In Defense of Medieval Gaming

The Middle Ages comprise the medieval period of European history, from the fall of Rome to the beginning of the Renaissance, spanning the period from roughly 400 A.D.-1350 A.D. This era covers almost a thousand years and is often portrayed as a period of decline, bordered by two eras of high civilization.

The very term “medieval” is often used as a synonym for “primitive” or “uncivilized”. Petty feudal states and religious institutions come to mind. However, the medieval era was also one of rapid progress and development. The establishment of the Christian church, the unification of hundreds of feudal states into kingdoms and duchies, the era laid down the cornerstones for modern technology and constitution. Without the chaos of the Middle Ages, there could never have been the order and enlightenment of the Renaissance.

The Middle Ages offer everything we recognize from the classic fantasy setting. On top of that we get everything history has to offer. It is probably the largest and most detailed game setting in existence. And at the same time, a highly mystery-filled one.

An often used argument against the use of historical game settings is that running such a story-line places a heavy burden on the shoulders of the master who must — in order to make the illusion complete — be very familiar with the workings, the characters, and the philosophies of the Middle Ages. This is true. It is heavy reading, but once done, — welcome to a fairytale realm of epic knights and holy quests, of treacherous princes and self-sacrificing priests, of scheming popes, and 14-year-old peasant girls leading armies into battle.

The Middle Ages setting is the foundation of all fantasy worlds. It has the swords, and if the master allows it, the sorcery. It has the feudal lords, the petty power disputes, the men of often quite interesting (mis-)education, the travelers, the mercenaries, the princesses, the wars, the heretics, the chivalry, the brutality, and the challenges that comprise everything known as fantasy gaming. What’s even better, it is the most documented setting in existence. The source material is fairly unlimited (though sometimes you have to look in really strange places for it).

In the medieval world you do not need to ask yourself whether kings really go and make such a blundering stupid decision as your plot requires, because they do. You do not need to worry whether this or that weapon would be superior to that or the other one, because history has already proven which one was the better. You don’t need to sit up all night wondering what will happen in the political world, because it is all in the books. You don’t need to be concerned whether this or that trinket or piece of information is available or even invented yet, because your encyclopedia holds the answer.

This leaves you as a master and scenario-writer in a wonderful situation. With all the background footwork done by history itself, you can focus on how to entertain and challenge your players. The stage and the backdrop have been readied for you in advance. You can go directly to creating the story-line, that which is the truly fun part of authoring a game.

In a manner of speaking, history does lay restrictions on itself. These and those things did happen, no matter what your player characters think about it. This is quite hard to dispute with. History runs its course, and the characters pretty much have to run along. But so does any other setting, unless the characters comprise the key figures in control — the kings, or even the gods. Part of storyline creation is deciding how to handle challenging the player characters, and deal with creating opposition and interaction. In this respect, having access to more than a thousand years of recorded history is a great thing.

Fantasy versus history: Magic or not?

A major argument against the historical setting is that the setting does not comprise magic — the trademark of the fantasy setting. However, this need not be true. Medieval man lived in a world brimming with magic. Sorcery, creatures wonderful and terrifying, dragons, angels with flaming swords — these creatures were really believed to exist. Angels spoke to Joan of Arc. St. George did kill the dragon. King Arthur was really swept away to rest in the fairy kingdom.

Your players may attempt to argue that this is all superstition and myth. That makes no difference to the medieval character who knows better, though. And this in turn means that the master can introduce pretty much any sorcery or supernatural entity he desires, as long as he stays within the very wide range of medieval storytelling. Medieval characters know that magic and fearsome beasts exist. There is no reason as to why a medieval adventurer would fail to come across examples of this.

Magic will never be an every day occurrence in a historic setting, but when it does indeed make its appearance, it does so with force. The average knight does not own an enchanted blade. When he faces the rare opponent who does, he’s in trouble. But if he is victorious, he can claim that great blade for himself, increasing his own powers — and making him a target of church interest. You never expect the Inquisition!

Playing historical characters

When a player asks to play a specific, documented character out of history, little danger bells go off. What parts of history would be affected by the person behaving differently than he did in actual history? What if Philip IV of France had not ordered the arrest of the Knights Templar? What if Joan of Arc had married the boy next door?

History is most commonly recorded depicting the decision-makers. If a player fails to have his character make the same choice as his historic counterpart did, trouble may pop up. This is no big deal for a one-shot scenario where it doesn’t really matter whether John Bruce of Scotland paid homage to Edward II in 1306 or not. In a continuous storyline it can screw up everything as the master will have to rewrite history from that point and up.

There isn’t even any valid reason for players to demand to play historic characters. Any baron or knight had a good chance of being where the action was. Players who want to play kings and popes will most likely face finding themselves in armed conflict with each other and caught up in political schemes that quickly turn boring to play. If the lust for power is the real motivation, remind your players that there was next to nothing a medieval nobleman could not do, as long as he was not openly acting against his king or church.

Which character ‘castes’ are preferable?

All classes of society are available in the medieval world, but some are definitely more exciting than others. The choice should be based on what kind of story the master intends to tell. Peasants who never leave their home village can be fun to play, but will require some rather innovative storytelling to STAY fun in the long run. The most obvious choices center around warriors and politicians or the combination of both. Knights are fun; peasants have dull lives. Holy knights have lots of fun; parish priests do not. Missionaries and doomsday preachers have fun; scribes and clerks get bored. Sergeants and mercenaries are fun; footmen in some nobleman’s army are miserable.

The characters must retain their choice of loyalty and action regardless of their class or birth. As long as the characters are allowed to travel where they want and to throw in their loyalty with whom they desire, they can be anything.

Choosing a level of society for a storyline

In traditional fantasy, the characters commonly are free men (or women) of the middle or upper classes. Sometimes they come from more humble origins, or they are noble of birth, but they are rarely the great decision-makers who determine the outcome of history. They work their way up to becoming rulers and guides of society, but this is a task of a lifetime of effort. The historical setting is not much different from the fantasy setting in this respect.

Choosing an era for a storyline

From our modern point of view, the ideals and the way people lived them in the Middle Ages shift rapidly. Playing knights (as in “do-goody type in plate mail”) is one thing in the 12th century and an entirely different thing in the 15th.

During the 10-12th centuries, the medieval setting is barbaric, sanguine, and violent, but in some fashion also very honest and straightforward. Morals and ethics differ from our own, but at least the leaders of the era made no great secret of what they wanted. Ideals were served, whether ecclesiastical, chivalric, or financial, with brutal, honest efficiency.

This changes in the era of 13th-16th century Europe. Suddenly ideal and fact become two different things. Lies and deceit become the standard. Kings and men of power betray each other to the best of their abilities. On the other hand, this era allows common man — at least if he could read and write — begin to appear where the action was. Knighthood and nobility became decadent, often depraved, but the bourgeoisie began to grow in power.

The choice of era should reflect what storyline is intended. If you wish to describe knightly prowess, honorable ideals, glorious battles, and lots of loot, the crusading era (1080-1291) is a good choice. A story of intrigue, policy, betrayal, commerce, and exploration would call for a later century.

Medieval religion

Without the power and impact of religion, the medieval setting collapses. When the medieval setting demands that the characters are thoroughly Christian, that they have no doubt of the existence of God, or the power of the Pope, they know for certain that Heaven and Hell exist, and they’re bound for either. Religion in the medieval world is as much a part of daily life as is breathing. Excluding this aspect from the setting is like excluding weapons or food.

Stats on historical characters

We don’t know enough about the majority of historical characters to do well putting them on game stats. If their present considered them to be heroes, their feats are greatly exaggerated in literature — and the same goes for villains who are unusually stupid, cruel, or wanton. The victor does get to write the history book.

You will have to decide on your own what stats to put on the historical characters your players will encounter. Base your choices on A) what is known about these people, B) what the character must have been able to do in order to achieve his position, and C), what you need for him to be able to do in your storyline. If you’re running a campaign depicting Richard I’s siege of Damascus, it is important that you keep straight what you’re dealing with.

A) King Richard was a man of physical strength, a skilled soldier (but not a political genius). He has handsome, chivalric (when he wanted to be), cruel to his enemies, and often perceived as ‘one of the boys’ by his soldiers and knights. Some historians believe that he had a homosexual relationship with King Phillip II of France.

B) Ricky must have had some brawl and battle skill in order to obtain the warrior’s reputation he did, but he was not necessarily any bright intellect. He was no great statesman, he tried to pawn London once, and he perceived himself as a French ruler of English peasants. He must have been physically attractive, since all legends call him beautiful, and he must have been charismatic on order to inspire the following and respect even his English subjects had of him.

C) You’re in need of a warrior king whom the knight characters take their orders from. He must be respected for his battle skill and leadership — his appearance/charisma and physical stats are in the high end. Intelligence-related skills need not be. You will be prioritizing his battle and siege skills, whereas more chivalrous skills such as etiquette, education and social skills may not require as much attention. Since he became the legend he did (read Robin Hood!), you may want to boost his charismatic characteristics a good bit above normal for humans in your game system.

Conclusion

The Middle Ages comprise research, homework, and a number of traps where technology and evolution is concerned, and the risk of making major changes to history. It excludes most action on behalf of female characters because woman was held in low esteem during this age. It has the advantages of good documentation, mapping, and debate, as well as it contains everything familiar from fantasy settings.