord and his knights. They take what they want from the common folk and give them "protection" in return. Turf wars are what you call it when one noble and his gang pushed into another guy's territory, because they wanted the better farms and craftsmen. The "mafia" is basically feudalism. Swear loyalty to someone, and they'll let you live on "their land" in return for giving them crops and taxes and goods that you make. They'll make sure no one else takes your stuff.

A secret mafia is unneccessary, everyone is in the open about it. Strong guys with weapons take what they want from people, that's how society works.

A secret criminal organization might be some robin hood types or bandits, that live among the common folk or in the wilderness and steal from the barons.

[weckar]

The Ptolus setting has the balaclazars (I do hope I spelled that right) who are the mafia in all but name (excepting a few dark secrets).

[snowblizz]

Almost all medieaval guilds are pretty much the mafia. Even down to roughing up outsiders and people not paying into their protection racket.

[Vinyadan]

A mafia operates in two ways. There is an open face, the superficially legal one, which translates itself in good relations with the government that allow practice of legal activities, like administering a road or building public structures. You can expect the job to be done badly or not to be done or using criminally low quality materials. On the other side, administering a road allows exclusive use of the road for certain traffics as well as knowledge of who passes through. The nominally lawful activities may also comprise shops, restaurants, gambling and storages, or garbage disposal. Garbage disposal is in particular a powerful weapon: what happens to a town where garbage disposal ceases to function for 15 days, and gong farmers make themselves unfindable?
These superficially lawful activities depend on other, unlawful activities. These are corruption, intimidation and murder of decision makers and concurrence to make sure to get the job.
The money for these activities activities comes from other unlawful activities, like smuggling, shop racketing and loaning money for illegally high interests.
These activities are only possible if a military arm performs other illegal activities destined to murdering civil opponents(at all levels), police force members, and members of rival gangs. They create a climate of fear and enforce the rule of silence on testimonies, until it becomes a cultural factor.

The most money comes from the legal activities, and the richness, joined with brute power, makes it so that a mafia leader will be one of the prominent and most respected figures in a village (which he may actually administer like a fief). However, the reason for this respect is never explained openly: the main point which mafia members will try to make is that no mafia exists.

You can do a lot of things in a campaign. It could be a mafia in a city, which could touch all of its levels and control many or all of them, or only touch a minority, while most of the citizens don't even know it exists. You could depict an upstart group of youngsters trying to become the new big wolves, openly murdering people in the streets and hiding in safe places from which they give orders to their associates. You could depict the mother of such a youngster that has been killed asking the players for help/vengeance/justice. Or the players may want to become the next wolves.

[Sir Daniel]

Yeah, the only way a criminal organization would not be attacked by heroes is by having a wall of innocent puppets and workers. Hard to track down an organization that most people aren't aware of. And the Watch isn't about to let some armed travelers search everyone for incriminating evidence, and a robber baron would not have to show himself to the PCs.

[Spiryt]

The "medieval mafia" would basically be every lord and his knights. They take what they want from the common folk and give them "protection" in return. Turf wars are what you call it when one noble and his gang pushed into another guy's territory, because they wanted the better farms and craftsmen. The "mafia" is basically feudalism. Swear loyalty to someone, and they'll let you live on "their land" in return for giving them crops and taxes and goods that you make. They'll make sure no one else takes your stuff.

By such dramatic definition, every legal government is 'mafia' though.

The take what they want by setting taxes and other burdens (generally much higher portion of one's income/production today than in poorer, medieval times, for example. If only for inability to put a tax in every crafting process, like VAT does.), and decide what the common space is used for.

The refusal to play by those rules is likewise answered with violence (prison, having to pay even more, public whipping, choose your time/custom).

Now and today, for most part the only thing common citizen can do about those is to move somewhere else.

So it's not a very good definition.

Unless someone is running an adventure of party consisting of hardcore anarchists, then such approach is perhaps encouraged, of course.

[Mastikator]

A thief's guild or secret league of assassins might serve as a medieval mafia, it would only make sense if it operated in a city with a high enough population to sustain a life of crime.

[Vinyadan]

While there are some points of contact, a mafia and a state (or a noble family) aren't the same.

The first thing (and the least important) is that a mafia by definition doesn't have legitimacy.

The second thing is that a mafia is a parasitic entity that needs the state to survive and which gains a very substantial part of its income through state deals. The state needs the nobles, but it doesn't need the mafia.

In addition to this, the mafia will exploit the laws of the state by infringing them and being able, this way, to offer otherwise unavailable wares, or to offer the same wares at much lower prices, or to be paid the same price doing a criminally bad job.

The third thing is that a mafia has no interest in administration as it is done by a state. It is extremely costly and requires a lot of compromises. It also means having to be prepared for wars on an international level, which simply is beyond the purpose of a mafia. A mafia would instead attempt to infiltrate and govern the machine of the state, without substituting it.

This is why even the village mafia leader will be highly respected and honoured and the local Pelor priest may want the procession to take a break before his house as a sign of submission, but he will never declare himself the new lord of the village though a violent insurrection, although he will accept a lordship if offered. He will try to meld himself into the system to control both his mafia and the legal part of administration and gain money from both, instead of generating a breakaway fiefdom. This is actually the model for the most successful mafias, since it means that it takes a jump upwards in authority for someone to intervene (someone from the Capital, or the King's or Duke's court), but the activities conducted as state representative and those conducted as mafia leader are still kept so separate as possible, just in case the higher authority visits at the wrong time and decides to start hanging left and right.

[Joe the Rat]

By such dramatic definition, every legal government is 'mafia' though.
See Thrudd's comment on Feudalism, and let's not veer off too deeply into political theory.

What you are looking at here is a shadow pillar - a hidden part of the power structure independent of arms (nobility), faith (church), and (superficially)commerce (guild).

Comparing to various criminal organizations, what you are looking at is essentially someone who provides many of the services and inconveniences of government (community protection/infrastructure/disaster relief, expected payments, opportunities for advancement, etc.) that is 1) operating independent of the government (or church) (maybe), 2) providing goods and services that are not approved by the "legitimate" powers, and 3) is using their unique positions to gather wealth and influence by "questionable" means.

All of which comes down to saying what is it that they do that makes them eeevil in this setting, above and beyond what the ruling bodies do? It's almost like you need a Bad Thing for them to be involved with, like slave trade or necromancy or demon summoning. Or it is a single group behind all of the dodgy business in every town. That one group of city watch that does a little protection racket and information brokering on the side? The market manager who assigns stalls and arranges accidents based on bribes or unknown orders? The presence of Stygian Black Lotus Root in the city? The halflings? All under the same guy.

[Thrudd]

By such dramatic definition, every legal government is 'mafia' though.

The take what they want by setting taxes and other burdens (generally much higher portion of one's income/production today than in poorer, medieval times, for example. If only for inability to put a tax in every crafting process, like VAT does.), and decide what the common space is used for.

The refusal to play by those rules is likewise answered with violence (prison, having to pay even more, public whipping, choose your time/custom).

Now and today, for most part the only thing common citizen can do about those is to move somewhere else.

So it's not a very good definition.

Unless someone is running an adventure of party consisting of hardcore anarchists, then such approach is perhaps encouraged, of course.

Feudalism was a lot different than today's governments. People were not free to move somewhere else, they were mostly bound to the land and forced to pay whoever was the boss of that land (who was often appointed by a higher boss). The explicit arrangement was "you work, I get paid, and I protect you".
There are many more layers of commerce and beaurocracy in industrial and post-industrial governments which a "mafia" can manipulate and hide behind.

A "mafia" in a feudal medieval world, I suppose, would be something like a group of merchant/bandits that distribute some forbidden goods which give them influence with the nobles and local magistrates.

Maybe they are a magic mafia, that will do dirty deeds with demons. No noble could be seen or known to deal with these people lest they be targetted by the inquisition or excommunucated and stripped of their lands, but they love being able to secretly curse their enemies, so they give the magic mafia a cut of their profits in return for covert demonic services. The mafia boss probably lives in the biggest manse apart from the nobles castle, and has a front as a merchant "importer exporter". The noble visits him, and the next week a werewolf attacks a rival's best farm village or an heir gets sick and dies. The magic mafia sometimes scares the local folk with threats and take what they want, and the noble ignores the small folks' claims that the merchant in the manse is really a warlock who treats with the devil. Of course, the noble could use his army to have him killed, so the mafia boss is careful not to overstep and provide services to any of the noble's direct enemies.

[RazorChain]

I just use organized crime lords in my settings. Often the kingpins are lower nobility that means they can only judged by their peers (other nobles). Mostly they keep to the larger cities and are involved in smuggling rings, extortion, loan sharking, human trafficking, fencing stolen goods, forgery, pick pocketing gangs, burglary etc. The Kingpin usually keeps a clean appearance, it's his middlemen who get their hands dirty.

[Vinyadan]

It is true that imagining a mafia outside a capitalist world isn't easy.

I can imagine a rural medieval mafia as a secret group of brigands who rob merchants as a way to make money. They then use part of the money to corrupt the officials, and employ the rest to pay their men, while harassing commoners to sell their lands or cede their rights over them to them for very low prices. In the end, the mafia leader can aspire to a marriage into the upper society, aim to nobility, become the most important person in the village because he owns or warrants most of the land, and try to further expand himself to the next village. The commoners are still there, but they now have to depend on the mafia leader.
The same mafia leader may choose to open an illegal gambling place. This would make his villagers, and potentially richer shop owners, even more indebted and dependent on him, and he could then go for loansharking. After which he may decide to go racketing the blacksmith and the fur maker, who aren't going to the casino, until they are forced to close. He buys their shops, the corrupt officials make all needed authorizations, and off he goes.
At this point the village is under his control. He only has to worry about infighting and expansion. Maybe he could occasionally have some cattle stolen or irrespectful fellow murdered.

Lack of bureaucracy also meant that it was more difficult for the ruler to be informed of what was going on, if the officials didn't wish to inform him about something.

A magic mafia could also be someone who decided to become the monopolist of magical components. Harassing, killing, intimidation, corruption, fabricated proof, and the man now is the only importer of bat guano in town, and, as it turns out, all the shops that sell it are owned by people from his gang. in a city it's even easier than in a fief, because the governor may be directly corruptible, if you can give him enough money and he cares more about his pockets than the city's coffers. After which the mafia leader could make his business grow and get the job of keeping the sewers working, for example, so getting useful hidden storage room in case he also works as a receiver of stolen goods.

[Thrudd]

It is true that imagining a mafia outside a capitalist world isn't easy.

I can imagine a rural medieval mafia as a secret group of brigands who rob merchants as a way to make money. They then use part of the money to corrupt the officials, and employ the rest to pay their men, while harassing commoners to sell their lands or cede their rights over them to them for very low prices. In the end, the mafia leader can aspire to a marriage into the upper society, aim to nobility, become the most important person in the village because he owns or warrants most of the land, and try to further expand himself to the next village. The commoners are still there, but they now have to depend on the mafia leader.
The same mafia leader may choose to open an illegal gambling place. This would make his villagers, and potentially richer shop owners, even more indebted and dependent on him, and he could then go for loansharking. After which he may decide to go racketing the blacksmith and the fur maker, who aren't going to the casino, until they are forced to close. He buys their shops, the corrupt officials make all needed authorizations, and off he goes.
At this point the village is under his control. He only has to worry about infighting and expansion. Maybe he could occasionally have some cattle stolen or irrespectful fellow murdered.

Lack of bureaucracy also meant that it was more difficult for the ruler to be informed of what was going on, if the officials didn't wish to inform him about something.

A magic mafia could also be someone who decided to become the monopolist of magical components. Harassing, killing, intimidation, corruption, fabricated proof, and the man now is the only importer of bat guano in town, and, as it turns out, all the shops that sell it are owned by people from his gang. in a city it's even easier than in a fief, because the governor may be directly corruptible, if you can give him enough money and he cares more about his pockets than the city's coffers. After which the mafia leader could make his business grow and get the job of keeping the sewers working, for example, so getting useful hidden storage room in case he also works as a receiver of stolen goods.

That all works except the buying land part. Commoners don't own anything, they can't sell lands or shops, it all belongs to the noble. They are literally his small folk. A noble can trade tracts of land with other nobles in deals, but no unlanded outsider could break into that gig without a fight. Someone with aspirations could try to get appointed as a local magistrate, like a sherrif. They could extort people under the noble's nose, run a gang of brigands that shakes down any merchants, skim off the taxes they are supposed to be collecting for the noble by various methods. With enough money, they can then outfit their men as a real army and overthrow the current noble. They'll need to be tough enough to win the retributive battle launched against them by the king's forces or make it costly enough that it isn't worth continuing to battle, or be rich enough to bribe and buy their way out of it. Then the former "mafia" boss offers allegiance to the king in return for official title and recognition, and they are made legit.

[Vinyadan]

That all works except the buying land part. Commoners don't own anything, they can't sell lands or shops, it all belongs to the noble. They are literally his small folk. A noble can trade tracts of land with other nobles in deals, but no unlanded outsider could break into that gig without a fight. Someone with aspirations could try to get appointed as a local magistrate, like a sherrif. They could extort people under the noble's nose, run a gang of brigands that shakes down any merchants, skim off the taxes they are supposed to be collecting for the noble by various methods. With enough money, they can then outfit their men as a real army and overthrow the current noble. They'll need to be tough enough to win the retributive battle launched against them by the king's forces or make it costly enough that it isn't worth continuing to battle, or be rich enough to bribe and buy their way out of it. Then the former "mafia" boss offers allegiance to the king in return for official title and recognition, and they are made legit.

That wasn't universal though, neither in place, nor in time. Private property survived during the middle ages, free owners of small parcels of land were a form of this (alodium), the other one being smaller parts of land near the habitation. And they must not have been that unusual, if the imperial law said that witnesses had to own at least so much in allodial possession as it was worth the wergild of the cause they were to testify for. These weren't leased, they were owned. The reality you describe seems to be the one around the Rhine Valley and Northern France after the XI century, but, the further south you go, the more land owned by the untitled you find.
Even territory which didn't belong to you and was merely leased could be re-leased to someone else (libellus), who was granted freedom in handling it and eventually leasing it again. Personal freedom also existed in the country.

Anyway, this is actually not that important, the DM will decide which kind of Middle Ages he wants to portray and what kind of mafia he wants to have his characters fight against/for. I just don't find the idea of a mafia doing an open war or takeover as possible, all the times they were forced to that they got wasted. It seems more like a political game than a mafia game to me.

However, there is a case in which this can happen. It is kleptocracy(2). Kleptocracy(1) is the normal case, a country is ruled by thieves. Kleptocracy(2) is the more interesting case, the country (or just the highest ruling class) starts giving power to a group of criminals because it needs their special services. If they play their cards well, the criminals can increase their power up to becoming pretty much untouchable and wage an open war or riot against their local authorities, because the higher authority will defend them indirectly. In the end, they can eat away a large chunk of the territory of their local authority and administer it as theirs, thanks to the support of the higher authority (which must keep these people out of jail, or they are getting jailed too).

[Spiryt]

Feudalism was a lot different than today's governments. People were not free to move somewhere else, they were mostly bound to the land and forced to pay whoever was the boss of that land (who was often appointed by a higher boss).


Perhaps in 18th century Russia, but in majority of medieval Europe, commoners actually very much could own, purchase and sell land.... Mostly in towns, of course, but not only.

About 'laboratores in Medieval France, owning their field (https://books.google.pl/books?id=lkDuTY-gm1QC&pg=PA268&lpg=PA268&dq=transactions+in+medieval+france&source=bl&ots=s5L4v5KuZn&sig=WlOV_GXwANjOdvcTkwNO8DK5c8s&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNtqyYrpLPAhUECSwKHVanBZ0Q6AEIODAI#v=on epage&q=transactions%20in%20medieval%20france&f=false)

Page 275

Here whole PDF about land transactions, mostly in Medieval England (http://people.hss.caltech.edu/~jlr/events/Briggs-EMGV.pdf)

Some prices of buildings (http://medieval.ucdavis.edu/120D/Money.html)

Owning a land obviously tended to give the duties of a landowner - military service, often replaced with monetary contribution instead. Which would sometimes lead to social 'migration' between classes, of course.

So please don't write that commoners in medieval Europe couldn't own land, buildings, shops, etc. it's simply not true.


People were not free to move somewhere else

German country right pretty precisely described what peasant had to do to leave the village governed by such law.

He had to tend the soil, tidy up the house, give back all crops or tools he had received when he was settling in, etc.

In Poland, peasant free from any obligations, could leave after paying something called "wstane".


Even in systems which were bounding peasant to the land, executing those laws was usually fiction - peasant could change his living and workplace by escaping to the other landowner.




All in all, Poorer or really just average, people generally tend to be bound in this world, be it credit, debt, flat that has to be paid or whatever, in all times. This doesn't mean that they are not free, or can't own anything..

[Jay R]

The biggest difficulty with putting a medieval mafia in your game is that nothing else in most D&D games has a medieval structure.

For instance:

Great idea! Maybe a couple of the quest giver nobles have ties to the medieval mafia, but there isn't enough evidence to prove their guilt.

This assumes that there is an overarching law that applies to all the nobles, and an overarching judicial system that they are all subject to. Neither assumption is inherently true.

In an Arthurian setting, I'd say that the old-style knights are somewhat mafia-like, with "Might makes Right", and that's the idea that Arthur's fighting against with "Might for Right."

[Clistenes]

Read Miguel de Cervantes's Rinconete y Cortadillo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rinconete_y_Cortadillo). It shows Renaissance organized crime. It is open source, so you should be able to find an english translation somewhere.

The books shows a Thieves's Guild as seen by a contemporary.

You have to take into account that Rinconete y Cortadillo is a satyrical work, so the characters are exaggerated for the sake of comedy.


In an Arthurian setting, I'd say that the old-style knights are somewhat mafia-like, with "Might makes Right", and that's the idea that Arthur's fighting against with "Might for Right."

Truth to be told, in the actual books King Arthur's main contribution seems to have the nobles stay in Camelot partying and jousting instead of staying in their fiefdoms fighting each other, but if you travelled a few miles away from Camelot, nobles kept the same absolute authority as always and treated the commoners as crap.

If you were a noble (specially if you were a pretty maid) you could go to Camelot and ask for help, and King Arthur may dispatch a knight, but if you were a serf or villein, you were out of luck...

[Temperjoke]

The Forgotten Realms setting for D&D has the Zhentarim, which are pretty much the Mafia in that setting. Openly, they're a mercenary group, but secretly they've been placing agents throughout the Sword Coast, taking control of villages, acting in a number of criminal enterprises.

[Beleriphon]

Perhaps in 18th century Russia, but in majority of medieval Europe, commoners actually very much could own, purchase and sell land.... Mostly in towns, of course, but not only.

About 'laboratores in Medieval France, owning their field (https://books.google.pl/books?id=lkDuTY-gm1QC&pg=PA268&lpg=PA268&dq=transactions+in+medieval+france&source=bl&ots=s5L4v5KuZn&sig=WlOV_GXwANjOdvcTkwNO8DK5c8s&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNtqyYrpLPAhUECSwKHVanBZ0Q6AEIODAI#v=on epage&q=transactions%20in%20medieval%20france&f=false)

Page 275

Here whole PDF about land transactions, mostly in Medieval England (http://people.hss.caltech.edu/~jlr/events/Briggs-EMGV.pdf)

Some prices of buildings (http://medieval.ucdavis.edu/120D/Money.html)

Owning a land obviously tended to give the duties of a landowner - military service, often replaced with monetary contribution instead. Which would sometimes lead to social 'migration' between classes, of course.

So please don't write that commoners in medieval Europe couldn't own land, buildings, shops, etc. it's simply not true.

In fairness there is a different between serfs and commoners, even though we tend to use the terms interchangably. Guy Hits-an-Anvil that runs the blacksmith shop in Townton is a commoner, dirt farmer Pierre Fermier de le Saleté on Sir Deebagge's estate is a serf. This is a difference between the two, and while the serf might be able to leave the land the fact remains it isn't the same as selling your shop and just going. Sir Deebagge owns the land, the house and everything on. In exchange Pierre gets to live the, grow food for his family and gives part of it to Sir Deebagge, and when some goons with swords show up threatening to take stuff Sir Deebagge's goons repel the invading goons. Pierre can up and leave if he wants, but he probably owes Sir Deebagge something for doing so, since Pierre does have an agreement with the knight. The payment might be finding another farmer willing to take his position, is could be hard currency, or it could be extra food above his usual amount owed. No matter what though, its going to be hard for Pierre to meet the price, since that's the whole point of being a serf in a feudal system. The entire thing is arranged to make it next to impossible to leave, even if legally one could.