Author Topic: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D  (Read 17420 times)

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #40 on: December 15, 2011, 10:46:48 AM »
@BB How do you feel about instead of hiring 4 tenth level PC classed characters you hire 40 NPCs with crap equipment of the same level?

I think I would go with 2 PC classed heroes, 4 NPC ones, and put the savings into mooks for things like inspections, meter maids, cross walk guard, hall monitors, and that sort of thing.

That sounds like an excellent way to train and equip the opposing forces.

Offline Halinn

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2067
  • My personal text is impersonal.
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #41 on: December 15, 2011, 11:53:54 AM »
Except as pointed out, they don't have sufficient presence unless you're talking about divinations, scrying and teleporting at will. The specialist adventurers would crush the bandits they can find like a grape, but are ineffective for the reason that all the other bandits are going uncrushed.

Who know that continuing to operate in this area will likely lead to their total destruction. It's the real reason atomic weapons made such an impact.

But even when countries had nukes, highly trained military forces, jet fighters and so on, crimes still happened inside their borders. Do you want to send adventurers out to deal with petty thieves in marketplaces and the like?
If I were the king of Hypothetical Land, I would try to cover my bases more widely. Have both some heavy-hitting high-level PC classes and some sort of army/militia to deal with minor issues.

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #42 on: December 15, 2011, 12:06:21 PM »
200k won't get you that though. And you likely won't have more than that.

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #43 on: December 15, 2011, 12:50:00 PM »
Depends on how big a nation. In practice, for smaller countries the armed forces are basically militia, and do farming in their time while on non-combat duty, countries that can afford to have a few thousand people stand around as a purely military caste(that get paid but perform no production) would generally have the following types in their militaries:
-Special forces. You hope to keep a few of these legendaries around, if you have one at hand, and can afford to maintain them. They can be sustained hire at significant levels for empires that could afford all of the below anyway. Most often, for fantasy kingdoms, they ARE the ruling class, or ancestors of the ruling class. Availability is unpredictable, you can't just decide to train up a level 10 cleric, and many of them are highly individualistic, idealistic and generally powerful enough to boot you off the throne if they really wanted to go at it.
-Elite military. Generally nobles and outfits directly commanded by nobles, might get up to 6th level and generally contains some spellcaster components. They're small in number, well equipped and generally serve in protective roles and management roles. They don't generally engage in production. When a monster shows up and theres no heroes to hire, they go to active duty with a bunch of professional soldiers and deals with it.
-Career military. Reasonably equipped(usually a good martial weapon and backup weapon, with breastplate or light mail), and trained(levels 3-5 would not go amiss, depending on experience in the field and training quality), these make up the core of a military force, and engage in police and border work. They fill outposts and forts, deal with bandits, orc raiders etc. They'd likely contain a spellcasting component, most likely adepts or clerical chaplains, more developed areas might have wizards attached.
-Militia. Minimally equipped and trained, these are the actual bulk of an army. They'd only have cheap gear, typically bows/crossbows or spears/polearms, leather or hide armor, and if they're lucky they might have a shield. They do engage in production, and in peacetime, they'd be doing stuff like farming(and incidentally dealing with wild animals in their areas).

In practice, you rarely actually need the upper tiers, because their combat role is when all-out war occurs, or some elite monster shows up. Other than these times, their upkeep is significantly higher and nonproductive. Contrast the others:
-Militia actually pay YOU to keep them around. They pay taxes and engage in production work, all you need to do is supply their scanty equipment, and even if killed the equipment remains for reuse.
-Professional soldiers need to be paid, but their presence projects a certain baseline degree of force. They keep crime down, which saves you the money and lost production you'd be otherwise losing to crime and fends off the more aggressive wildlife. They'd also outfight the typical mob of peasants which is handy if theres a revolt or something.
-Elites are problematic here. Training one is a very large investment, so most likely they're part of your ruling caste already. Their role is management, as far as day to day operations go. Their actual combat ability doesn't matter unless you're actually at war, in peacetime, they're a liability socially.
-Legendaries are difficult to obtain, upkeep and keep under control. They likely could have a crown themselves if they wanted, and their capabilities are niche. Why keep them around to deal with bandits when a hundred professional soldiers would be able to do the same at less of a price? A thousand professional soldiers can keep the peace across some ten times the area the adventurers would be covering, at a comparable price.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline midnight_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 360
  • It is good and fitting to die for the dice...
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #44 on: December 15, 2011, 01:44:07 PM »
Just a quick interjection at the idea of what's being discussed.

The thing is since the pc's are the "Stars" of any given story, and they're super heroes. . .

 I paralell how in comic books the government of the world really DON'T have an answer for the justice league.

Even if you're party is sans superman (and it isn't really) Flash, Green Lantern, Batman, and Wonder Wonderwoman could wipe any country they wanted.

Really how it would work in real life just like wmd's but with Persons of Mass Destruction instead.

The only thing thats rational is to have your own Wmd's and hope no one presses the button.

Futher I reject the entire X archers will kill the adventurer There's something wrong with that but I'm pressed for time... I think its because it's scenario based...
can't put my finger on it right this second though.
"Disentegrate...gust of wind. Can we please get back to saving the world now?"

Offline Halinn

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2067
  • My personal text is impersonal.
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #45 on: December 15, 2011, 01:46:29 PM »
Futher I reject the entire X archers will kill the adventurer There's something wrong with that but I'm pressed for time... I think its because it's scenario based...
can't put my finger on it right this second though.

Wouldn't the character get full cover against archers not in the front ranks?

Offline zook1shoe

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4938
  • Feeling the Bern
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #46 on: December 15, 2011, 02:00:10 PM »
Depends on if they are a hill or plains
add me on Steam- zook1shoe
- All Spells
- playground

Offline littha

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2952
  • +1 Holy Muffin
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #47 on: December 15, 2011, 02:01:13 PM »
Futher I reject the entire X archers will kill the adventurer There's something wrong with that but I'm pressed for time... I think its because it's scenario based...
can't put my finger on it right this second though.

Wouldn't the character get full cover against archers not in the front ranks?
Quote from: SRD
Soft Cover
Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC. However, such soft cover provides no bonus on Reflex saves, nor does soft cover allow you to make a Hide check.

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #48 on: December 15, 2011, 02:15:17 PM »
So no, since you were fishing for 20s anyway in that scenario.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline nijineko

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2413
  • two strange quarks short of a graviton....
    • View Profile
    • TwinSeraphim
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #49 on: December 15, 2011, 04:07:43 PM »
i think i can add a few more points to the list of things not directly considered yet in this thread.

i shall bare a bit of geek and refer to a loudly touted but poorly executed example: the prime directive. for the non-trekkies and non-trekers among us, this bit of star trek culture is supposedly the big rule for the federation in interacting with cultures less developed then themselves. basically, it states don't reveal your "superior" technology to "inferior" cultures lest you mess with their "natural" development. incorrectly applied to the native americans and the conquistadors, and acurate real-life example would be the japanese around world war 2.

first we look at the industrial revolution here and here. very generally speaking, the industrial is considered to have taken about 200 years, which is sufficient generalization for my purpose. now, prior to the late 1800s, the japanese were still a feudal agrarian society, which is about the default assumption of time period for many oriental settings in fantasy. from about 1867-1912, a space of 45 years, they duplicated the entire 200 years worth of industrial revolution, catching up with everyone else with a vengeance.

this has led to what is called, in prime directive terms, an "impacted culture". instead of learning and developing unique takes on technology on their own, they just cherry-picked whatever technological, social, and political reforms caught their eyes. in fact they sent out many "diplomats" (ie:scientists) to tour all manner of facilities in order to copy foreign tech. speaking from my own personal experience, when i lived in japan only 15 years ago, most of the japanese i have personally spoken to had never heard of or seen electric popcorn makers, or can openers where you turn/rotate/spin the handle to open a can, let alone electric can openers. they have sat-nav in their cars, and phones the size of lighters, but the houses are made from 3rd grade lumber, cheap concrete, and tin. medical tech lags by about 10 years or more, depending on area. (seriously, despite all the anime and manga to the contrary, you do NOT want to end up in a japanese clinic or hospital when overseas.) they have some of the best game systems, and hovercrafts for bumper cars in game centers, but there are still areas of japan in which people have never met a foreigner. \

there are numerous other tribe examples out there. the native tribes living in japan before the arrival of the japanese qualify too.


anyhow, back to the fantasy discussion. in fantasy, magic = tech. at some point in time there would have been a magiological revolution by some culture or cultures. in fact, most fantasy games have epic or artifact items as left overs from just such a culture.

from an archeological point of view, we live in a graveyard of dead and lost cultures today, so the whole dungeon here, there, and everywhere is not as bad an assumption as one might think. (though rarely is usable tech recovered, even if evidence of such tech is found, let alone tech more advanced than ours today... yes, there are a few, but anyway... so the whole magic item thing is a bit over the top.)

given d&d's dependence on the vancian system of magic, and the subsequent reliance on material components, and given even the unlikely population and class and level demographics listed in the dmg, you would literally need slaughter farms of various magical beasts in order to supply even a modest country's need for magical components. forgotten realms and eberron sort of approached this, but failed to execute it really.

so your two basic scenarios of advanced magical cultures involve:

1) magiology slowly developing over time, which would imply trade, and a general availability of tech with said availability and advanced forms being top heavy towards a government and military bias. certain nations might have specializations due to available local resources, and if one or more can dominate particular resources, they can become superpowers. access to other planes might allow disproportional resource access compared to size, population, and local resources of a given country. unless planar locals object to said mining; which is a whole 'nother story.

2) impacted development, which involves cherry picking from more advanced resources, not all of which may be fully understood. this results in swift development, but a chimeric patchwork of advanced and primitive and all in-between. mining ancient magiological tech or copying / trading with a more advanced group or similar could explain this.


there may be other methods of development, but these are the two main ones we can draw from experience of in our own world. some things to consider is the sort of tech one could make without fire, such as in an underwater environment, or in outer space. each has possible exceptions: deep sea thermal vents (dangerous and poisonous), and solar lenses to create heat.

any discussion of costs and resources should really be considered against one of two said backdrops. d&d is notoriously silent on the more detailed aspects of economy and commerce necessary to support the supposedly widespread availability of magical items implied by the gp limit of towns of various sizes. a few sketches are set forth as guidelines, and the rest, without much in the way of background is dumped in the dm's lap. as a result, it is seldom developed, and thus we have the rules we have with all the nonsensical results we are debating here. 


ps: just as an interesting side note, most fantasy settings are explicitly post-apocalyptic. greyhawk has the twin cataclysms, plus numerous other local catastrophes. forgotten realms has its share, plus the recent one that converted FR from 3rd to 4th. dark sun is a prime example as well, as is hollow earth, savage coast, and most others. the time frame of said apocalypse varies from setting to setting, but they pretty much all have them.


pps: some have wondered why there is no mass combat rules in 3rd, when every version previous has had them? here is your answer. and the mass combat rules you are looking for.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 04:23:11 PM by nijineko »

Offline Halinn

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2067
  • My personal text is impersonal.
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #50 on: December 15, 2011, 05:07:03 PM »
200k won't get you that though. And you likely won't have more than that.

Why not? What assumptions are you making with regards to levels of taxation, GDP and so on?

Offline Nachofan99

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 111
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #51 on: December 15, 2011, 05:22:59 PM »
I also like the "ancient magic"=lostech angle.  The ruler of the kingdom has the scepter of dominance which is a badass artifact.

Really, "plot armor" is just that and should probably be left alone.  Unless your DM is a dick, where's the harm? 

Offline littha

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2952
  • +1 Holy Muffin
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #52 on: December 15, 2011, 05:24:26 PM »
A point to be made would be that a kingdom should have a really enormous income, especially when compared to a single adventurer.

Assuming a population of 10 million commoners getting paid 1sp a day with a tax rate of 10% you make 100,000 gp a day... what percentile of this would you designate to military upkeep? 10% of that? probably low considering the feudal structure but we will go with that, so 10,000 gp a day. 3.65 million gp a year for arming and paying your soldiers?

That is 20,000 soldiers pay and equipment for your first year. From this we can surmise that the affordable ratio of commoners:soldiers is 500:1 

Adventures cost you 50,000gp + 36,500gp a year, each. You can afford 42 Adventurers, so the ratio of commoners:Adventurers is 238095:1

Offline Halinn

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2067
  • My personal text is impersonal.
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #53 on: December 15, 2011, 05:40:08 PM »
Making the assumption that D&D populations follow populations in medieval Europe, a kingdom of 10 million is huge. Per wikipedia, 1328 France had between 18 and 20 million inhabitants. Tuscany, an italian region covering 23000 km² (ca. 150*150 km, or 8900 mi²) had a population of 2 million in 1300.
Basically, population growth was limited to a large degree by crop yields.

Offline midnight_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 360
  • It is good and fitting to die for the dice...
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #54 on: December 15, 2011, 06:07:51 PM »
D&D isn't medieval, its an Iron age setting.
"Disentegrate...gust of wind. Can we please get back to saving the world now?"

Offline Halinn

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2067
  • My personal text is impersonal.
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #55 on: December 15, 2011, 06:19:48 PM »
Well, the earlier one goes in Earth history, the lower the population. The entire Roman Empire was estimated between 80-120 million people at its largest. Compare modern day Italy, less than 5% the area of the empire, having a population of 60 million.

Edit: a bit of math tells me that a Create Food and Water trap, at minimum CL operating 24 hours/day can feed 72000 people, at 7500 gp and 600 xp. That equates to a minimum of 139 of these traps to feed 10 million people. That costs just over a million gold, as well as 83400 xp (also known as enough to knock a 20th level character down to level 15, or enough exp to be a 13th level character). Not accounting for the fact that you need to account for the fact that you probably want to be able to feed more than 10 million, in case of a rise in population, that you likely won't be able to distribute the food perfectly and that for some part of the population you want to create some prestidigitation traps if you plan on feeding everybody with magic.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 06:40:41 PM by Halinn »

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #56 on: February 17, 2012, 09:16:34 PM »
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline Endarire

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1662
  • Smile! Jesus loves you!
    • View Profile
    • Greg Campbell's Portfolio
Re: Classic vs Modern - National Security in D & D
« Reply #57 on: February 17, 2012, 09:27:19 PM »
I wrote a module called The Metaphysical Revolution which explored the industrialization of magic, among other things.