Culture aka Social Class

Arkat

Mongoose
Ok we've touched on this in a few other posts. The Culture or Social Class options don't seem to balance out at least not if your making starting level characters. Nobles just start with an obscene amount of money compared to the other options.

I'm considering forcing players to roll on the old RQ2 Social Class table for this instead of letting them pick. Anyone see any other options to balance this out a bit?
 
Arkat said:
Ok we've touched on this in a few other posts. The Culture or Social Class options don't seem to balance out at least not if your making starting level characters. Nobles just start with an obscene amount of money compared to the other options.

I'm considering forcing players to roll on the old RQ2 Social Class table for this instead of letting them pick. Anyone see any other options to balance this out a bit?

Yeah, just balance out the money.

THe backgorunds and professions are balanced skill point wise. If you don't like the money that nobles get, just change the starting money, or gibve evberyone the same amount of weath and explain that nobles have had a downturn in their fortunes (a good motivatfion for adventuring).
 
An idea I've had is to rate social class on a 3-18 scale, and then allow players to roll 4D6 and drop the lowest. I originally came up with a table for fantasy campaigns, and then came up with a table for modern characters.

When I get home, I'll post the two tables, one for archaic and the other for modern campaigns. I suppose a science fiction campaign would require a third table, but it's easy to see how to use the scale.
 
If you don't want to mess with a Pseudo-Characteristic idea, you could require that noble characters own certain things that must be paid for out of their starting money. Many cultures reserved high status for people who owned certain amounts of land or goods. So a noble may be required to buy armor or a horse or land.

Another way to hit nobles is with living expenses. A guy who does not show he is rich by spending money conspicuously may at least lose the status associated with the nobility.
 
Utgardloki said:
An idea I've had is to rate social class on a 3-18 scale, and then allow players to roll 4D6 and drop the lowest. I originally came up with a table for fantasy campaigns, and then came up with a table for modern characters.

When I get home, I'll post the two tables, one for archaic and the other for modern campaigns. I suppose a science fiction campaign would require a third table, but it's easy to see how to use the scale.

Swordbearer used to do that. It also gave everything a pirce by solcai class. The idea was that in order to own the equipment of the upper classes (like plate armor) you had to be a memmber of the uper classes. Very good for a medieval setting.

HeroQuest does something similar, by abstacting wealth.
 
Well atleast i let my players be what they want (almost) so if they want to be Nobles, then they are nobles. Gladly my players are so good that they dont minmax or make characters via munchkinism. If you have same problems, you should talk to your players:D

and so what if someone or even 2 players want to be Nobles, let them. That is only the great variation of roleplaying "be who you want to be". It is the law of the world, barbarian culture dont value money, they value trading and Nobles have money whether GM wants it or not. Ofcourse as GM´s, you have the right to restrict certain aspects like money or magic. Not "barking" at you, just reminding that you are there to make players happy.
 
Hoitsu said:
It is the law of the world, barbarian culture dont value money, they value trading and Nobles have money whether GM wants it or not.

True, but the system only gives you money to buy starting equipment, it does not give comparable goods to a barbarian. Where is his starting 2d10 pigs?
 
Why would a barbarian want a pig? (Although I suppose a shaman might have a wild boar as a companion, assuming the shaman had an animal companion. That could be cool.)

One more thought before I go home and look stuff up is that with power comes responsibility. In my homebrew world of Audor, I informed players playing nobles that they had noble obligations. A noble in Runequest might also have obligations and expectations that he'd have to meet.

I remember that the Greeks were expected to own certain things such as a horse and armor if they belonged to the upper class. This could fit in well in a Runequest culture.

I have an idea that in the Prax area, perhaps a guy is supposed to give a gal a gift when he wishes to see her; a noble would be expected to give a more expensive gift than a commoner would.
 
Utgardloki said:
Why would a barbarian want a pig?

The point is their society is cash poor but they would have comparable other goods. Herding is a major part of part of many barbarian cultures, so I used pigs as an example. In Glorantha raiding the other clans herds is a regular pastime (kinda like football on sundays).
 
Do you really have follow the rules so strictly??? Come on, deside yourself what your players get and thats it. Anyway it is much easier that way
 
Hoitsu said:
Do you really have follow the rules so strictly??? Come on, deside yourself what your players get and thats it. Anyway it is much easier that way

Strictly following the rules is not the strong point of the posters around here. :p

That being said many players LIKE buying their starting equipment. Arbitrarily choosing what players start with is fine for some, but not everyone.
 
I have trouble with advetourers being Nobles.After all What Baron or such is going to let his heir go risk his life and limb as a mere adventourer. Even a lower ranking Noble would send a man at arms along to keep his child company if he became an adventourer.
But rather then say my players cannot pick the Noble class I offer them 2 options if they pick Noble.
1) Y ou are from a Noble family but have lost your lands because either your family has been driven into exile or the head of the family been convicted of some crime.
2) You are an aknowledge illegitimate child of a Noble( Your mother was a serving wench,slave, concubine or maybe even leather tanner) and your Father has plenty of legitimate heirs. He has paid for your education and starting equipment but now you need to make it on your own.Perhaps your Father wife or one of his legitimate heirs has it infor you and its not safe to stick around too much.
 
In my Cultures (Social Classes) and professions for Leshan, I'm giving Trappings (like in Warhammer) based on the social status (Including a home, I get tired of the 'homeless' adventurer), some common gear and a bit of cash. So far, it has worked out well.
I've gotten the Imperial culture pretty well hammered out and one of my buddies is working on the stuff for a neighboring region (kind of celtic / scots highlander based).

I've just started on the Elven culture native to the starting area, and will do the dwarves of the area next and then work my way out from there, but the Trappings idea is something I will use on all of them.

It allows those characters with a martial background to start with reasonable weapons and armor, based off their background and/or status, and prevents the peasant mercenary from being unable to have any armor or any decent weapons and I don't feel like it is too unwieldy to work with. (I've got some minor tweaking to do, but nothing major that we've found so far). I don't believe that the social classes should be 'balanced' in their gear.

Peasants are NOT going to be able to afford the same type stuff as a Noble. Just not gonna happen. However, by giving them stuff appropriate to their background and profession, they don't have to be nothing but ill-equipped cannon fodder either.

TROSE - I Like your idea regarding nobles.
 
The problem is that, in a peasant/citizen/noble trichotomy as much of the setting has, the peasant will have literally little that is in fact theirs. Barbarians will have almost nothing that isn't communal aside from personal wearing goods...

Citizens (residents of cities, the literal and original meaning of the term) will have more, but by and large, the sum total of their owned goods will be higher than peasantry and lower (by far) than the average nobleman, let alone the landed lords.

Oh, and pigs tend to be raised by peasants, rather than barbarians... goats, sheep, horses, dogs, and cattle tended to be the staples of the barbarians.

Peasants tended to have all the above around, but most were not theirs, but belonged either to the community or to the lord. Most of their belongings were, however, tools.

The Nobles, well, power and wealth are the defining features.
 
TRose said:
I have trouble with advetourers being Nobles.After all What Baron or such is going to let his heir go risk his life and limb as a mere adventourer. Even a lower ranking Noble would send a man at arms along to keep his child company if he became an adventourer.
But rather then say my players cannot pick the Noble class I offer them 2 options if they pick Noble.
1) Y ou are from a Noble family but have lost your lands because either your family has been driven into exile or the head of the family been convicted of some crime.
2) You are an aknowledge illegitimate child of a Noble( Your mother was a serving wench,slave, concubine or maybe even leather tanner) and your Father has plenty of legitimate heirs. He has paid for your education and starting equipment but now you need to make it on your own.Perhaps your Father wife or one of his legitimate heirs has it infor you and its not safe to stick around too much.


This makes perfect sense if you are usuaing the Englisn system of noblility. THe eldest sone inherients the tititl and land, so the other sons get nothing. If lucky they might get a postion as a hosehold knight at home, but often all they got were a horse, armor, a knighthood, and best wishes-if that.

Such a character would make an idea adventurer-since historically that is about the only thing they could do.
 
First, the modern tables, because these are simpler. Players roll 4d6 and drop the lowest die to determine their Wealth on a scale of 3-18. It's possible to raise your Wealth score as high as 21. (Science fiction games may allow Wealth to be raised farther.) I'm kind of fudging things on the low end of the scale, but keep in mind that this is includes the value of your property and all your possessions but not your debt, so if you have a house, there's about $100,000 or more right there, even if you are paying a mortgage.

Code:
Wealth
  3-4      1d10 dollars
  5-6      1d10 x 10 dollars
  7-8      1d10 x 100 dollars
  9-10    1d10 x 1000 dollars
  11-12  1d10 x 10,000 dollars
  13-14  1d10 x 100,000 dollars
  15-16  1d10 x 1,000,000 dollars
    17     1d10 x 10,000,000 dollars
    18     1d10 x 100,000,000 dollars
    19     1d10 x 1,000,000,000 dollars
    20     1d10 x 10,000,000,000 dollars
    21     1d10 x 100,000,000,000 dollars

Next, the archaic table. Again, scaling is on a 3-18 scale. It might be possible to provide for scores above 18, which would represent higher levels of nobility.

Code:
 3d6        Social Status           Income*
----            ------------            ------------
  3            Outlaw                  None
  4            Slave                   None
  5             Debtor                  See below**
 6-7            Impoverished            None
 8-9            Destitute               0-9 cp/month
10-11           Poor                    1d20 sp/month
12-13           Commoner                1d20 sp/week
14-15           Professional            5d10 sp/week
 16             Well-Off                1d10 gp/week
 17             Aristocrat              3d10 gp/week
 18             Noble                   1d100 gp/month

* In order to receive this income, the PC must establish a job appropriate to his social class, and maintain this job.  In the case of a destitute status, the job only takes up 1d30 days of the month;  the rest is free time in which he may do whatever he wishes.  Nobody really cares.

In the case of Poor, Commoner, Professional, and Well-Off characters, they must show up for work at least 5 days of every week, otherwise their weekly income is proportionately reduced.

In the case of the Well-Off, 10d10% of their income derives from their job, for which they must show up 5 days a week or have their weekly income reduced.  The rest derives from investments, inheritance, and other income sources that do not depend on the characters presence to accrue, but must accrue in a certain city.  The character must collect any funds from that city;  they do not follow him around.

The Aristocrat and the Noble are assumed not to have to do anything so mundane as to show up for work regularly, but must maintain a presence in order to keep their income streams.  Failure to make a presence 1d10 times a month will result in a 1d% reduction in income, down to a minimum of 10% income in the case of the Aristocrat, or a minimum of 50% income in the case of the Noble.

** Roll again for social class lifestyle.  If the result is Debtor again, treat as Impoverished.

Finally, I have a book that describes the four social classes in Athens. (It is The Cartoon History of the Universe by Larry Gonick.

The "Thetes" made less than 280 bushels of grain a year, or the equivalent in money.

The Zeugitae made 280-420 bushels, and had their own armor.

The Knights made 420-700 bushels, and had armor and a horse.

The "Seven Hundred Bushel Men" were men who made more than 700 bushels a year. He'd have a stable of horses, a purple coat, and a few golden dishes.
 
I was looking at my Social Status table document. Of course, it was made for a homebrew D&D game, but I figured it was unfair to deprive everybody of the brilliant prose I used to define the levels in the archaic social class table.

Obviously, any talk of "levels" or Diplomacy Skill Checks wouldn't apply in Runequest (although an RQ GM may use Influence Skill Checks and the levels in the MRQ rulebook for equivalent purposes). Prices may also be adjusted.

The social levels in the archaic table are:

Outlaw (3). Whether you are guilty or whether you are innocent, you are wanted by the law, and there is a price on your head, dead or alive. (The reward for bringing you to justice can be determined by multiplying your level by your charisma modifier -- minimum of +1 -- times 10 gold pieces.)

Slave (4). You are an escaped slave. Someone may or may not be looking for you. Or you may be a serf with no legal right to leave your farm, unless you can avoid the authorities for a year and a day.

Debtor (5). You are in debt. You are so far into debt that you are never going to get out. Think of what Han Solo owed to Jabba the Hutt. Your creditor will be expecting regular payments, or else. To determine your debt, multiply 3d6 by the normal starting gold of your level. As far as how much you have to pay to keep the debt collectors from collecting your kneecaps, the answer is whatever they can get away with. Roll again to determine what your actual social status is. Your debt is assumed to be high enough that it absorbs whatever wealth you may inherit from your actual social status, but debt collectors may let you keep a fraction of your income, if they like you. (You may make a Diplomacy Check to convince the debt collectors to keep that percentage of your income for living expenses.)

Impoverished (6-7). You are poor. You are so poor you do not get any starting money. You are so poor you have to buy used food. You are so poor, your bologna does not have a first name.

Destitute (8-9). Every once in a while you get to see money. Sometimes you are even allowed to touch money. Sometimes you can afford to eat, but if it was not for charity you would die of cold or starvation.

Poor (10-11). With careful management, you can afford to eat most days, and sometimes you even have enough money to make your rent payment on time. Being able to buy new clothes is a luxury that you can barely imagine -- if you do not absolutely need it to survive, you probably can not afford it.

Commoner (12-13). With careful management you can eat every day, and maybe meat once a week. You have enough money to keep the landlord happy, and can even afford to treat yourself or someone you like to a small present like a toy or candied pastry. Over a lifetime, those copper and silver pieces you manage to save may add up to something.

Professional (14-15). You no longer have to carefully ration every copper piece, as long as you can keep your spending somewhat under control. Maybe you can not afford anything really fancy, but you can buy decent clothes for yourself and your family, and can afford to accumulate possessions.

Well-Off (16). You have enough money that you do not have to worry about having enough money, as long as you do not get carried away with your spending. You can afford good clothes, good food, and good furniture for a nice living space. You may even have a summer and a winter home. You have a tendancy to round prices off to the nearest gold piece.

Aristocrat (17). You have so much money, that it is getting difficult to keep track of it all. Fine food, fine clothes, fine women; you are used to these things. There will always be some things you can not afford, but you have the cash to buy things that less well off men spend an entire lifetime saving enough money to afford.

Noble (18). You have a rank of nobility, albeit perhaps one of the lower ranks. Anybody can exhaust their wealth, but you would really have to work at it, although much of your wealth may be in land or buildings or other non-liquid assets.
 
As far as barbarians not having pigs.Depends on the barbarian. For historical examples, Barbarians from Southern, China, Non Muslim Maylays and people from the Pacific islands could be consider Barbarians befor the 15 century and pigs where a big part of their culture.
 
TRose said:
As far as barbarians not having pigs.Depends on the barbarian. For historical examples, Barbarians from Southern, China, Non Muslim Maylays and people from the Pacific islands could be consider Barbarians befor the 15 century and pigs where a big part of their culture.

The same is true for peoples other than barbarians too. Prior to the Rennassiance wealth was usually measured in terms of land, animals, and goods. Money was more the exception rathert than the rule.
 
Greetings

atgxtg said:
[
This makes perfect sense if you are usuaing the Englisn system of noblility. THe eldest sone inherients the tititl and land, so the other sons get nothing. If lucky they might get a postion as a hosehold knight at home, but often all they got were a horse, armor, a knighthood, and best wishes-if that.

Such a character would make an idea adventurer-since historically that is about the only thing they could do.

In fact (historically) many would go into the Church. Knighthood as a career fell off dramatically - there were IIRC several attempts by government to encourage more gentry to become knights. But in an RPG knight errants are a great tool.

Regards
 
Back
Top