Knights cost so much $.

[jjpickar]

How much does it cost to equip and maintain a knight according to RAW? I sat down and calculated it.
Here is what I gave my knight: Heavy Warhorse, Bit and Bridle, Military Saddle, Full Plate, Heavy Steel Shield, Lance, Longsword, and (optional) a grand House.

Total Cost minus grand house: 1,967 gp

Upkeep (Horse+Common Upkeep from DMG page 130): 722.5 gp per year.

Total cost with the grand house (assuming it comes with land and peasants and therefore no upkeep): 6,967 gp

Thoughts, criticisms, alternate calculations, comparisons, or any other things you can think of please bring up.

[Bears With Lasers]

Ahh, GP. Really, it should be as abstract as HP.

[jjpickar]

It is pretty much anyway. All these are according to the market price determined arbitrarily (from PHB) and assumed to be static. Thats pretty abstract.

[Maxymiuk]

Armor, weapons, equipment, and horse: "My father, the Lord paid for all that as I was growing up and learning the kinghtly ways from him."

Grand house: "I shall come into possesion of one either by inheriting it from my father, or by marrying the daughter of another Lord and inheriting his."

Upkeep: "I shall impose a tax upon the caravans passing through my land. Those merchants wouldn't know what to do with all that money anyway."

[Telonius]

Grand house: "I shall come into possesion of one either by inheriting it from my father, or by marrying the daughter of another Lord and inheriting his."

Or, depending on alignment, using the good old-fashioned method: attacking the other lord and taking it from him.

[SpiderBrigade]

Armor, weapons, equipment, and horse: "My father, the Lord paid for all that as I was growing up and learning the kinghtly ways from him."

Grand house: "I shall come into possesion of one either by inheriting it from my father, or by marrying the daughter of another Lord and inheriting his."

Upkeep: "I shall impose a tax upon the caravans passing through my land. Those merchants wouldn't know what to do with all that money anyway."

Err...so you're saying that the DM should allow a character to have all this expensive stuff because it's in his backstory? I foresee the other players having a bit of a problem with that...or else demanding extra stuff of equal value, at which point you're just re-figuring the starting gold anyway.

[jjpickar]

Actually I was assuming this was a PC lord equipping his feudal knights but this can also be what a PC buys for himself as well.

[Amphimir Míriel]

How much does it cost to equip and maintain a knight according to RAW? I sat down and calculated it.
Here is what I gave my knight: Heavy Warhorse, Bit and Bridle, Military Saddle, Full Plate, Heavy Steel Shield, Lance, Longsword, and (optional) a grand House.

Don't forget that warhorses are not "travelling horses" any more than race cars are adequate for the interstate*. So you need to add the cost of a palfrey (light horse) for travelling from place to place and a Heavy Horse or a Donkey for carrying weapons, armor and equipment in said travels.

Also, if you want to be completely realistic, add the cost of a second donkey or light horse for the squire, plus his living expenses. Knights, being nobility, usually did not bother with setting up camp, lighting a campfire, etc.

Because of the cost of equipping oneself in the cavalry, the term became associated with wealth and social status, and eventually knighthood became a formal title.

Indeed a poor knight is only a figure of fantasy... just like princesses locked up in towers or honest politicians who are close to the people and sensitive to their woes.

For a description of Medieval warfare in the most realistic way possible, check out The Medieval Soldier... or you can read the excellent novels of George R. R. Martin (Starting by A Game of Thrones)

Now, we are not trying to be too realistic, right? So let's leave it at a warhorse, a donkey for carrying equipment, Bit and Bridle, Military Saddle, Full Plate, Heavy Steel Shield, Lance, Longsword and dagger... Still an expensive proposition, but it shouldnt be out of reach for the average 2nd-3rd level fighter.

* Warhorses are bred for battle, and the aggressive behaivor that is discouraged in modern horse breeding and training was actually encouraged for warhorses. Warhorses bit, kicked and were generally difficult to ride in a long journey, yet those traits were desirable in a combat mount. They were also slower than a riding horse when it came to covering long distances (yet warhorses, being stronger, could gain better sprinting speeds when carrying an armed and armored rider into battle).

[Shatenjager]

Generally anything that a player owns at the start is what you are paying gold for. If your parents gave you a +2 sword in your backstory then you still pay for it out of starting money. The same goes for a horse/house/armor etc.

Sometimes you can get extra stuff from a your lord, but it would really just be a loan unless you pay with starting gold. Heck you could argue that the WBL of the charachter is what he is worth to the lord and what he's willing to give up without the charachter performing additional services (such as questing).

[jjpickar]

This is true about extras but that is something a knight must take care of for himself. The lord is already providing all the combat equipage for free if the knight wants to have a squire (probably costs as much as merc calvary 4 sp per day, 146 gp per year), a donkey ( including a pack 13gp), and a riding horse with gear (light horse + riding saddle+ saddle bags=89gp) he must provide it himself. Total cost if lord provides it: 248 gp

[Closet_Skeleton]

You forgot barding for horse.

[jjpickar]

I left it out intentionally. I couldn't think of it being something a lord was absolutely required to provide for his knights. Full plate barding decreases a warhorses speed from 50 ft to 35 and costs 6000 gp plus it takes 20 minutes to put on or remove so I didn't think it was at all practical either.

[Hazkali]

Err...so you're saying that the DM should allow a character to have all this expensive stuff because it's in his backstory? I foresee the other players having a bit of a problem with that...or else demanding extra stuff of equal value, at which point you're just re-figuring the starting gold anyway.

I think Maximiuk's comments reffered to knights in general, as opposed to player characters. Obviously no DM would allow players things just becuase they're in the backstory in this manner (at least, if there is, my character inherited a +5 Vorpal Flaming Holy Axiomatic Silver Greatsword from his grandfather...). If a Knight PC starts out at 3rd level they can easily afford all of the portable trappings of knighthood with no problem.

A 1st level knight anyway would fit more the image of a page or squire, with a weaker horse, chainmail armour, wooden shield and a single melee weapon. I tend to say that 1st level represent classes in their "training" stages anyway, due to poor funds and abilities- Monks have novices, Clerics have acolytes etc etc.

[Matthew]

Don't forget that warhorses are not "travelling horses" any more than race cars are adequate for the interstate*. So you need to add the cost of a palfrey (light horse) for travelling from place to place and a Heavy Horse or a Donkey for carrying weapons, armor and equipment in said travels.

Also, if you want to be completely realistic, add the cost of a second donkey or light horse for the squire, plus his living expenses. Knights, being nobility, usually did not bother with setting up camp, lighting a campfire, etc.

That rather depends on the period you are looking at.

Indeed a poor knight is only a figure of fantasy... just like princesses locked up in towers or honest politicians who are close to the people and sensitive to their woes.

Nope, they were real, but later on it became difficult and counter productive to become a Knight.

Yes, the costs you are calculating are expensive, but bear in mind that in a Feudal Society land and wealth are associated directly with Knights. The cost of equipping a Knight here is the cost of endowing a Knight with a Free Holding (very expensive).

[Driderman]

I do believe being a 'poor knight' meant donating most of your worldly trappings, only keeping enough to wage war in the name of god and keep the estate running while you're off in the Holy Land killing heathens and dining at the churchs expenses when possible
Also, in the real medieval ages feudal lords didn't grant much of anything except maybe titles and wives, maybe land to their most trusted men after a succesful campaign. Both commoner troops and noble troops were expected to bring their own gear to the battlefield, so you fought with what you could afford.
Stories of knights who's entire fortune amounted to nothing more than the armor they wore and the sword the wielded are not unheard of. Of course, back in the days a steady swordarm and loyalty to the right man could earn you both lands and a title in single battle. But of course, that just meant you now had to pay taxes of your newly acquired income, to the man who wouldn't even pay for your warhorse

[Matthew]

Knights could go bankrupt like everybody else. Gambling, Tournaments, being captured in war, fiscal downturns. It was a risky vocation. One way was by giving up their property and going off to fight somewhere, sure, but it wasn't the only way.

[Amphimir Míriel]

Yeah, maybe I should rephrase: Poor Knights were actually those guys that had the bulk of their assets invested in their weapons, armor and mounts...

I can easily imagine a guy with 3000gp invested in his equipment eating boiled mutton in a shady inn because he hasnt been able to get a decent bodyguard contract lately...

[Tellah]

Please, please, read up on feudalism, people.

French feudal lords--the feudal system you're probably thinking of, but there were many--were not required to provide their vassals with marshal equipment. Rather, they exchanged an economic incentive, like land or the rights to the proceeds from a mill, for military service. Knights bought their own equipment out of the proceeds from their fief, and were required to keep it in good working order. English feudalism, if you can call something that centralized feudal, had even less in common with that image.

D&D really isn't set up to emulate those kinds of relationships in a meaningful way. Players want their wealth in treasure, usually, and not in the form of taxes gained by administering over a fief granted to them through feudal ties. IRL I specialize in historical economic systems, and I've tried to explain D&D through historical economic systems, but it simply doesn't mesh at all. D&D is a fun fantasy game with a pseudo-historical basis; as such it gets just about everything in history wrong in the name of fun. Especially economics.

Indeed a poor knight is only a figure of fantasy... just like princesses locked up in towers or honest politicians who are close to the people and sensitive to their woes.

Quoted for unimpeachable truth.

Of course knights (meaning mounted nobles) were expensive to train and equip. Around the time of the Hundred Years' War, larger armies composed of more peasants were a cheaper and more effective method of waging war, and heavily-armored, well-trained knights were no longer the behemoths of the battlefield. Pikes had something to do with this, as did longbowmen, less expensive firearms and so on. Since then, we've moved more and more toward massive peasant armies, until American military tactics began to favor heavy tech over mobs of doughboys. This is a large reason why fantasy games and stories focus on the medieval period, because smaller groups of better-trained noble knights were preferred.

[CASTLEMIKE]

The Knight class Starting Gold is for a Typical Young Knight Not the Prince. You can amend it with a background feat or two.

I think the Grand House is Excessive for a starting Knight let them Buy their own. Using DMG character wealth for a level 10 PRC of 49,000 GP and based on the 25% magic item suggestion. That is a good Target for a PC to normally consider Owning a house in most campaigns unless taking Early Retirment normally IMO although renting in some form (coin or feudal obligation) is always an option along with a room at the Home Manor (The PC may be a Distant but Capable Noble Scion and 3rd or 4th Cousin of the House Patriarch) or Feudal Lord's Castle.

I like using Maximum Starting Gold and the Bonus Knight Squire Feat from Champions of Valor:

The PC gets a Masterwork weapon or Chainmail and Light Warhorse (or Warpony) or a Potion of Cure Moderate Wounds. I Favor the Second Option (with standard Trading Up Rules (Half Market Cost for the Chainmail + the Difference for the Improved Armor).

To make the game more enjoyable for the DM and PC throwing in an additional Feat like Bastard of Azoun (or Other Noble) can be a campaign driver and came with similar starting benefits including the Minor Stipend to avoid the public complaints and embarassment. A House Signet ring wouldn't cost the family much and would generally entitle the young knight to "Basic Hospitality" for a few days as a guest in most Aristocratic and Noble homes.

As a DM don't forget the Wizard gets a Spellbook which has a High GP valuation at Level One so your PC could be outfitted as you wish possibly with a minor modest stipend for a few years.

Not All Knights were from the Aristocracy, Nobility or Royalty.

Your Knight PC could be a former "Commoner" a younger son of a Poor or Well to Do Craftsman, Farmer, Merchant, Minor Adept, Professional Soldier Man at Arms (That could be part of his background story (He was a young Man at Arms NPC War-1 who got Lucky saving his Lord in his first battle and was Esquired which added the polish and skills to his Warrior training and converted his class to Knight -1).

He could have been a Formally Unacknowledged Noble Bastard of some sort who Aspires to Something Better in Life based on his Blood or Prove Himself Worthy (Campaign Drivers) and was Apprenticed off to a Minor Hedge Knight to give him an Opportunity to Better himself. So he wouldn't necessarily have All the Best equipment starting off with an average Partially Trained One or Two Trick Riding Horse or an Aging/Fading Fast Light Warhorse good for another few months at Best and Chain mail until something better can be earned via combat or purchased.

[Matthew]

Please, please, read up on feudalism, people

Tellah, Feudalism is certainly very oraganic, but you are mistaken in the generalisations you are making here. The Medieval Knight is himself an inconstant figure. Eleventh Century Knights were *very* different and more numerous than fifteenth century Knights and the system worked differently. By the fifteenth century, the very reduced number of Knights who remained sometimes paid to have surrogates fight for them.

Of course knights (meaning mounted nobles) were expensive to train and equip. Around the time of the Hundred Years' War, larger armies composed of more peasants were a cheaper and more effective method of waging war, and heavily-armored, well-trained knights were no longer the behemoths of the battlefield. Pikes had something to do with this, as did longbowmen, less expensive firearms and so on. Since then, we've moved more and more toward massive peasant armies, until American military tactics began to favor heavy tech over mobs of doughboys. This is a large reason why fantasy games and stories focus on the medieval period, because smaller groups of better-trained noble knights were preferred.

Again this is the very late period of Knighthood you are describing and there were Knights during this period who fell on hard times. There are a number of papers worth directing you to at this point, but the Medieval Knighthood Series (Vol. I-V) might be most useful, as they are collected papers. If you have access to Jstor I can direct you to some good papers there as well. Military History is, of course, itself in a state of flux, so it's hard to say anything concrete.

[Dervag]

I left it out intentionally. I couldn't think of it being something a lord was absolutely required to provide for his knights. Full plate barding decreases a warhorses speed from 50 ft to 35 and costs 6000 gp plus it takes 20 minutes to put on or remove so I didn't think it was at all practical either.

With horses being so expensive, some kind of barding is practically a must. After all, the mount is usually an easier target than the rider, and if somebody manages to kill his very expensive warhorse the knight loses much of his battlefield flexibility.

Also, you might want to remember that a knight will not necessarily always have the best of everything. If he himself cannot afford Full Plate, then he might very well not have a suit of Full Plate, instead making do with somewhat lighter armor.

[Yahzi]

* Warhorses are bred for battle, and the aggressive behaivor that is discouraged in modern horse breeding and training was actually encouraged

At one point, the value of a warhorse was reckoned at the lives of four grooms - because that's how many he would kill during his training.

Probably just medieval urban legend - but still, it gives you a sense of how people thought about it.

[Driderman]

It should also be noted that 'foot knights' is not unheard of either. It has happened plenty of times, for all manner of reasons, that a knight has lost his steed and been unable to replace it, either because of economics or the simple fact that there were no proper horses to be had at the place or time, thus forcing the knight to fight on foot

[jjpickar]

Eh. This isn't supposed to be historically accurate. I was just trying to think of the stuff a stereotypical knight might need. Its more from the perspective of a strategy gamer than anything else. The knight seemed like a generic unit that might be common enough in pseudo...middle ages...kinda...fantasy world...thing...place.

[Matthew]

Well, you see, you asked a rather loaded question, now that I look at it more closely: "How much does it cost to equip and support a D&D Knight" depends on your conception of a Knight, which is why it has ignited a wider ranging discussion. Perhaps we ought to ask, "How much does it cost to equip and support a D&D Heavy Horse Man?"

[jjpickar]

True, I just assumed knight sorta evoked an image of a classic full plate clad, lance wielding, chivalrous warrior right out of Arthurian legend.

[Lord Tataraus]

Actually, I have always thought of a low level Knight (before about 5th level) to be more on the squire side of things. And a squire would not have that stuff and by 5th level, you most likely have the money required. (minus the house, you inherit that)

[asqwasqw]

Um, full plate makes up most of the cost... If you have less armor and buy a heavy shield, a longsword, you still have money left over. I fail to see where it says knights gain any bonus fighting mounted (and you need two feats in order to fight better mounted which you will not get till later).

[crazedloon]

I fail to see where it says knights gain any bonus fighting mounted (and you need two feats in order to fight better mounted which you will not get till later).

um well just for crunch sake they get mounted combat at level 2 and then they can use their bonus feats to get other mounted combat feats so yes they do have a mounted fighting style if you so wish.

[asqwasqw]

um well just for crunch sake they get mounted combat at level 2 and then they can use their bonus feats to get other mounted combat feats so yes they do have a mounted fighting style if you so wish.

Whoops... Never mind then. But knights don't have to get the full plate, which brings their cost up sigifigantly. At level 3, a knight could easily afford 1000 gp of armor and equipment. I fail to see how a knight is more costly than others just because he is a knight.