this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2025
96 points (100.0% liked)
chat
8367 readers
393 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Capitalism's development was not such an 'all at once' phenomenon and the capstone of its supremacy still took many years after many dictatorships of the bourgeoisie were formed. England for instance, especially around its metropoles had well established manufacturing industries that were overcoming guild limitations and a thriving merchant class that were becoming embedded as the early capitalists, in like the 1600s well before steam power and the industrial revolution.
China for example is in the process of developing socialism, and a medieval fantasy world could be at the nascent developmental stages of Capitalism.
Sure, but those developments are very focused on manufacturing. Like off the top of my head, Skyrim represents it's farmers as either independent farmers who own their own land, or wage workers employed by those farmers. They travel to towns and bring their produce to the local markets, and seemingly own all of their produce. So what do the Jarls own? They're supposed to be lords, but they are really just generic governors. Similarly, it seems that anyone in Skyrim can cut down trees if they want to, they don't need logging rights to cut and sell wood.
The Witcher 3 has a much more fleshed out economy from what I've played (only about 15 hours). The farmers, from what I can tell, are mostly wage workers, but the world is very clearly an early modern setting minus gunpowder, rather than a middle ages setting.
Agriculture is a very good benchmark for examining how an economy is represented. When a medieval fantasy setting has serfs rather than proles on a farm, it's evidence that at the very least, the writer understands that different economic systems exist.
Middle Earth seems to work in its own way, which I'm happy about. The hobbits seem to be a fairly communal society, with noble families being mostly a formality. But crucially, hobbits seem to have their own understanding of productivity and economics, and thats fun and imaginative for a fantasy setting. The worst is when writers just crowbar capitalism into a feudal-inspired society because they can't imagine anything else.
for you and others that enjoyed your post, have a look at the game 'pentiment'. it's a little indie rpg set in austria in a small town straddling the late medieval and early renaissance and tells a story of social change.
Hard to argue that Obsidian is a "little indie" studio, but the game definitely doesn't have a bloated AAA scale.
Pentiment is one of Josh Sawyer's pet projects and a delightful game!
oh no kidding, I didn't realize obsidian was the dev. frankly I didn't think it was possible that this type of game would be made by anyone but some indie studio
if they thought about it at all, they probably decided the jarls collect rent in cash, like land lords did in the 1800s (or today, for that matter) from their tenant farmers.
a cash based economy in medieval times? lol