How do politics in dnd, and how do I get my players involved?
Politics in Tabletop
Dylan Miller
Chase Clark
We're gonna build a wall around the town and make the Orcs pay for it.
Julian Perry
D&D doesn't really do politics well because the nature of PC class characters and magic is such that, generally speaking, their very existence breaks the idea of almost every political system that ever existed in the real world.
The only form of government that really makes sense in D&D is a Mage Oligarchy or some kind of Autocracy run by a God-King who's really just a high level wizard or bard or cleric. Or maybe he's actually a god.
For games with strong political themes you either need a very disciplined group who can suspend their disbelief (not bad things at all, in fact D&D groups tend to be pretty good at this once they've been playing together for a while) or you need to play a game whose mechanics support that sort of thing.
Personally my favorite games for this sort of thing are Cyberpunk 2020 and The Riddle of Steel, but obviously you can make it work with GURPS, Shadowrun, Cyberpunk 2020, etc.
As for getting the players involved, it helps for them to have something to latch on to. It has to be something understandable to them, not everyone is a polsci major. It also helps a LOT if you're not doing modern politics. Modern politics are really depressing when you look under the hood, medieval politics just get cooler.
Chase Johnson
You'd probably pee on them.
Lincoln Phillips
>The only form of government that really makes sense in D&D is a Mage Oligarchy or some kind of Autocracy run by a God-King who's really just a high level wizard or bard or cleric. Or maybe he's actually a god.
Well, in 3.5. Not so much other editions. In 4e a Fighter could kick the shit out of said wizard if he's a comparable level.
Levi Moore
That is probably true, I did not play 4.0. The point however is that the existence of magic that can influence people or do other powerful things does change fundamentally what kind of governments would be viable. If 4th edition limits magic down to a more manageable level then it would fall into the other type of game.
Nolan Miller
>implying a fighter would get to 1v1 an archmage for the leadership position
I don't think that's how it works.
But even accepting your point, this only means the autocracy may be run by a God-King who is the biggest baddest most lethal dude in the realm. Still nothing that you see IRL for anything bigger than a jungle tribe or bandit group.
Levi Adams
>Still nothing that you see IRL for anything bigger than a jungle tribe or bandit group.
Right, but it's a pretty accepted trope for someone in a position of authority to be a tremendous badass. It's not like being a huge fucking nerd makes you an able ruler either.
Luke Clark
It doesn't limit magic (Well, a bit. Rituals take time rather than a standard action) so much as it brings non-mages up tot he same level.
Anthony Harris
I mean what people can do in combat isn't really the point, it's how much that can help you run a country. Can you charm large numbers of people, force your viziers to tell the truth, essentially mind control your own bodyguards so that they can't possibly betray you, etc. The ability to like physically beat the shit out of your enemies whether it's with magic or with a sword isn't what breaks D&D from a political perspective, it's the far-reaching powers that magic would give someone in government.