I have a question for those used to worldbuilding in D&D-tradition

File: 1494260719467.jpg (72KB, 564x797px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 564x797px

>>53625459
Literally just say that there is aristocrats, but also free commerce. Players won't really get the incompatibility, I know I don't

>>53625781

These people are absolute nerds in the humanities, though

Aristocrats draw magical power from their domains. A duke, a king, or an emperor should be treated as a level fifteen or greater caster class in terms of raw stats. Peasant rebellions tend to spontaneously combust. So long as commerce doesn't move the borders and the taxes get paid every year, the aristocracy doesn't give a hoot about merchants.

>>53625781
There's not an absolute incompatibility between the two.

The Merchant class simply isn't able to collect rents from peasants and is therefore never able to become richer than the Nobility even if they own property (their house).

>>53625459
What is a 'freer level of commerce' to you?
A 'Free City' as in the HRE might be something you should research, depending on how you interpret that phrase.

>>53625995
To further elaborate:

Let's say your a burgher or merchant who needs something built, you have to hire people and buy supplies, where as a Lord is entitled to a certain amount of physical labor spent building things on his behalf, using wood from his own land, one is much more expensive than the other.

>>53625459
Market could be free but if merchants are disallowed from owning land they will be locked out from a huge source of wealth. In preindustrial society land made up over 80% of all wealth.

>>53625459
Mafia families are merchant aristocrats

>>53625459
Dragonmarked

>>53625459
>>53625946
What you're looking for is called a Plutocracy, where the wealthy make the social decisions and are the rulers - not just behind the scenes like in every other society ever, but for realsies. Money is best measured in land and livestock and other matters, and if you have enough of those you're considered of the ruling class. If you fall below the threshold, you're kicked out. This is basically how Carthage functioned.

Once people are in power, they like to be entrenched in power. Following that it's a simple matter of establishing inheritance and debt laws that strongly favor land owners and dynasties. At that point you're a landed noble in all but name, the only difference is you aren't cloaking it in divine mandate.

Hell, if you worship a commerce diety like Waukeen, you CAN cloak it in divine mandate

>>53625459
>you know, is there a smart way to do this where you can assume a freer level of commerce without obliterating the idea of a formalized aristocracy?

This happened in the West well into the 19th century, anon.

Old-fashioned nobles enter the modern age with a head-start. They retain their titles, retain their lands, and retain their wealth. Now they're wealthy landowners with fancy titles in 1850 and recognized as nobility. The political power isn't inherent to the station, but it might as well be.

>>53629315
>>53629286
Combine these to have fun economic friction between the old money and new money and what is essentially a society going through the birthing pains of the Renaissance!