World Design - Agriculture & Nutrition

[ivan]

Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?

I found some data on wheat farming - how many people the average wheat
farmer could feed and how much surplus he produced - but I need more
details. Specifically, I need the equivalent info for barley farming,
and the yield per acre of each grain. I'm trying to generate some
population densities for various parts of my world. Any help?

Thanks.

[No 33 Secretary]

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?
I found some data on wheat farming - how many people the average wheat
farmer could feed and how much surplus he produced - but I need more
details. Specifically, I need the equivalent info for barley farming,
and the yield per acre of each grain. I'm trying to generate some
population densities for various parts of my world. Any help?

Google is your friend.

http://www.hyw.com/Books/History/Agricult.htm (about a third of the way
down, though it's in literes instead of bushels).

http://www.minarsas.demon.co.uk/harn/farming/calendar.htm
(some of it is Harn-specific, but it's based on some solid research - Andy
knows his shit.)

If you want more, gogole on "medieival crop yields" (without the quotes).

[Zenobia]

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 22:58:01 -0000, No 33 Secretary

Post by No 33 Secretary

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?
I found some data on wheat farming - how many people the average wheat
farmer could feed and how much surplus he produced - but I need more
details. Specifically, I need the equivalent info for barley farming,
and the yield per acre of each grain. I'm trying to generate some
population densities for various parts of my world. Any help?

Google is your friend.
http://www.hyw.com/Books/History/Agricult.htm (about a third of the way
down, though it's in literes instead of bushels).

: A horse, an ox, or a wife, was used to pull the plow
I can't get my head around the idea of a wife being used to pull
the plough. I think 2 oxen are far more likely. By definition,
an acre is the area of land that could be ploughed in one day
(using a saxon plough with 2 oxen to pull it). I doubt that the
wife would be able to pull the plough 10 yards.

:Romans had been avid students of agriculture
- the Romans stole many of their ideas from the Carthaginians
who wrote text books on, for instance, the agriculture of the
vine. (Just about the only thing the Romans kept of the
Carthaginian civilization, after destroying it were the books on
agriculture which, I believe, they promptly gave themselves
credit for writing.

[David Johnston]

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:39:29 +0100, Zenobia

Post by Zenobia
On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 22:58:01 -0000, No 33 Secretary

Post by No 33 Secretary

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?
I found some data on wheat farming - how many people the average wheat
farmer could feed and how much surplus he produced - but I need more
details. Specifically, I need the equivalent info for barley farming,
and the yield per acre of each grain. I'm trying to generate some
population densities for various parts of my world. Any help?

Google is your friend.
http://www.hyw.com/Books/History/Agricult.htm (about a third of the way
down, though it's in literes instead of bushels).

: A horse, an ox, or a wife, was used to pull the plow
I can't get my head around the idea of a wife being used to pull
the plough. I think 2 oxen are far more likely.

When available, that was true. Using your wife as a draft animal
was only done by the poorest men living on very small farms.

[Zenobia]

Post by David Johnston
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:39:29 +0100, Zenobia

Post by Zenobia
On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 22:58:01 -0000, No 33 Secretary

Post by No 33 Secretary

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?
I found some data on wheat farming - how many people the average wheat
farmer could feed and how much surplus he produced - but I need more
details. Specifically, I need the equivalent info for barley farming,
and the yield per acre of each grain. I'm trying to generate some
population densities for various parts of my world. Any help?

Google is your friend.
http://www.hyw.com/Books/History/Agricult.htm (about a third of the way
down, though it's in literes instead of bushels).

: A horse, an ox, or a wife, was used to pull the plow
I can't get my head around the idea of a wife being used to pull
the plough. I think 2 oxen are far more likely.

When available, that was true. Using your wife as a draft animal
was only done by the poorest men living on very small farms.

I'd love to see a demonstration of two people using a medieval
(wooden) plough in this way. I recon even Arni Schwarzenegger
would have problems.

I doubt two people would be able to get an acre ploughed in a
week even with 6 months practice beforehand.

[David Johnston]

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 23:08:54 +0100, Zenobia

Post by Zenobia
I doubt two people would be able to get an acre ploughed in a
week even with 6 months practice beforehand.

People that poor didn't _have_ an acre.

[Terry Austin]

Post by David Johnston
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 23:08:54 +0100, Zenobia

Post by Zenobia
I doubt two people would be able to get an acre ploughed in a
week even with 6 months practice beforehand.

People that poor didn't _have_ an acre.

Then they died. You can't support even one person on that little land.

On the other hand, there are techniques for human pulled ploughs, no matter
how ignorant Zenobia might be of them.

[Zenobia]

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 20:26:06 -0000, Terry Austin

Post by Terry Austin
there are techniques for human pulled ploughs, no matter
how ignorant Zenobia might be of them.

So how do they do that? Have you ever tried pulling a metal
spade though earth let alone a wooden plough?

A plough works due to the pulling force. The person at the back
applies slight downward pressure and steers.

[Terry Austin]

Post by Zenobia
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 20:26:06 -0000, Terry Austin

Post by Terry Austin
there are techniques for human pulled ploughs, no matter
how ignorant Zenobia might be of them.

So how do they do that?

Sweat.

Post by Zenobia
Have you ever tried pulling a metal
spade though earth let alone a wooden plough?
A plough works due to the pulling force. The person at the back
applies slight downward pressure and steers.

More or less. It's slower, and turns less earth at a time, because humans
can exert less force than oxen or horses. But it is, in fact, how it was
done at some times and places.

Deal with it.

[marc17]

Post by Terry Austin

Post by David Johnston
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 23:08:54 +0100, Zenobia
People that poor didn't _have_ an acre.

Then they died. You can't support even one person on that little land.

Well, I seem to understand that people did this all the time. Die that
is.

I don't think you can really discuse such a thing too much without
talking about the current social structure. I find it suspicious that
a poor couple would have a plow but no oxen as most of the texts I
read seem to indicate that both were usually communal property due to
expense. Perhaps a wooden scratch plow. They could be reduced to such
because they also farm communal lands which they may or may not get
some of the produce from. Then they might only have an acre or less
that is actually their land and may or may not get to use the communal
resources. But, I would also gather that if it was get the wife out in
front of the plow or starve, that they'd find a way and make it work.

[Mitch Williams]

You may also want to see if you can find a copy of "HARN Manor". This book
goes into great detail about how many farmers and what crops you need to
feed people in a realistic setting.

Mitch

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?
I found some data on wheat farming - how many people the average wheat
farmer could feed and how much surplus he produced - but I need more
details. Specifically, I need the equivalent info for barley farming,
and the yield per acre of each grain. I'm trying to generate some
population densities for various parts of my world. Any help?
Thanks.

[Peter Knutsen]

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?
I found some data on wheat farming - how many people the average wheat
farmer could feed and how much surplus he produced - but I need more
details. Specifically, I need the equivalent info for barley farming,
and the yield per acre of each grain. I'm trying to generate some
population densities for various parts of my world. Any help?

There's an entry in this article on crop yields
< http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/agricult.htm >

There's also this article, which is good, but doesn't directly
address the subject of crop yields <
http://www.io.com/~sjohn/demog.htm >. Instead if talks about
population densities

Note that Ross' article in particular assume three-field crop
rotation. That wasn't done in the very early medieval period,
meaning crop yields were a lot lower. ISTR Jeff's article
addressing the issue, but it's some years since I read it.

As for Terry's suggestion, be mindful of the fact that not
everyone agrees on how to spell "medieval". So try using several
variant spellings, when you search.

[s***@sonic.net]

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?

One of the issues that is becomming increasingly problematic for me is
the question of just *how* clear a parallel can be drawn from historical
data to the common FRP tropes (particularly the high-fantasy ones, such
as D&D's). I find it wildly improbably that high-magic worlds wouldn't
engage in food-production magic on a regular basis... ripen a crop a mere
week after planting? Why not? Harvest a bushel a day (year-round) from
a small backyard plot... sure! A milk-cow that gives as much as you
want *whenever* you want? Easy! Etc etc etc...

I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

YMMV, of course!

[Peter Knutsen]

Post by s***@sonic.net
One of the issues that is becomming increasingly problematic for me is
the question of just *how* clear a parallel can be drawn from historical
data to the common FRP tropes (particularly the high-fantasy ones, such
as D&D's). I find it wildly improbably that high-magic worlds wouldn't
engage in food-production magic on a regular basis... ripen a crop a mere
week after planting? Why not? Harvest a bushel a day (year-round) from
a small backyard plot... sure! A milk-cow that gives as much as you
want *whenever* you want? Easy! Etc etc etc...

In most thoughtfully created settings, magic which is that
powerful is either exceedingly rare, or else completely nonexistent.

Post by s***@sonic.net
I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

That's because you haven't realized that magic should work "on
top" of mundane activities, rather than replace them.

[David Meadows]

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
One of the issues that is becomming increasingly problematic for me is
the question of just *how* clear a parallel can be drawn from historical
data to the common FRP tropes (particularly the high-fantasy ones, such
as D&D's). I find it wildly improbably that high-magic worlds wouldn't
engage in food-production magic on a regular basis... ripen a crop a mere
week after planting? Why not? Harvest a bushel a day (year-round) from
a small backyard plot... sure! A milk-cow that gives as much as you
want *whenever* you want? Easy! Etc etc etc...

In most thoughtfully created settings, magic which is that
powerful is either exceedingly rare, or else completely nonexistent.

Post by s***@sonic.net
I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

That's because you haven't realized that magic should work "on
top" of mundane activities, rather than replace them.

No, magic *can* work on top of mundane activities rather than replace them.
There is no reason why it *should*. There is scope for both types of world,
though the one where magic is so pervasive and powerful that it can replace
all mundane activities probably need a bit more thought to make it work.

[Tetsubo]

One of the issues that is becoming increasingly problematic for me is
the question of just *how* clear a parallel can be drawn from historical
data to the common FRP tropes (particularly the high-fantasy ones, such
as D&D's). I find it wildly improbably that high-magic worlds wouldn't
engage in food-production magic on a regular basis... ripen a crop a mere
week after planting? Why not? Harvest a bushel a day (year-round) from
a small backyard plot... sure! A milk-cow that gives as much as you
want *whenever* you want? Easy! Etc etc etc...

In most thoughtfully created settings, magic which is that powerful is
either exceedingly rare, or else completely nonexistent.

I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

That's because you haven't realized that magic should work "on top" of
mundane activities, rather than replace them.

I guess I've always seen magic being a great deal like electricity.
At first it was "on top" of an otherwise non-electrical world. But very
shortly it permeated the very fabric of the entire world. There are
still places that don't have electricity of course. But they would love
to have it if they could. I see magic as another type of technology. It
has a lot more "oh shiny" aspects to it but it still must be logically
applied. Unless of course magic in your campaign is fueled by Chaos...

[s***@sonic.net]

Post by Peter Knutsen
In most thoughtfully created settings, magic which is that
powerful is either exceedingly rare, or else completely nonexistent.

Erm. YMMV, and I strongly suspect that it does. Please get a bit
more specific... "most thoughtfully created settings"? What about
the main D&D worlds (the FR setting, Dragonlance, etc)?

I'll go ahead and use D&D as the reference standard because... well, it
*IS* the reference standard of gaming (i.e. more people have played
some version of D&D than any other RPG, so it serves the most likely
common basis for discussion).

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

That's because you haven't realized that magic should work "on
top" of mundane activities, rather than replace them.

Why d'ya think I specified uber-productivity, rather than just an
"Everfull Bushel-Basket" or a "Milk-Pitcher of Continual Pouring"?
This is my preferred way to look at it. As I see it, growing a real
crop (then using magic to get a season's harvest every week) *IS*
working "on top" of the mundane activity. If you're working off of
a different perspective, please *do* expand...

But, I'm forced to point out that standard D&D items include such
things as "Decanter of Endless Water" & "Myrlund's Spoon" & "Bottle
of Air" -- creating useful stuff in quantity, WITHOUT being "on top
of" any mundane source of the thing-created. These things clearly
establish that, in D&D, healthful sustenance can be had from items
of only minor to medium power.

Surely, vermin-control and boosting productivity are fairly minor
magics in comparison. How many "Decanters of Endless Water" would
it take to prevent a drought from signifigantly impacting a farming
village, hmm? Here's what the DMG 3.0 has to say:
30gal/rd * 10rd/min * 60min/hr * 24hr/day = 432000 gallons / day

I honestly can't see that, in a D&Desque world, medieval European data
on crop-yield and population-density are terribly relevant. I'd be
quite delighted to be shown the error of my ways... I cordially
invite you to do so.

[Peter Knutsen]

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by Peter Knutsen
In most thoughtfully created settings, magic which is that
powerful is either exceedingly rare, or else completely nonexistent.

Erm. YMMV, and I strongly suspect that it does. Please get a bit
more specific... "most thoughtfully created settings"? What about
the main D&D worlds (the FR setting, Dragonlance, etc)?

D&D is, *sincerely*, not the place to go look for thoughtfully
created settings.

Post by s***@sonic.net
I'll go ahead and use D&D as the reference standard because... well, it
*IS* the reference standard of gaming (i.e. more people have played
some version of D&D than any other RPG, so it serves the most likely
common basis for discussion).

The D&D rules care only about combat and other activities
related to dungeoncrawling, hence its magic system is a
grotesquely bad basis from which to extrapolate a magical world.

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

That's because you haven't realized that magic should work "on
top" of mundane activities, rather than replace them.

Why d'ya think I specified uber-productivity, rather than just an
"Everfull Bushel-Basket" or a "Milk-Pitcher of Continual Pouring"?
This is my preferred way to look at it. As I see it, growing a real
crop (then using magic to get a season's harvest every week) *IS*
working "on top" of the mundane activity. If you're working off of

But it's ridiculously powerful.

Post by s***@sonic.net
a different perspective, please *do* expand...
But, I'm forced to point out that standard D&D items include such

Yes, that's why I specified "thoughtfully created" worlds. D&D
and "thoughtful" don't go together.

Post by s***@sonic.net
things as "Decanter of Endless Water" & "Myrlund's Spoon" & "Bottle
of Air" -- creating useful stuff in quantity, WITHOUT being "on top
of" any mundane source of the thing-created. These things clearly
establish that, in D&D, healthful sustenance can be had from items
of only minor to medium power.
Surely, vermin-control and boosting productivity are fairly minor
magics in comparison. How many "Decanters of Endless Water" would
it take to prevent a drought from signifigantly impacting a farming
30gal/rd * 10rd/min * 60min/hr * 24hr/day = 432000 gallons / day
I honestly can't see that, in a D&Desque world, medieval European data
on crop-yield and population-density are terribly relevant. I'd be

It seems as if you are coming out of the closet as one who
ascribes no value to thoughtfully created settings.

Post by s***@sonic.net
quite delighted to be shown the error of my ways... I cordially
invite you to do so.

[s***@sonic.net]

Post by Peter Knutsen
D&D is, *sincerely*, not the place to go look for thoughtfully
created settings.

OK. As I mentioned, I've found it impossible to ask the "thoughtful"
questions in D&Desque settings. In the presumption that the original
poster may have been asking after historical data to "improve" a D&D
type setting, I was suggesting that most D&D tropes are essentially
incompatible with authentic medievalism.

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
I'll go ahead and use D&D as the reference standard because... well, it
*IS* the reference standard of gaming (i.e. more people have played
some version of D&D than any other RPG, so it serves the most likely
common basis for discussion).

The D&D rules care only about combat and other activities
related to dungeoncrawling, hence its magic system is a
grotesquely bad basis from which to extrapolate a magical world.

Eh. I'll take issue with the use of "only" -- but I'll freely grant
you "primarily" and even "overwhelmingly." Hopefully, this still
leaves us room to talk... ;-) But IMHO the D&D magic-system doesn't
"fit" well with the pseudo-medieval worlds of "classic D&D" (e.g.
Greyhawk, the Realms, Krynn, et al).

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

That's because you haven't realized that magic should work "on
top" of mundane activities, rather than replace them.

I reiterate and expand: to accept medieval-ish "peasants-in-the-fields
imagery" alongside the "high fantasy" tropes requires some level of one
or more of the following:
(a) not asking after detailed historical data,
(b) coming up with explanations of how potent, reliable magic has left
mundane/historical society & culture unimpacted
(c) handwaving the issues away, and playing in a world that "doesn't
make sense"
Magic, if potent/reliable/widespread/unhidden, *MUST* change the look&feel
of a culture from the "medieval european" pastiche of D&D. If you want
that flavor -- say, Europe of about 750ad through 1350ad -- you can't have
D&Desque magic with D&Desque commonality/acceptance of magic.

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
Why d'ya think I specified uber-productivity, rather than just an
"Everfull Bushel-Basket" or a "Milk-Pitcher of Continual Pouring"?
This is my preferred way to look at it. As I see it, growing a real
crop (then using magic to get a season's harvest every week) *IS*
working "on top" of the mundane activity. If you're working off of

But it's ridiculously powerful.

Yeah.

Post by Peter Knutsen
Yes, that's why I specified "thoughtfully created" worlds. D&D
and "thoughtful" don't go together.

Yeah.

Post by Peter Knutsen
It seems as if you are coming out of the closet as one who
ascribes no value to thoughtfully created settings.

Not at all. I quite enjoy them. I haven't abandoned D&D, however, and
in the absence of definitive info to the contrary I assume it as an
"industry norm."

The original inquirer has given more info now, and I join others in
suggesting he look at "Harn". In brief, magic is recently returned to
the world; as a new phenomenon, it hasn't yet made any sweeping changes.
We don't (yet) know how he sees it changing things for the future...

[David Johnston]

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by Peter Knutsen
D&D is, *sincerely*, not the place to go look for thoughtfully
created settings.

OK. As I mentioned, I've found it impossible to ask the "thoughtful"
questions in D&Desque settings. In the presumption that the original
poster may have been asking after historical data to "improve" a D&D
type setting, I was suggesting that most D&D tropes are essentially
incompatible with authentic medievalism.

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
I'll go ahead and use D&D as the reference standard because... well, it
*IS* the reference standard of gaming (i.e. more people have played
some version of D&D than any other RPG, so it serves the most likely
common basis for discussion).

The D&D rules care only about combat and other activities
related to dungeoncrawling, hence its magic system is a
grotesquely bad basis from which to extrapolate a magical world.

Eh. I'll take issue with the use of "only" -- but I'll freely grant
you "primarily" and even "overwhelmingly." Hopefully, this still
leaves us room to talk... ;-) But IMHO the D&D magic-system doesn't
"fit" well with the pseudo-medieval worlds of "classic D&D" (e.g.
Greyhawk, the Realms, Krynn, et al).

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

That's because you haven't realized that magic should work "on
top" of mundane activities, rather than replace them.

I reiterate and expand: to accept medieval-ish "peasants-in-the-fields
imagery" alongside the "high fantasy" tropes requires some level of one
(a) not asking after detailed historical data,
(b) coming up with explanations of how potent, reliable magic has left
mundane/historical society & culture unimpacted
(c) handwaving the issues away, and playing in a world that "doesn't
make sense"

Yeah. Potent, reliable (widespread) magic is kind of like modern
technology, and we all know that our world contains no peasants
labouring away in fields...right?

Post by s***@sonic.net
Magic, if potent/reliable/widespread/unhidden, *MUST* change the look&feel
of a culture from the "medieval european" pastiche of D&D. If you want
that flavor -- say, Europe of about 750ad through 1350ad -- you can't have
D&Desque magic with D&Desque commonality/acceptance of magic.

I could use a little support for that generalisation because frankly I
don't see it. Certainly feudalism can be amply justified, because
the availability of one 1st to 3rd level magician per village is not
going to overthrow the rulership of the wicked 20th level fighter
with his 9th level court magician and his 5 to 10th level knights.
While magic undermines the effectiveness of thick stone walls, they
also make them far easier to erect in the first place and they are
handy against a wide variety of marauding creatures. Magicians
only make knightly armour more plausible by making it more effective.
And as for agricultural techniques, while fertilisation spells might
ensure that the farmers have sustained crop yields that real medieval
farmers could only dream of, they aren't going to change much about
the way farmers go about actually farming. Indeed they'll discourage
the development of things like crop rotation as no longer necessary.
Most other magical farming techniques are just too expensive to
be used on a large scale.

[s***@sonic.net]

Post by David Johnston
Yeah. Potent, reliable (widespread) magic is kind of like modern
technology, and we all know that our world contains no peasants
labouring away in fields...right?

<g> There's still poor people, some of whom work fields. But I expect
that magic, like tech, will tend to replace unskilled & semiskilled labor.
No, it WON'T be universal. But there's an awful lot of machines in the
fields these days... fields that once would've been filled with peasants.

Post by David Johnston

Post by s***@sonic.net
Magic, if potent/reliable/widespread/unhidden, *MUST* change the look&feel
of a culture from the "medieval european" pastiche of D&D. If you want
that flavor -- say, Europe of about 750ad through 1350ad -- you can't have
D&Desque magic with D&Desque commonality/acceptance of magic.

I could use a little support for that generalisation because frankly I
don't see it. Certainly feudalism can be amply justified, because
the availability of one 1st to 3rd level magician per village is not
going to overthrow the rulership of the wicked 20th level fighter
with his 9th level court magician and his 5 to 10th level knights.

If the village-wizards band together, and each unload a full complement
of Magic Missile (and no, I *don't* mean "together" in the sense of "a
nice tight cluster suitable for Fireball'ing;" I just mean cooperating)
into the Court Wizard... one Ex-wizard. OK, maybe he has spells/items
to stop THAT attack; but what about all the village priests who cast
"Charm Person" -- even if he saves 90% of the time, it takes remarkably
few spells to reduce him to an *OVERALL* 50/50 (or worse) chance. Then
there's the chance of "wandering adventurers" who decide to overthrow
the Wicked Fighter, either directly or by becoming leaders in the
resistance. Etc etc etc...

However, I wasn't arguing feudalism specifically, just that an Industrial
world (whether magic-driven or tech-driven Industry) is gonna depart from
the Medieval world. If magic is cheap enough and reliable enough, what
Wicked Overlord *wouldn* load his peasants with Wheat Bane scythes +1,
Threshers of Chaff-Disintigration, Bushel-Baskets of Holding, &c? One
peasant could harvest 10 acres in a day... but wouldn't quite be a
"peasant" (Commoner) any more, likely having enough "free" time to pursue
other Overlord-enriching projects (crafts, fishing, etc); maybe an Expert?

As the magitech drives productivity up, other changes *will* follow...

[David Johnston]

Post by s***@sonic.net
However, I wasn't arguing feudalism specifically, just that an Industrial
world (whether magic-driven or tech-driven Industry) is gonna depart from
the Medieval world. If magic is cheap enough and reliable enough, what
Wicked Overlord *wouldn* load his peasants with Wheat Bane scythes +1,
Threshers of Chaff-Disintigration, Bushel-Baskets of Holding, &c?

Not a one. Of course while the magic is reliable, it ain't cheap.

[Eric Tolle]

Post by David Johnston

Post by s***@sonic.net
However, I wasn't arguing feudalism specifically, just that an Industrial
world (whether magic-driven or tech-driven Industry) is gonna depart from
the Medieval world. If magic is cheap enough and reliable enough, what
Wicked Overlord *wouldn* load his peasants with Wheat Bane scythes +1,
Threshers of Chaff-Disintigration, Bushel-Baskets of Holding, &c?

Not a one. Of course while the magic is reliable, it ain't cheap.

It's not just a matter of whether the magic makes an activity
more efficient, but whether it is cost-effective to do so. And
of course whether the initial outlay cost can be afforded. It
doesn't matter if a "Wand of Crop Increase" doubles the
production of a lord's lands, if he can't afford to purchase it.
Of course in that case we need merchants who are willing to float
loans at reasonable rates...

I'm actually thinking that common magic might actually inhibit
an industrial revolution- with magic to increase production,
you would get less of the stresses that lead to innovation being
accepted, and with increased medical care, you may avoid things
like the Black Death- and the resulting increase in value of
human labor.

You may retain a society with the image of invention/crafts
that the Ancient Greeks (and other cultures) had: crafts and
invention is a demeaning occupation for the lower classes.

- Eric Tolle

[Mad Hamish]

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 09:53:59 +0200, Peter Knutsen

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
One of the issues that is becomming increasingly problematic for me is
the question of just *how* clear a parallel can be drawn from historical
data to the common FRP tropes (particularly the high-fantasy ones, such
as D&D's). I find it wildly improbably that high-magic worlds wouldn't
engage in food-production magic on a regular basis... ripen a crop a mere
week after planting? Why not? Harvest a bushel a day (year-round) from
a small backyard plot... sure! A milk-cow that gives as much as you
want *whenever* you want? Easy! Etc etc etc...

In most thoughtfully created settings, magic which is that
powerful is either exceedingly rare, or else completely nonexistent.

and we can tell this because Knutsen recons that any setting which has
them isn't thoughtfully created...

Post by Peter Knutsen

Post by s***@sonic.net
I've got no problem simply ignoring it all, handwaving it away and just
taking the peasants-in-the-fields imagery to fit the game tropes; but I
just can't see the point in researching such things unless the setting
is rather low-fantasy and/or historically-accurate.

That's because you haven't realized that magic should work "on
top" of mundane activities, rather than replace them.

depends entirely upon what magic can do.

Given magic allowing water breathing and maybe a degree of telekinesis
recovering shipwrecks should be very simple using magic. Magic might
be very useful for preserving foods and do the job better than salting
or smoking.

Communication spells can make a whole heap of things easier and there
are a heap of uses of magic that can assist in defence.

[David Johnston]

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?

One of the issues that is becomming increasingly problematic for me is
the question of just *how* clear a parallel can be drawn from historical
data to the common FRP tropes (particularly the high-fantasy ones, such
as D&D's). I find it wildly improbably that high-magic worlds wouldn't
engage in food-production magic on a regular basis... ripen a crop a mere
week after planting? Why not?

One reason why not, is because that degree of magic sounds likely to
either strip the soil of nutrients, or have bizarre effects on those
eating it. Still there are plenty of magic fertilizer and vermin
control spells in various systems to justify a fantasy civilisation
with yields far greater than historical low tech methods.

[Tetsubo]

Post by David Johnston

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?

One of the issues that is becomming increasingly problematic for me is
the question of just *how* clear a parallel can be drawn from historical
data to the common FRP tropes (particularly the high-fantasy ones, such
as D&D's). I find it wildly improbably that high-magic worlds wouldn't
engage in food-production magic on a regular basis... ripen a crop a mere
week after planting? Why not?

One reason why not, is because that degree of magic sounds likely to
either strip the soil of nutrients, or have bizarre effects on those
eating it. Still there are plenty of magic fertilizer and vermin
control spells in various systems to justify a fantasy civilisation
with yields far greater than historical low tech methods.

Sort of a Darksun feel to the magic... it strips the land of its
lifeforce kind of thing. I could see that. Magic as industrial pollution...

[s***@sonic.net]

Post by Tetsubo

Post by David Johnston
One reason why not, is because that degree of magic sounds likely to
either strip the soil of nutrients, or have bizarre effects on those
eating it. Still there are plenty of magic fertilizer and vermin
control spells in various systems to justify a fantasy civilisation
with yields far greater than historical low tech methods.

Sort of a Darksun feel to the magic... it strips the land of its
lifeforce kind of thing. I could see that. Magic as industrial pollution...

<g>
It's an interesting thought, for sure. Kinda puts another layer on the
ol' "Barbarians Hate Magic" notion, and makes the "Forsaker" a kind of
noble ecoterrorist... <heh>

But, the magic an *provide* the extra soil-nutrients. Magic-as-inevitably-
warping should make adventurers a twisted lot indeed... just HOW many hit
points of damage does the average 5th-level party get "Cure X Wounds"ed on
them, most adventures...? The notion can provide the basis for a handwave,
but frankly I'm not swayed. I continue to find this an issue best not looked
at too closely, lest it affect suspesion-of-disbelief.

YMM(of course!)V.


- Steve S.
to de-spam me, de-capitalize me.

[David Johnston]

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by Tetsubo

Post by David Johnston
One reason why not, is because that degree of magic sounds likely to
either strip the soil of nutrients, or have bizarre effects on those
eating it. Still there are plenty of magic fertilizer and vermin
control spells in various systems to justify a fantasy civilisation
with yields far greater than historical low tech methods.

Sort of a Darksun feel to the magic... it strips the land of its
lifeforce kind of thing. I could see that. Magic as industrial pollution...

<g>
It's an interesting thought, for sure. Kinda puts another layer on the
ol' "Barbarians Hate Magic" notion, and makes the "Forsaker" a kind of
noble ecoterrorist... <heh>
But, the magic an *provide* the extra soil-nutrients.

Then why bother with the crops? Why not just wave your hand and
produce the food already cooked? That's pretty much what you are
doing, after all.

Magic-as-inevitably-

Post by s***@sonic.net
warping should make adventurers a twisted lot indeed...

It's not that it's inevitably warping as that I doubt a steady 3
squares of stuff conjured from nothing would be healthy.

[Rick Pikul]

{Foomph...}

Post by s***@sonic.net
But, the magic an *provide* the extra soil-nutrients.

Then why bother with the crops? Why not just wave your hand and produce
the food already cooked? That's pretty much what you are doing, after
all.

Possible reason:

It's easier to cast a spell that improves soil then it is to create good
food out of nothing. If, for the magical effort involved in creating a
tasty dinner for four, you can create a yield increase that will supply a
dozen such meals, most would go for the latter.
This further becomes a better choice, if a basic 'fertilize' spell can be
cast by any hedge wizard, (although on a smaller area), while a 'create
dinner' spell requires an experienced hedge wizard or a true mage to cast
it.

[John Reiher]

Post by Rick Pikul
{Foomph...}

Post by s***@sonic.net
But, the magic an *provide* the extra soil-nutrients.

Then why bother with the crops? Why not just wave your hand and produce
the food already cooked? That's pretty much what you are doing, after
all.

It's easier to cast a spell that improves soil then it is to create good
food out of nothing. If, for the magical effort involved in creating a
tasty dinner for four, you can create a yield increase that will supply a
dozen such meals, most would go for the latter.
This further becomes a better choice, if a basic 'fertilize' spell can be
cast by any hedge wizard, (although on a smaller area), while a 'create
dinner' spell requires an experienced hedge wizard or a true mage to cast
it.

But what about the Gods? Any priest of an agricultural god can invoke a
blessing for the entire community, with the proper sacrifices, and
guarantee a good yield that year.

Druids, if they feel like it, can be of great assistance in dealing with
nature as well.

I always view that to create a magical item, the caster has to impart a
bit of themselves into it. And to create some items, you need rare items
to add into the item and there is always failure to account for.

Also, compare the cost of the item to the earning power of the average
person. Even the weakest of magic item, is worth more than any peasant
could save in a score of years. The average person, outside of nobility
and adventurers, earns about 10 silver pieces a week, though for a
farmer that averaging it out over the year, he really earns his money
during the harvest and when he hires out his labor to help someone else.

Adventurers have far too much money for the local economy, and as such
can destroy it. When Thuddar the Mighty, tips the barmaid a few gold
pieces, he's given her a month's pay. The economic model for the fantasy
world is pretty much shot.

[Rick Pikul]

Post by John Reiher

Post by Rick Pikul
{Foomph...}

Post by s***@sonic.net
But, the magic an *provide* the extra soil-nutrients.

Then why bother with the crops? Why not just wave your hand and produce
the food already cooked? That's pretty much what you are doing, after
all.

It's easier to cast a spell that improves soil then it is to create good
food out of nothing. If, for the magical effort involved in creating a
tasty dinner for four, you can create a yield increase that will supply a
dozen such meals, most would go for the latter.
This further becomes a better choice, if a basic 'fertilize' spell can be
cast by any hedge wizard, (although on a smaller area), while a 'create
dinner' spell requires an experienced hedge wizard or a true mage to cast
it.

But what about the Gods? Any priest of an agricultural god can invoke a
blessing for the entire community, with the proper sacrifices, and
guarantee a good yield that year.
Druids, if they feel like it, can be of great assistance in dealing with
nature as well.

Sure, there are other possible reasons that you would improve the land
rather than just create the food. I was only giving one example.

[Blaine]

Post by David Johnston

Post by s***@sonic.net

Post by s***@sonic.net
One of the issues that is becomming increasingly problematic for me is

the question of just *how* clear a parallel can be drawn from historical
data to the common FRP tropes (particularly the high-fantasy ones, such
as D&D's). I find it wildly improbably that high-magic worlds wouldn't
engage in food-production magic on a regular basis... ripen a crop a mere
week after planting? Why not?

One reason why not, is because that degree of magic sounds likely to
either strip the soil of nutrients, or have bizarre effects on those
eating it. Still there are plenty of magic fertilizer and vermin
control spells in various systems to justify a fantasy civilisation
with yields far greater than historical low tech methods.

On the other hand, modern industrial farming methods do some pretty
horrible things th the soil as well. As long as the supply of
synthectic nitrates and pesticides(or magic, in our hypothetical
world) holds out, soil depletion can be compensated for. The problem
arises when the amount of artificial help needed gets so high that it
ceases to be profitable.

[David Dunham]

Post by ivan
Does anyone know where I can find information on the nutritional yield
of medieval farming?

I've been gathering some data on my web site at
<http://www.pensee.com/dunham/facts/food.html>
<http://www.pensee.com/dunham/facts/animals.html> and
<http://www.pensee.com/dunham/facts/braudel.html> -- the last one is
notes from Fernand Braudel's The Structures of Everyday Life:
Civilization & Capitalism 15th-18th Century, Volume 1, which I highly
recommend.

[ivan]

Thanks for your responses. As for the magic debate, I'm trying to
maintain a framework of realism, something closer to the Illiad than
to Harry Potter. Besides, I'm creating a world where magic has only
recently resurfaced after a few thousand years. Yeah, I know I ripped
of Shadowrun, but what can you do?

[s***@sonic.net]

Post by ivan
Thanks for your responses. As for the magic debate, I'm trying to
maintain a framework of realism, something closer to the Illiad than
to Harry Potter. Besides, I'm creating a world where magic has only
recently resurfaced after a few thousand years. Yeah, I know I ripped
of Shadowrun, but what can you do?

Harn (Columbia Games) would appear to have some good resources for you,
as others have suggested; see:
http://www.columbiagames.com/cgi-bin/query/cfg/allharnitems.cfg
Note that from time to time Harn material goes on sale; you may be able
to get pieces cheaper. Also note that the *world* is largely de-linked
from the *rules* -- and can be bought separately. See also:
http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_4647.html
http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_5208.html
http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/9/9258.phtml
http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/9/9188.phtml

As to the "framework of realism" and magic being a "recent return" --
this is clearly NOT D&D(esque) nor even Ars Magica (where magic is a
margins-of-society thing, but has been actively (if quietly) pursued
by the Order for hundreds of years). You should probably figure out
just *how* much can be done with magic, in terms of changes to society.
I had mentioned uber-productivity; clearly it hasn't YET been done; but
(in your world) COULD it be done? At what cost? What about simply an
"enhanced" productivity -- every year consistently very good? What about
other kinds of magic? How easily can magic make one more-than-naturally
persuasive... 1:1 or in oration to a crowd? Complete mind-control? Can
magic do "big&flashy" things, or is it universally subtle? Can you give
someone a heart-attack? If so, how easily? Etc etc etc...

[craig]

To find this information look at www.sac.co.uk this is the scottish
agriculture website.