battle Wear vs. Town Wear

[torchwolf]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

As long as there is some internal consistency to it, armor and weapons at all times are probably necessary where monsters dwell, and vice versa.

 

Something I do is just have an Adventurer's Charter. This is a handy dandy certificate/badge/mark/tattoo that states that this group is allowed to carry weapons/magic implements in various areas of a city because of their occupation as adventurers. Makes some form of sense to the more realistic lovers' date=' doesn't screw over the fighter, and everyone including the paranoid players are happy. Also makes for some interesting plot seeds, like a lord that sees your Sword of Orcslaying and wants it no matter the cost, or goblins raid the city and you need to get to your armour/weapons as quickly as possible.[/quote']

The concept of "troubleshooters" is more common to cyberpunk, dark champions, or SF than fantasy, but is a reasonable idea; it also gives a reason for adventurers to uphold and protect their reputation.

 

But hey if that doesn't solve anyone's problems... let me grab my stick. This horse needs some beating

 

 

It's been dead for some time, but considering the hordes of wandering zombies it might be better to kill it a few more times.

(wondering if anyone remembers the vampire cow who followed Dracula around... no, wait, that thread is also undead...)

[BubbaDave]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

In my world, assuming civilized areas, entering a town you have three choices:

1) All weapons longer than a dagger and all armor heavier than leather go into a chest in the gatehouse, you get a receipt, you get them back when you leave

2) All weapons longer than a dagger are peacebonded, armor heavier than leather goes into your pack (or you can hire this friendly fellow with a wheelbarrow) and you post a surety of two gold florins (roughly two months' wages for a laborer), forfeited if you're stopped by the watch while wearing armor or carrying usable weapons

3) You claim special status, either nobility or bearing arms on city, Church or Imperial business; you post a surety of two gold florins and a member of the watch escorts you to the city fortress or cathedral to confirm your status. Falsely claiming nobility gets you an extensive public flogging and the stocks if you survive; falsely claiming city or church business is more likely to lead to heavy fines or imprisonment. Of course, both Church and state have their share of corrupt officials, so it's entirely possible for you to bribe your way onto the rolls as a special agent-- and equally possible for an enemy to bribe your way OFF the rolls, much to your surprise....

 

The result is that city adventures tend to be heavy on intrigue and violent episodes tend to be stealthy, savage and short; characters are constantly angling for noble or episcopal patrons (who are in turn looking for reliable agents), and urban adventures tend to be more Gangbusters than Boot Hill.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

"Monsters" are a generic term. Humans are as dangerous as any monster' date=' and can be even more annoying then your garden variety bugbear or orc. So your world is a safe place where Brigands, bandits and other human nasties don't exist to plague the PC's?[/quote']

That last sentence just sounds like baiting. There are multiple, very detailed descriptions of above of how people handle towns in worlds with and without monsters. The fact that at least some towns and cities are safe and social norms prohibit walking around dressed like Ironman in no way negates the existence of "Brigands, bandits, and other human nasties" at large in the world, nor even the occasional threat within cities.

[Curufea]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

Historically brigands and bandits didn't tend to last very long anyway. You need a) a lot of disenfranchised anti-establishment violent people WITH NO TIES to the people the prey on Somewhere to hide a large group and c) some way to flee the reprisals from the local militia - sheriff, villagers and any feudals.

A lot of the D&D setting is based on the premise that the world is full of amoral sociopaths.

[Tasha]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

That last sentence just sounds like baiting. There are multiple' date=' very detailed descriptions of above of how people handle towns in worlds with and without monsters. The fact that at least some towns and cities are safe and social norms prohibit walking around dressed like Ironman in no way negates the existence of "Brigands, bandits, and other human nasties" at large in the world, nor even the occasional threat within cities.[/quote']

 

Probably a little bit on the baiting. Just pointing out that Human are as dangerous (or more so) than most Monsters. That Brigands, Bandits etc are a staple of the Genre no matter how realistic the campaign is.

 

Actually my point is that the more dangerous the world is, the more people will be used to seeing heavily armed and armored people. They might be uneasy around strangers, but still might not say anything about it.

 

In a more civilized world (or part of a world), People would be less comfortable with armed and armored strangers. They wouldn't have the constant stream of armored and armed people walking around. So in those Civilized Kingdoms they would have laws against wearing armor in well guarded cities.

 

I still think that making a Heavy Fighter strip at the gate is kind of excessive. Taking someone at their word should be good enough. (ie the Guard informs the PCs that "Battle Weapons" and Plate Armors are not allowed within City Limits. Tells them that it is Ok to ride to an Inn where they will be expected to store their adventuring equipment while in the city. That using proscribed weapons and armor in the city is grounds for heavy fines and/or imprisonment if not approved by the rulers of the city before hand etc). In a realistic game I don't know if my fighter would ever feel comfortable enough to leave her plate armor with the town guard. Said Armor is worth more than said guardsperson is likely to make in many years of doing their job.

[IKerensky]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

An anecdot related to this subject:

 

In an Earthdawn game (a long time ago in a galaxy far far away), I had a Vorst-Human Scout trying to enter a luxury inn to follow on an elf noble. The vorst is dressed Vorst style : Black leather Armor, with many spikes and claws, with dented blade sword, and a large crystal spiked shoulderpad.

 

His first try to come into the Inn by the front door result in his prompt ejection by the Troll Bruiser.

 

So the player try to be sly. He buy a flour bag, and go knock at the kitchen backdoor. When the door opened he put the bag on his shoulder and declare 'I am the baker delivery man'... The cook have a long look at him, his swords, the flour that is covering the right part of his black armour, the empty bag that is dandling from the crystal spikes on his shoulder... next thing the player remember is contact with an hard surface when the troll bouncer try to beat his own record at Vorst tossing.

 

So I am all for the player remembering to change clothing when in town...

[Markdoc]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

The concept of "troubleshooters" is more common to cyberpunk' date=' dark champions, or SF than fantasy, but is a reasonable idea; it also gives a reason for adventurers to uphold and protect their reputation.[/quote']

 

Actually, I use this trope a lot in my games - in fact, the current FH group occupies exactly that slot right now: they're sort of special ops group for the local city council. That doesn't give them a complete free hand - if they stir up any trouble with the occupying forces nearby, the council will hang them out to dry, but it does give them a base, access to advice, funding, the odd magical help, etc.

 

cheers, Mark

[Hierax]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

I remember way back in AD&D 1st ed. some players trying to talk their way into a city as "Humble Sheep Herders" including:

 

• Human battle-scarred wearing blackened full-plate, shield, huge 2-handed sword, spike flail, etc.
  

 

• Half-Troll with some huge weapon, spiked club/mace I think
  

 

• Half-Ogre with spiked leather and gigantic bastard sword
  

Needless to say, they didn't have any luck in getting in -- all they achieved was a good laugh for the gate guards and myself!

[Markdoc]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

Historically brigands and bandits didn't tend to last very long anyway. You need a) a lot of disenfranchised anti-establishment violent people WITH NO TIES to the people the prey on Somewhere to hide a large group and c) some way to flee the reprisals from the local militia - sheriff, villagers and any feudals.

A lot of the D&D setting is based on the premise that the world is full of amoral sociopaths.

 

Umm, it's considered more appropriate to just call them "player characters"

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

I still think that making a Heavy Fighter strip at the gate is kind of excessive. Taking someone at their word should be good enough. (ie the Guard informs the PCs that "Battle Weapons" and Plate Armors are not allowed within City Limits. Tells them that it is Ok to ride to an Inn where they will be expected to store their adventuring equipment while in the city. That using proscribed weapons and armor in the city is grounds for heavy fines and/or imprisonment if not approved by the rulers of the city before hand etc). In a realistic game I don't know if my fighter would ever feel comfortable enough to leave her plate armor with the town guard. Said Armor is worth more than said guardsperson is likely to make in many years of doing their job.

 

I think what you are describing "dump your gear at the inn" is actually pretty close to how most of the more "restrictive" GM's run things. It's certainly how I do it.

 

cheers, Mark

[mayapuppies]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

I think what you are describing "dump your gear at the inn" is actually pretty close to how most of the more "restrictive" GM's run things. It's certainly how I do it.

 

cheers, Mark

Ditto

[Markdoc]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

I remember way back in AD&D 1st ed. some players trying to talk their way into a city as "Humble Sheep Herders" including:

 

• Human battle-scarred wearing blackened full-plate, shield, huge 2-handed sword, spike flail, etc.
  

 

• Half-Troll with some huge weapon, spiked club/mace I think
  

 

• Half-Ogre with spiked leather and gigantic bastard sword
  

Needless to say, they didn't have any luck in getting in -- all they achieved was a good laugh for the gate guards and myself!

 

"But sir, I am just a simple trader in trinkets..."

"Yer not comin' in and that's final!"

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/046/6/c/6cd2f77a2afed33675b3a8aa4253e8dd.jpg

 

cheers, Mark

[Vulcan]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

In my world, assuming civilized areas, entering a town you have three choices:

1) All weapons longer than a dagger and all armor heavier than leather go into a chest in the gatehouse, you get a receipt, you get them back when you leave

2) All weapons longer than a dagger are peacebonded, armor heavier than leather goes into your pack (or you can hire this friendly fellow with a wheelbarrow) and you post a surety of two gold florins (roughly two months' wages for a laborer), forfeited if you're stopped by the watch while wearing armor or carrying usable weapons

3) You claim special status, either nobility or bearing arms on city, Church or Imperial business; you post a surety of two gold florins and a member of the watch escorts you to the city fortress or cathedral to confirm your status. Falsely claiming nobility gets you an extensive public flogging and the stocks if you survive; falsely claiming city or church business is more likely to lead to heavy fines or imprisonment. Of course, both Church and state have their share of corrupt officials, so it's entirely possible for you to bribe your way onto the rolls as a special agent-- and equally possible for an enemy to bribe your way OFF the rolls, much to your surprise....

 

The result is that city adventures tend to be heavy on intrigue and violent episodes tend to be stealthy, savage and short; characters are constantly angling for noble or episcopal patrons (who are in turn looking for reliable agents), and urban adventures tend to be more Gangbusters than Boot Hill.

 

And players want to play characters who do not depend on such heavy arms and armor to survive combat - back to the 'Mage, Monk, and Rogue bonus' issue.

[Shinobi Killfis]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

Isn't that odd' date=' in itself? Why do the towns even exist if they are dangerous places to be? [/quote']

 

Explain Washington DC to me then, that place has a murder rate that puts any fantasy city I ever designed to shame. I never said it was uninhabitable just dangerous.

 

And all of these heavily-armed men, whose profession is presumably fighting don't umm, actually fight? Or does the greengrocer put his plate armor on and strap a two handed axe over his shoulder, before going out to hawk cabbages?

 

Where did I say people don't fight. I said the PCs would be seen as an assist to the town guard. The PCs might be closer to the touble and quite frankly training a new town guard is expensive so why have your people get killed when you can have an adventurer get killed in his place.

 

Sure - you make the two safe for them to come in and spend their money by ... making it safe. Which means not having rival gangs of adventurers roaming about eyeing up each other's valuable gear. Now to be plain, I'm not saying you shouldn't run your game like that:I'm playing in a D&D game somewhat like that right now. It's silly, but it's fun. However, there's no way you can logically defend it - it's just for fun.

 

I think I have logically defended mine just as well as you have yours. There are plenty of times in history where armed civilians were a fairly normal occurrence, and there societies and cities could survive. If it is illogical for them to exist, how come they were able to in history. Just because I may model my worlds after time periods where the citizen and civilian might be and frequently was armed does not mean my world is any less illogical than yours.

 

 

I'm just pointing out that a GM can run a game with a much more realistic atmosphere (still pretty unrealistic, but hey ...) without doing it just to stiff the players.

 

cheers, Mark

 

Sure there are ways to do it and ways not to do it. I found the previous list especially all the taxes to be a fairly heavy handed player screwing. I might do it in a game where I was trying to parody current real life, but it would not be my norm. I thought it was funny to see all the taxes being levied in the book Another day another dungeon when the characters tried to transport there goods out of the dungeon(dwarf territory) into there home country. That isn't to say there might not be a good way to do this where it isn't player screwing but I think the taxes would be fairly hard to pull off.

[Vondy]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

Historically brigands and bandits didn't tend to last very long anyway. You need a) a lot of disenfranchised anti-establishment violent people WITH NO TIES to the people the prey on Somewhere to hide a large group and c) some way to flee the reprisals from the local militia - sheriff, villagers and any feudals.

A lot of the D&D setting is based on the premise that the world is full of amoral sociopaths.

 

And they were seldom "the dread pirate roberts," either. They tended to be half starved wretches who were poorly clothed and poorly armed. There were occasional bands or organized professional raiders, but mostly bandits and brigands were just desperate to survive and either found a way to return to ordinary life or perished.

[Curufea]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

I think I have logically defended mine just as well as you have yours. There are plenty of times in history where armed civilians were a fairly normal occurrence' date=' and there societies and cities could survive. If it is illogical for them to exist, how come they were able to in history. Just because I may model my worlds after time periods where the citizen and civilian might be and frequently was armed does not mean my world is any less illogical than yours. [/quote']

 

I can't think of any where civilians wander around armed all the time - have you any examples?

[SteveZilla]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

There are of course "cities" in my game' date=' where people do walk around in armour, their hands never far from their weapons' hilts - but those tend to be wretched hives of scum and villainy.[/quote']

 

And even there you might find a Jed-- I mean Paladin.

 

In my world, assuming civilized areas, entering a town you have three choices:

1) All weapons longer than a dagger and all armor heavier than leather go into a chest in the gatehouse, you get a receipt, you get them back when you leave

2) All weapons longer than a dagger are peacebonded, armor heavier than leather goes into your pack (or you can hire this friendly fellow with a wheelbarrow) and you post a surety of two gold florins (roughly two months' wages for a laborer), forfeited if you're stopped by the watch while wearing armor or carrying usable weapons

3) You claim special status, either nobility or bearing arms on city, Church or Imperial business; you post a surety of two gold florins and a member of the watch escorts you to the city fortress or cathedral to confirm your status. Falsely claiming nobility gets you an extensive public flogging and the stocks if you survive; falsely claiming city or church business is more likely to lead to heavy fines or imprisonment. Of course, both Church and state have their share of corrupt officials, so it's entirely possible for you to bribe your way onto the rolls as a special agent-- and equally possible for an enemy to bribe your way OFF the rolls, much to your surprise....

 

The result is that city adventures tend to be heavy on intrigue and violent episodes tend to be stealthy, savage and short; characters are constantly angling for noble or episcopal patrons (who are in turn looking for reliable agents), and urban adventures tend to be more Gangbusters than Boot Hill.

 

Interesting way of putting it (Gangbusters vs Boot Hill*)!

 

*Though I have never played either game, I think I get the general gist.

 

I've never run a game before, but were I to do so, I would have some territories (cities, provinces, maybe a whole country) that enforce some sort of "arms restriction". Not to screw the PCs, but because it could logically (IMO) exist. I wouldn't start the game in such an area, thus I feel that gives the players a choice. Also, I would never have the city guard be the ones to "store" the items not allowed to be worn. Depending upon how the interaction goes, it could range from simply informing the PCs of the restriction, to dispatching one or two low-level escorts to accompany them straight to the chosen residence/inn.

 

As far as the restrictions, I have a couple of thoughts. That its not an "all-or-nothing" matter, but of varying degrees. The more "dangerous" an area/town, the more likely people will be allowed (and exercise) carrying weapons bigger than Daggers, armors heavier than Studded Leather, missile weapons heavier than a Sling, and magical abilities stronger than .... say, (in D&D terms) 2nd lvl spells. I'm not a big fan of Monks -- Bare-handed Martial Arts would not likely be present in a European Medieval Style game I would run. I have known some GM's hate Elves, and exclude them. With me, it's Monks. :shrug:

 

Also, I wouldn't have the players start the game with the heavy weapons/armor, thus allowing them at initial stages to pass to and fro freely, and as they slowly acquire stronger gear, the exposure to any societal/legal limits would be a gradual process.

[BubbaDave]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

Explain Washington DC to me then' date=' that place has a murder rate that puts any fantasy city I ever designed to shame.[/quote']

 

Sorry, but this silliness needs to be slapped down with a quickness. The largest city in medieval Europe was Paris, population roughly 100,000 in the year 1300. The homicide rate in DC in 2007 was 30.8 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Do you believe that medieval Paris saw fewer than three homicides a month? I call shenanigans.

[BubbaDave]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

And players want to play characters who do not depend on such heavy arms and armor to survive combat - back to the 'Mage' date=' Monk, and Rogue bonus' issue.[/quote']

 

That wasn't actually how it worked out. Instead, the players used their brains. For example, in one adventure when they decided to break into the warehouse where the secret temple was hidden, they loaded the Scots man-at-arms' plate mail into one cask, loaded the fully armed and armored dwarf fighter into another, marked both kegs "brandy," and drove a wagon with some real casks as well as the special brew to the warehouse shortly after sunset. The night watchman was eager to take the mistaken delivery from the drunk-seeming "teamsters," chained up the guard dog, stepped inside the warehouse to show the "teamsters" where to unload the merchandise, and discovered that a small keg of beer can give one a headache in multiple ways, especially if administered by a large Scotsman eager to get back into his DEF7 security blanket. A bit before midnight-- a temple destroyed, loot gathered, and number of would-be demon summoners having found their cult membership followed by dismembership-- the wagon proceeded back to the inn. The next day the wagon left town, with the rest of the party berating the dwarf and Scotsman for having purchased so much alcohol even they couldn't drink it all; if the gate guards were more interested in the small cask of beer the adventurers left them than the larger "brandy" cask full of loot, well, that's nobody's loss except the taxman's....

[Shinobi Killfis]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

Sorry' date=' but this silliness needs to be slapped down with a quickness. The largest city in medieval Europe was Paris, population roughly 100,000 in the year 1300. The homicide rate in DC in 2007 was 30.8 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Do you believe that medieval Paris saw fewer than three homicides a month? I call shenanigans.[/quote']

 

I have no idea what the nurder rate for a medevil city was, I can only say what the murder rartes in my cities are. And yes I'd say it was under 3 per month most years. But like how DC spiked to close to 600 murders in 1991 my cities might spike as well. I think the only sillyness is you feel the need to "slap down" what I've said with virtually no information on my setting. And whether you like it or not DC is one of the more dangerous cities to live in when you take out things like cities in a uprising or in full anarchy so it is a good current day example of "dangerous" places that somehow manage to survive.

[dmjalund]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

the danger is of course relative - calculate the odds that the person murdered would be in fact You. then compare that to other daily threats in the fantasy universe

[Alibear]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

My GMing style is sometimes squite arbitary. I just explain the situation in a few sentences and skip the boring bits or bit where players will do stupid stuff. It might go something like this.

 

"A weeks travelling in the wilds, often wet miserable and cold, sleeping rough more often than not you find yourselves in the Elephant's Toe Inn in the town of Rockferry. You've shaved, bathed and sent your travel clothes to a local seamstress, your armour to the smith to have holes and dents repaired. With a full belly and a good night's sleep you wile away the afternoon with mug of the local cider in your fist and sit by the fire and swap stories and tales with the locals and flirt shamelessly with the serving wench. It feels so good to be in civilisation, not wearing uncomfortable, chaffing armour, not lugging around a heavy pack and cumbersome weapons. You feel rested, safe and warm for the first time since you left Manndorf."

 

Some things are a given, that they might have a sword in the corner out of the way but armour or bows would not be reasonable in such a setting. However if it's not such a cozy setting, if I had set it up to be a wild and lawless place then i'd assume the players would take my hint and keep amred and armoured. It depends on how the GM sets up the game.

[Outsider]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

I remember way back in AD&D 1st ed. some players trying to talk their way into a city as "Humble Sheep Herders" including:

 

• Human battle-scarred wearing blackened full-plate, shield, huge 2-handed sword, spike flail, etc.
  

 

• Half-Troll with some huge weapon, spiked club/mace I think
  

 

• Half-Ogre with spiked leather and gigantic bastard sword
  

Needless to say, they didn't have any luck in getting in -- all they achieved was a good laugh for the gate guards and myself!

 

 

 

Heh... reminds me of the party that made one of its members wear a sign around his neck that read "Not a Monster".

[Markdoc]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

And they were seldom "the dread pirate roberts' date='" either. They tended to be half starved wretches who were poorly clothed and poorly armed. There were occasional bands or organized professional raiders, but mostly bandits and brigands were just desperate to survive and either found a way to return to ordinary life or perished.[/quote']

 

In general I agree completely. There is one exception I can think of - the bandit armies that sprang up in the wake of various wars - the free companies in France after the end of the hundred years war, the unaffiliated condotta in Italy or the border reavers in Northern England, etc. In general, these were all groups of ex-soldiers with no other means of support held together by a charismatic leader: the most successful of them sometimes morphed into local lords, when they established themselves too firmly to be rooted out. Some of the early japanese crime syndicates also went through the same process in the medieval period - when central leadership was weak, they extended control over quit large areas and in some cases, were unofficially recognized by the government, who paid them off to maintain law and order rather than mounting a military campaign.

 

One thing all these successful bandits had in common though, was the ability to field an army large enough to challenge the local authorities: not your stereotypical "bunch of bandits hiding in a forest" who tended to be just as you described.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear

 

I have no idea what the nurder rate for a medevil city was' date=' I can only say what the murder rartes in my cities are. And yes I'd say it was under 3 per month most years. But like how DC spiked to close to 600 murders in 1991 my cities might spike as well. I think the only sillyness is you feel the need to "slap down" what I've said with virtually no information on my setting. And whether you like it or not DC is one of the more dangerous cities to live in when you take out things like cities in a uprising or in full anarchy so it is a good current day example of "dangerous" places that somehow manage to survive.[/quote']

 

I think this is your problem - you don't know. You are guessing, and guessing wrong. To put it in perspective, the highest murder rate in the US is not now, or even recently: it was much higher in the 1930s. And even then, the murder rate at it's highest is less than half what it was in 1500's europe - and the murder rate had been declining for centuries by that point. There's a fun book - "A History of Murder: Personal Violence in Europe from the Middle Ages to the Present" by Pieter Spierenburg. He's collected a lot of data in one place, if you are interested.

 

So even though we can know with a fair degree of accuracy that the murder rate in medieval cites was far higher than it is in modern cities today ... we also know that it was forbidden for the common citizenry to wander about armed and armoured. A knife, yes - more warlike weapons on the streets were reserved for the guards and the military. That's just how it was.

 

cheers, Mark