Fun Stuff > MAKE

I'm making a video game! - and I could use your input/comments

<< < (2/7) > >>

oddtail:
(double post because if I keep editing the previous one, I will keep doing it forever)

@LTK: I hadn't heard of Twine, but I just checked it out and it might be just what I need for many of my purposes. It's immensely helpful, actually! I will almost certainly make large parts of the game in it before I go to any other platform. Thank you so much!

Cornelius:
Well, with the risk of complicating things, while at the same time oversimplifying; much depends on when and where exactly you are looking. While we speak of the Middle Ages as one period, there are vast differences between say, 800 and 1200. The development of cities, and the trade networks connected with that, formed a drastic change, with trade and banking, and, arguably, the first multinationals, there was a move away from the much more interdependent model of the earlier times.

One important factor is that the peasant is bound to the land, like the lord himself is also bound to the land. Neither can be ousted, unless it can be demonstrated that they neglect their duties. Add to that the existence of commons, and common rights in the forests and hunting preserves, and a peasant is not, in fact, dependent on the lord for sustenance. (Which, incidentally, was a consideration in the enclosure of commons in the later ages.) Peasants could do very well for themselves. The rise of a middle class of craftsmen and tradesmen testifies to that, to the extent that some trader's palaces are easily thought of as noble dwellings. Although I'll admit that that is more common in an urban environment.

And once we're talking about an urban environment, there's the guilds to consider. Much simplified, a guild acted as social security, trade union, and standards authority.

Regional differences also play a role; Brehon law, for instance, differs from English common law, differs from French law, et cetera. And customs, of course. Not to mention the ethnic and religious differences that might exist within certain regions. Generally, the Assizes of the Kingdom of Jerusalem are more or less accepted as an ideal representation of feodal law. Notably, trial by combat or ordeal is, if I remember correctly, not present there, having been outlawed by Rome some time earlier. In common law, it was still accepted - though the form differed greatly between regions - if decidedly uncommon. One mention of it in the 15th century shows that it was regarded as a spectacle, as it had been a century and a half since the last time anyone had called for it. Tellingly, most of the specatators, both common and noble, were utterly disgusted by it, and deemed it legal murder.

The divine right of kings, however, waxes and wanes. The way I see it, it's not been overly strong during most of the era - note also that there were several elective monarchies, that, aside from term limits, are perhaps not so very different from what some republics now practice. The idea was very much strengthened at the end, and later, when we really get absolutist kings, who not only reign, but rule. On the other hand, the idea of someone's place in life being predetermined to some extent, is present - but then, we find that same idea in most pre-christian societies as well.

You mention the military mighty. Until fairly late in the middle ages, that means, the person who can mobilise most people in his fief (and can find and retrieve the weapons and armour issued, as that often was repurposed to some more homely application, like jackchains being turned into hinges), and has the support of other lords, and vassals. And your levies might well appeal to justice, if you call them for reasons not within your rights and privileges to call them. Mercenaries did exist, but again, your fief, the support of vassals and peers, determines how many of them you can hire, and for how long. With the risk of, if you don't pay in time, having them turn against you. As such, your people, as much as your land, are your wealth and power. There might be a useful parallel there.

Again, with the risk of complicating things, whilst trying to summarise the highlights of about a millennium.

I entirely agree it is a good base for an allegory, though.

Edit: switching languages is not always good for spelling.

oddtail:
@Cornelius: I wrote and deleted like five responses. It's surprisingly difficult to articulate comments and questions about what I've been working on for years without writing a novel-length post.

Here's a more concise version:

I think I need to narrow down what elements of feudalism I need and why. Entire games, even genres, have been completely built around very narrow aspects of life associated with the Medieval period. I mean, there are literally video games that are about little else but building Medieval-style castles. Not warfare in general, just castles.

So, to narrow it down:

- I'm defaulting to Central or Eastern Europe, but that's mostly because it's what I can envision the best and probably know relatively more about.

- time period is tricky. Europe in AD 800 and Europe in AD 1450 obviously have very little in common with each other. I'm going for "little infrastructure, large areas of untamed land, large cities are becoming a factor but haven't risen to prominence yet". But that doesn't narrow it down even to a specific century, seeing as 12th century Sweden and 12th century Italy weren't exactly on a similar level of development.

- the "sapient animals" part complicates things too. Civilization doesn't exactly need to advance to tame the wilderness if the characters you meet ARE the wilderness. Overall, the medieval-influenced setting is secondary in my mind to the animal-like behaviour combined with human mental faculties. Mostly in a "culture and systems of power justify certain behaviours" way. As in, wolves being wolves and sheep being sheep, but pretending to be civilized about it.

- Early Medieval period makes sense in that the relationships between carnivore leaders and their soldiers would work best for the narrative if they were more personal, less formalized and less complex. I'm thinking 10th-11th century Poland, with no powerful overall authority on a very large scale and with local leaders more war heroes and gifted generals than anything else. But that clashes with the premise of "people accept the system", because I can't envision herbivores accepting a wolf's authority due to his personal charisma and war prowess. There *needs* to be an expectation of predetermined social roles for the setting to work, and from what I can gather, that solidified later than 10th century. Then again, animal species differ much more than different groups of humans, so that may have influenced the culture of the game's world a lot.

- another complicating matter is that I want the setting to be somewhat low-tech, the reasoning being that claws and teeth and horns are a good stand-in for weapons and help enhance the feeling that it's a story about civilized animals, not humans that look like wolves or oxen for extra flavour. And obviously, advanced weaponry and armor, not to mention firearms and big castles, would make claws and teeth as weapons of war seem a bit silly. I'm going for a "owning a sword is a big deal, even for a soldier" vibe. BUT, that creates a problem with the narrative, because the dynamic of losing what's yours doesn't work when there isn't a place that represents holding power (i.e. castle). So there's a conundrum - an impressive castle doesn't mesh with the overall need for a low-tech feel to emphasise the animal nature. No castle means the central conflict makes little sense or needs to be reworked - you can't lose your lands if owning your lands amounts to having a semi-nomadic lifestyle and basically treating a patch of forest as your hunting grounds. There's no big symbolic "loss" when there's betrayal or you lose a war (which is the inciting incident for the game), losing your hunting grounds to a stronger wolf pack would just require the heroine to retake that immediately or admit defeat. And that's not the dynamic I'm going for - it'd undermine the "left homeless" narrative.

These are some somewhat disconnected thoughts about the setting, without any real central point to them. I'm mostly trying to figure out a starting point for discussion of how feudalism would even work when a wolf protects villages in his/her domain in return of periodically being offered villagers to eat.

(and let's not get into demographics of sapient animals that have typical animal breeding habits and yet live in a humanlike way, have humanlike settlements etc. This is something that HAS to be delegated to "suspension of disbelief" completely, because there's no way to justify that without building the world completely from scratch and throwing out any similarity to the real world)

Cornelius:
I can understand it's difficult to reply concisely. Trying to capture an entire society is challenging, to say the least. But a few elements can go a long way to make a narrative.

As you say, location and exact time period do tend to go together. But as you're not aiming to make a historical game, it's not of very great importance. I can see what kind of society you're going for, though.

So, what I read is effectively an early mediaeval setting, where we have strong tribal influences, of bands gathering around heroes/warlords; much like how Tolkien (but not Jackson) envisioned his elves. Though I can't say for sure what was the case in 10th century Poland, in other places, the idea of distinct roles was present. It's amongst others one of the earliest datings of the Rígsţula, although that's been dated from the 10th to 12th century and back. 

There are animal dens, and you could consider territorial claims to water holes and such, as well. A castle being important, but not necessarily all that elaborate, would mesh well with an early medieval feeling.

Herbivores accepting a wolf's authority, could be managed by portraying a credible outside threat - Have you seen the havoc those boars wreak when they come to raid us? Or by some accepted rule of society - or mythology. The one doesn't preclude the other, as long as you can present a good narrative. Or you could look at Beowulf: what made Scyld a good king.

It might be inspiring to look at Reynard the Fox (Caxton's translation). It shows a feodal society, that's only just processing the change from common, customary law, to written law, with due process, with animals. There's not all that much description of the court and such - though it does preserve some Arthurian norms. There's humans in there, but they're not central to the plot.

oddtail:

--- Quote from: Cornelius on 26 Feb 2019, 06:07 ---So, what I read is effectively an early mediaeval setting, where we have strong tribal influences, of bands gathering around heroes/warlords; much like how Tolkien (but not Jackson) envisioned his elves.
--- End quote ---

Yes, that's pretty much what I meant. I think "Tolkien but not Jackson" sums it up perfectly. Tolkien has a semi-mythic and simultaneously very cosy and personal feel to the elves, especially within context of not just LotR, but also Silmarillion.


--- Quote ---There are animal dens, and you could consider territorial claims to water holes and such, as well. A castle being important, but not necessarily all that elaborate, would mesh well with an early medieval feeling.
--- End quote ---

I didn't even think of sources of water like watering holes as crucial, I sort of assumed by default that towns and cities are built near rivers. But "watering holes as important to the community" is actually brilliant and helps scale things way down, and also reinforce the idea that there aren't many big centres of civilization (cities and towns being replaced by communal burrows and whatnot). Also, puts more emphasis on hunting as part of everyday life. Being caught off-guard would be deadly, which - now that I think of it - might be interesting.

I vaguely remember from nature documentaries that wolves and animals they hunt don't really care much about each other when the wolves are not hunting. A wolf may be within a few feet of a group of bison, and they will not even bother to lift their heads to look. But when a group of wolves move in hunting formation, bison get jittery and soon run away or attempt to chase the wolves off.

I'm thinking of replicating a similar dynamic culturally. Herbivores casually interact with carnivores in certain social settings, but a meeting out in the wild is dangerous and makes the prey wary. I suppose a naturally fearful species could come to accept feudalism if it meant the everyday fear of being eaten goes away. A savage rabbit is afraid of any savage wolf he meets. A rabbit peasant meets a wolf knight with no fear, because they both have "an understanding". A community of rabbits lives in peace, and drawing lots in winter to send a few of their own to certain death may seem like a small price to pay.

I mean, from a human perspective, it seems perverse and crazy. But making it part of rabbit culture would be just alien enough to be interesting. I think I had a seed of that idea before, but your comments helped me formulate it clearly - so thanks for the help!


--- Quote ---Herbivores accepting a wolf's authority, could be managed by portraying a credible outside threat - Have you seen the havoc those boars wreak when they come to raid us? Or by some accepted rule of society - or mythology. The one doesn't preclude the other, as long as you can present a good narrative.
--- End quote ---

I actually hadn't thought of that, but it makes sense. I think I was subconsciously applying modern notions of mortality to a medieval setting, to an extent. In modern world, if someone dies, it's rare and terrible. In pre-Industrial times, death to disease, hunger or accidents was a fact of life. I suppose protection from some the realities of everyday life (like the scary outsiders) seems like a pretty sweet deal in a dangerous world - at least to some. And others don't exactly have much of a choice if that's the social expectation.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page