How to make an ACTUAL medieval setting?

[Amaril]

Okay, so one of the more common sentiments I see expressed around here is that very few ostensibly "medieval" fantasy worlds actually maintain accurate technology levels or cultural structures to any particular part of the Middle Ages (or even stick to stuff from within that general category). Now, I understand this is rarely an actual problem, as it doesn't seem to get in the way of people enjoying the setting for the most part. But it has made me curious, as someone who doesn't know much about history: what would settings actually based on specific parts of the medieval period look like compared to what we're used to in fantasy?

Let's say, for example, that I wanted to make a world with technology and social structures comparable to those of western Europe circa the 9th century CE. In very basic summary, how might that be different from the standard fare of published D&D settings? What kinds of equipment might characters have available? What cultural norms might stick out to players and GMs as unexpected, different, and/or important to address in a game? I understand that the only real answer to these questions is "do more historical research", but it would help to have some idea of where to begin, and anyway, I'm less interest in becoming intimately familiar with any particular historical period for its own sake, and more just thinking about this as a theoretical world-building and game design exercise.

[Chijinda]

I'm not a historian persay, but as far as weapons are concerned, a LOT of equipment.... simply put wouldn't exist yet. If we're talking, lets say... 9th century? Stuff like Plate Armor, literally doesn't exist. Neither do Rapiers. Crossbows would be absurdly basic and simple, and you certainly wouldn't have stuff like Heavy or Repeating crossbows. Even stuff like flails or halberds probably don't REALLY exist yet (at least not in the form we're familiar with).

I'm sure other gear doesn't exist yet either, but I'm far too tired (read: lazy) to go through every piece of gear in the game and cross-reference it to make sure it didn't exist yet.

But basically, your base-line mook/militia is still probably about the same. Someone in boiled leather, with a spear or hand axe (probably not swords as this early in, swords are nobility's weapon. It's not until we get into around the late 14th/early 15th century, to my knowledge, that swords start becoming a standard sidearm for non-nobility).


As I said I'm not a historian so someone is welcome to correct me on the finer points here if I'm off base, at least as far as gear. Someone else can probably help you with technology and culture.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

9th century is... interesting. It was the last gasp of the Great Migration period, and the very beginning of what is often called the Medieval period.

This is the period that sees the last two major "barbarian" invasions; the Vikings and the Magyars. There is absolutely no large metal plates seen in armour, at least in Europe. Chain mail is common, at least as a vest. The rich can afford full-body sets of chain mail. Think shield walls when you think of this period. 90% of military technology is spears and chain mail and shields, but most people can afford at least a basic set of all three in many places.

"Feudalism" in its rigid formalistic sense is only beginning to develop. England and Norse lands comes down to the manor-house as its basic unit of governance, whether a big manor controlling many villages or a small manor controlling one (the latter more common for the Norse), and people owe their king, but it's not all made formal until the French influence it in the 11th century.

This is also the first period where "knights" only emerge as we recognize them by the end of it. The previous century had seen the rise of a powerful mounted armoured warrior-aristocracy, that supported itself on land grants from the King, but these land grants weren't made hereditary until the LATTER half of the 9th century. It's also in the latter half that we see the degradation of central rulership, as the Carolingian states divide stagnate and collapse, and the rise of local power, as rather than facing large armies (on the most part), the main threats are smaller local raids; Viking raids on lands bordering the Northern seas and the attached rivers, Muslim raids on lands bordering the southern Seas, and Magyar raids for Germany. Thus the knightly classes were empowered as a way of protecting against smaller localized threats, while the central monarchy was depowered, to allow the knightly classes more leeway, in the absence of large threats requiring large armies.

The merchant classes are also barely starting to emerge in northern Italy. The 9th century Italy is a kingdom with the same trends as France and Germany, but the 10th century sees Italy being under control of the Kings of Germany and later the Holy Roman Empire, and those rulers really don't care too much about Italy, focusing on affairs in Germany. As such, they leave a power vacuum, but the city-states that we know of that are so influential on parts of modern fantasy don't start to come to their own until the late 12th century at the EARLIEST. In fact, urbanization is only just beginning to increase in any real rate since the collapse of the Roman Empire, especially in response to these raids; cities can have walls and fortifications built around them.

In terms of technological inventions, the 9th century saw the invention of gunpowder in China, but most notable inventions are in maths; algebra and the number 0 are here, in the Middle East and India respectively.

[Hoosigander]

There are of course many variations within Western Europe in the 9th century, but for the sake of simplicity I will base my comments on Carolingian France.

Military:
The first thing your PCs would notice, being the professional warriors they are, would be the lack of all of the late medieval and Renaissance weapons that populate the equipment lists in RPGs. Their choices would be Mail Hauberk or Byrnie, a spangenhelm (a conical helmet made from several separate steel plates riveted to steel bands), a round center-grip wooden shield with an iron boss. Weapons would be spears, one-handed swords, large knives, axes, and bows. There are fortifications and city walls, but no castles. Aristocratic retinues of armed men would be more important in the raising of armies than in say, the 6th century, but theoretically a broad class of men would be eligible for military service and there are laws that demonstrate emperors wanted to encourage that. Low level raiding on the Saxon, Breton, and Spanish borders was constant. Armies assembled in the spring and went on campaign, not all men who were eligible for service served. Individual armies were probably in the low thousands, but many Carolingian campaigns feature multiple field armies attacking from different directions.


For more detail consult: http://deremilitari.org/2014/02/caro...ninth-century/

Social/Governmental:
Cities would probably be smaller than what you'd be used to in a later Medieval/Renaissance inspired setting. Rome may have had as many as 50,000 residents, but the other largest cities of the Empire would have between 10,000-25,000 residents (as always estimating historical population sizes is hard and all estimates should be taken with a grain of salt).

The empire was divided up into hundreds of counties, governed by a count, who was responsible for administering justice, enforcing capitularies (legislative or administrative decrees issued by Merovangian or Carolingian monarchs), levying soldiers, receiving tolls and dues and maintaining roads and bridges. Counts were appointed by the ruler, but often were already locally important magnates. It is important to note that feudalism does not exist, since military service is not rendered in exchange for land and all the oaths of fealty and other accouterments of classic feudalism are not in use (I must note that feudalism is a disputed concept, but since it is not relevant to the 9th century I will not go into the debate).

Missi Dominici(sg. missus dominicus) were pairs of men, one clergymen and one secular official, who were sent out from the royal court to tour and inspect the empire.

Something very different from you're standard medieval setting; No primogeniture. If the king dies the kingdom is divided amongst his sons.

Tl;dr: Not the same variety of weapons.
No feudalism
No Castles
Small Cities
No Primogeniture.

[2D8HP]

O.K. The campaign starts in AD930, say 30 years after the 9th century but,

Mythic Iceland was an AWESOME! read and campaign. It would be real easy to reskin the raid on Anglo-Saxon England as coming from Scandinavia rather than Iceland, and it's a wealth of information.
Here's a
review.

For 2e AD&D there's
Vikings, and for continental Europe there's

Charlemagnes Paladins

[TheYell]

Clerics cant heal
Paladins cant smite
You're a fighter
You never upgrade your gear
You fight other fighters and rangers because your pal asked you to
If you arent chaotic evil in conquered towns you never get treasure
You get xp watching friends die
Cholera is a thing

[Floret]

But basically, your base-line mook/militia is still probably about the same. Someone in boiled leather, with a spear or hand axe (probably not swords as this early in, swords are nobility's weapon. It's not until we get into around the late 14th/early 15th century, to my knowledge, that swords start becoming a standard sidearm for non-nobility). .

Please note I am not a historian either, but through studying medieval literature and (German) Larping as well as generally being interested I have picked up some stuff (Trust me, German Larpers have exceedingly extensive debates about historical accuracy and at least historical sourcing of concepts, even if we then mix them up with Fantasy elements)

It has been basically corrected by other posts before this, but to do it explicitly: No. If you want historical realism, NEVER go boiled leather for central Europe. Looks nice - sure! But while it is used historically in some places, it is exceedingly rare and easily outclassed by other things easier to get at. While boiling the leather does make it somewhat more suitable for armor than it would otherwise be, the standard armor for mooks and militias was mail (read: chainmail) or Gambesons (padded armor). Spears are way more likely than axes as well, and if you use a handaxe, most people will also use a shield.
The problem with swords is, that you can use them for fighting and... well. Nothing else. Spears are at least capable hunting weapons, axes have a variety of non-combat uses (Battle axes not being used for that notwithstanding, we are talking militia here). Swords? Not so much. So investing in a sword simply isn't all that worth it if you are not fighting regularly. If you are, one might start to think about it.

[Lorsa]

I think an actual medieval setting would have some for of random disease table, where you roll each year to see if you contract a lethal disease or not. Bonus rolls if you get injured or whatnot.

In a fantasy setting, that is often ignored and/or fixed by divine magic.

[LudicSavant]

Platinum is an impurity in your other metals.

[Kami2awa]

Alchemical items would probably not exist, certainly ones like sunrods. Frankly, we would struggle to create some of the alchemical items on the list with modern chemistry. Alchemist's fire, however, can probably just go back to the oil flasks of old D&D.

I'm guessing, however, that this is still a fantasy world, so magic of various kinds is around, not to mention monsters and so on. The Men of Middle-Earth, especially as portrayed in the films, would potentially be a good source of inspiration for what weapons and armour are available.

Culturally, religion is going to impact a lot on the setting, and anyone who can perform divine magic is likely to be a much, much bigger deal.

[snowblizz]

Cholera is a thing

No it's not. Cholera in Europe didn't arrive until the 1800s when it was "imported" from the Far East (India) by way of Russia.

[Tobtor]

Gambesons (padded armor).

Just a note: we have no evidence for padded armour in the 9th century (or indeed 10-11th) in western Europe. It is a later thing.

As others said: shields, spears, axes and swords are the thing. But within these groups there are many variations (winged spears, long axes, short axes, borad axes, single edged swords, dual edged swords, etc).

Mail are rare and quality varied.

The large "have it all" towns are from high-late medieval period rather than 9th century.

Spears are at least capable hunting weapons

Most 9th century (or centuries close to it) spears would never have been used for hunting. Most areas had rural farm life, with little opportunity to large game hunting, which is the only type of hunting you use 2.5m-3m long spears with heavy war heads on.

Generally the actual composition of 9th century armies and weapon types is not well understood (lack of exact written sourcess and/or archaeology etc). Both Roman and dark age northern Europe is better understood, and so is later periods.

The social and economic aspects are a little large to delve into here, as most RPG (and especially DnD) worlds are very different.

[TheYell]

thats what i get for posting while sick i give everyone the cholera

[Martin Greywolf]

A question like this is impossible to answer on a forum - you need either a vast array of knowledge accumulated over the years, or a book that focuses on exactly your period. I have one such book next to me, dealing with 1400 Hungary, it's thicker than the thickest Harry Potter, and it doesn't have all the information (lacking mostly in weapon and armor descriptions).

Even then, you'll run into trouble with regional variations - calling medieval Hungary a feudal kingdom for example is as wrong as it gets, but people will still do it. Hell, even using the word feudalism itself without first giving your definition is dicey. There would be a lot more color in your setting than you usually see, though.

Also, would people here who know bugger all about the topic kindly check their facts? The dung ages are a discredited trope for a damn good reason.

One thing i will pitch in on is Carolingian weapon composition. In case of eastern fringe of empire (county of Nitra is the English phrase for the area, I think), we can make a rough estimate based on what weapons appeared in graves. This of course only applies to central European Slavic tribes at best.

Spears appear in 12% of military graves, and from other finds in them we can tell they were given to poorer combatants. These probably had no other weapon than a spear and a long knife.

Axes are the most common by far, appearing in 55% of graves. Of these, three quarters are bearded axes, 20% is narrow-head axes, 7% is broad-head axes. This tells us pretty clearly what the most common secondary weapon was.

Swords are found in 7% of graves, making them extremely rare, and likely expensive.

I already mentioned knives, long military knives (over 15cm, or half a foot) make up 21% of all knife finds, and knives of some sort were found in 83% of graves. Military knives were worn on the left side exclusively, smaller ones don't have dominant placement.

Interesting are bows - they are found in 55% of graves, which is a staggeringly high number. These are probably infantry bows, with lengths between 150 and 190 cm, I have yet to see any analysis on how powerful they were though, I'd estimate them to be around 90-100 lbs, but I could be very wrong.

One thing to keep in mind is that this composition corresponds to what the people used, but isn't exclusive - someone with a sword in his grave probably fought with spear and shield an awful lot, but didn't consider spear to be important enough to put into his grave.

[Lacco]

Welp, this kind of debate is something I like, because I'd love to play in such setting.

Clerics cant heal
Paladins cant smite
You're a fighter
You never upgrade your gear
You fight other fighters and rangers because your pal asked you to
If you arent chaotic evil in conquered towns you never get treasure
You get xp watching friends die
Cholera is a thing

That said: don't play this in D&D. TheYell summed it up well - while I'd love to play in such setting, this wouldn't work for me.

I'm not a historian persay, but as far as weapons are concerned, a LOT of equipment.... simply put wouldn't exist yet. If we're talking, lets say... 9th century? Stuff like Plate Armor, literally doesn't exist. Neither do Rapiers. Crossbows would be absurdly basic and simple, and you certainly wouldn't have stuff like Heavy or Repeating crossbows. Even stuff like flails or halberds probably don't REALLY exist yet (at least not in the form we're familiar with).

A good source (I'm not 100% sure about the actual authenticity) would be "The Flower of Battle" pdf for Riddle of Steel RPG. Mainly because it has a nifty weapon list including information about the usage of weapons in different eras.

Someone else can probably help you with technology and culture.

This would be something I'm after. Mainly the culture.

One thing that occurs to me as important would be the social structure...

@Hoosigander & Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll: any good sources (to read or watch) regarding the social structure & culture? We have some local "living history" clubs, but they mostly deal with later periods...

EDIT: @Martin Greywolf: can you give me the name of the book? I don't have anything "lighter" to read at the moment and it seems interesting...

[BayardSPSR]

Instead of responding in detail, I'm going to point you at this thread, and observe that 9th century western Europe is not going to be recognizably "medieval." It's going to feel like Beowulf.

To be fair, pick any year in any country, and it's probably not going to feel like what we think of as "medieval" at all, which is exactly the problem. "Medieval" is the average of a dozen countries over five+ centuries, in the same sense that JFK and Shakespeare both lived in the "modern era." And what, then, is modernity?

[LudicSavant]

Instead of responding in detail, I'm going to point you at this thread, and observe that 9th century western Europe is not going to be recognizably "medieval." It's going to feel like Beowulf.

To be fair, pick any year in any country, and it's probably not going to feel like what we think of as "medieval" at all, which is exactly the problem. "Medieval" is the average of a dozen countries over five+ centuries, in the same sense that JFK and Shakespeare both lived in the "modern era." And what, then, is modernity?

[MrConsideration]

Sticking to Ninth Century Northern Europe, a lot of D&Disms will work: you're working with some very varied cultures, but some truisms emerge:

-It is a broadly known fact that there are objectively monsters out there: Pliny, Bede and other learned men talk of hideous monsters, and our sagas and poetry record victories over dragons and other horrors. Even minor difficulties in life are down to Elves and Trolls, but there are lucky charms and the like that can protect you.

-People can do magic. The Suomnesuko people of Finland can turn into bears; there are hagtessen who cast curses, and Priests can intercede with god on your behalf.

-God or the god(s) are an objective fact. For pagan peoples, you can adopt a monothetistic god along your using pile of polytheistic ones. Jesus and Thor are both pretty awesome, especially when they're tag-teaming giants.

-The most important class is an aristocratic class whose main concern is combat and violence. In Carolinian France these milite are starting to create for themselves a code of practice and common culture. if you belong to an aristocratic family, the advancement of your family is paramount. These people are trained in arms and their equipment is objectively better than what your average levy can get together.

-Pretty much everyone works the land in a small community of less than one hundred people and works for a feudal benefactor.

- A large trading city - such as Jorvik/York, my home town, might contain less than ten thousand souls.

-Most currency is silver. It doesn't matter who minted it - all that matters is the weight.

You'll have to decide if you're making the beliefs about magic true, or having a no-magic setting, or having classes based on different concepts. This would be a big homebrew effort.

If you're doing this for your own game, I'd focus on a narrow area with a lot of scope for D&Ding - I'd recommend the Baltic Sea and its coast for the Ninth Century, as you get a number of distinct cultures and a lot of wilderness to adventure in.

[Bulhakov]

Some good links:

http://historylink101.com/middle_age...daily_life.htm

http://www.timeref.com/life/countrylife.htm
http://www.timeref.com/life/townlife.htm

http://www.petesqbsite.com/sections/...uts/m_econ.htm

[Hoosigander]

@Hoosigander & Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll: any good sources (to read or watch) regarding the social structure & culture? We have some local "living history" clubs, but they mostly deal with later periods...

Books: Charlemagne's Courtier: The Complete Einhard
Charlemagne: Empire and Society
Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance


Internet Resources: http://www.charlemagneseurope.ac.uk/
http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/Halsall/sbook1h.asp
http://academics.ivc.edu/arts/visual...arolingian.pdf

People can do magic. The Suomnesuko people of Finland can turn into bears; there are hagtessen who cast curses, and Priests can intercede with god on your behalf.

This is true, but I have a minor point to add. Although tons of ordinary people believed in magic, it was not intellectually respectable to do so (in the this period at least, things change around the 14th century.) As the Lombard Laws say, magic "is not a thing to be believed by Christian minds." Charlemagne's Capitulary for Saxony (a recently conquered pagan region) proscribes the death penalty for anyone killing a witch, and describes the crime as something done, "after the manner of the pagans." The whole Capitulary is concerned with enforcing Christianity as a religion and stamping out pagan practices, thus it seems that at least in terms of the "correct" or orthodox beliefs magic was seen as an unchristian and pagan superstition. Of course, some of the very documents that denounce people for believing in magic tell us that a lot of people did. For example, Agobard of Lyons wrote a sermon condemning belief in magic which gives many details as to what people (Carolingian, Catholic people) actually believed. He reports that many people believed that certain individuals had the power to raise gales by magic, that said gales were accompanied by visits flying ships that steal crops, and that people could kill livestock by means of a special powder.

http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/Halsa...andThunder.asp

[Elder_Basilisk]

Just a note: we have no evidence for padded armour in the 9th century (or indeed 10-11th) in western Europe. It is a later thing.

Picking up on this note, when is it that the first evidence for padded armor in western Europe appears? And is there evidence for any forms of armor other than chain mail (full suits and byrnies) prior to that?

By 1181, at least, gambesons were widespread enough that Henry II required all burgesses and the whole body of freemen to have a gambeson, iron helmet, and a spear in his assize of arms.

My understanding was that full coats of mail such as those worn by the Norman knights or Saxon huscarles in 1066 would have been worn over a gambeson or similar thick, quilted garment. Are you suggesting that that is not the case? Or only that gambesons as independent armor were not known until later? (The Wikipedia article--not the most reliable source but it's something--appears to take this view: that gambesons were worn as arming coats under mail but did not appear as independent armor until the late 11th century).

[Max_Killjoy]

Would a thread along these lines, but for a different time period, draw much feedback?

Or are most of our local experts focused on post-Roman Europe?

[BayardSPSR]

Would a thread along these lines, but for a different time period, draw much feedback?

Or are most of our local experts focused on post-Roman Europe?

Probably; the focus of this thread is due to the fact that OP picked the 9th century out of a hat.

[2D8HP]

Instead of responding in detail, I'm going to point you at this thread, and observe that 9th century western Europe is not going to be recognizably "medieval." It's going to feel like Beowulf.

Did some ask for a setting book for
Beowulf and 6th century Scandanavia?

How about 6th century Ireland?

Oh look here's an Awesome RPG that you should totally GM for me!

[2D8HP]

Sticking to Ninth Century Northern Europe....

If you're doing this for your own game, I'd focus on a narrow area with a lot of scope for D&Ding - I'd recommend the Baltic Sea and its coast for the Ninth Century, as you get a number of distinct cultures and a lot of wilderness to adventure in.

Did some request a medieval Baltics RPG setting book?

[Dragonfan]

I think the fourteenth century is the closest to what everyone thinks is medieval.

[BWR]

No one has mentioned Ars Magica yet? for shame.

[Lorsa]

No one has mentioned Ars Magica yet? for shame.

I was thinking about it, but it isn't an ACTUAL medieval setting, it's a historical setting where all supernatural myths and beliefs held by people at the time are real.

[Max_Killjoy]

OP - were you thinking of this setting as including any sort of magic, or being fairly mundane/historical?

[Amaril]

OP - were you thinking of this setting as including any sort of magic, or being fairly mundane/historical?

I guess I was thinking a very low-magic world; magic being rare and/or dangerous enough to remain something you normally only hear stories about, rather than actually see. Of course that would still have some effects on the culture and tech level, but direct historical comparison is still fine as a base to work from.