What Is Your View of the D&D World?

You know the world I'm talking about, right?  The one presented in the Player's Handbook and the Dungeon Master's Guide?

Of course there is a world presented there.  It's just not explicitly there - you need to read between the lines to find it. And how you perceive it impacts all of your play - even in other published world settings. Because your view of the world as a whole alters the role of each class.

In many ways, it's like the Platonic Ideal of a setting. In others, it's a kitchen-sink hodgepodge of everything the designers could think to add.

Here are some notes on my view of the setting:

It's post-apocalyptic. The Apocalypse in this case could be any number of things, but any central authority has broken down, and has not yet been fully restored. There are pockets of civilization, and the occasional small kingdom, but for the most part, towns are on their own, the roads are filled with bandits, and any trade that happens requires a number of armed guards for the caravans. Territory is often claimed by multiple kingdoms and empires. Either way, there is a constant need of armed parties to patrol, protect, and raid.

It's low-technology. Have you seen stats for repeating crossbows? How about guns? They may be out there, but I've never seen a PC with a Musket +2. Not only that, but technology doesn't seem to be advancing - parties regularly venture into the ruins of ancient cities seeking treasure, and they often seem to find equipment which is even better than what they already have (often due to enchantment). Are the Wizards suppressing technology so as to hold onto power?

Gods are real. It should go without saying, but sometimes it doesn't. And I'll admit to being annoyed at how most parties handle religion. Players seem to pick their Patron Deities at character generation, and then proceed to ignore that line on the sheet for the rest of the game (with the exception of Divine characters, who still ignore the rest of the pantheon - another error). In fact, there's a whole post about this stashed somewhere.

So why does this matter?

It gives characters a reason for existing - a place to fit, as it were. Using just the Player's Handbook, here are a few ideas:

Fighters can serve as town guard, soldiers, gladiators, bodyguards, thugs for the local thieves' guild, or escorts for other classes between cities. Warlords can be captains, generals, and sergeants for any role a Fighter can fill, as well as filling a number of administrative and governmental rules.

Rangers and Rogues are thieves, assassins, scouts, snipers, huntsmen, spies, and merchants.

Wizards are scholars, teachers, and advisors.

Clerics are special to me. Remember the concept of circuit preachers from the Old West? I see clerics filling that same role. They ride from town to town following a specific route performing the work of their Gods in each village - performing weddings, funerals, and other specific duties as needed.  They follow a set schedule, and report to someone else in their church hierarchy.

Paladins (to me, at least) fill the role of circuit judges. They ride from town to town dispensing justice as appropriate. Even unaligned paladins will interpret and enforce the law. The interpretations will of course vary depending on the paladin's patron deity. Additionally, paladins get to be their deity's special forces and temple guards.

Do I favor Divine classes with more authority?  In general, yes I do. At the same time, the divine classes are likely to be involved in a power structure with central authority which hasn't broken down. Where a fighter may be part of an army, it will be the army for a small kingdom - a Cleric will be a part of a church hierarchy which may stretch into multiple kingdoms. And may lead to conflict with nobility - just look at the (real-world) history for examples of this.

When I get around to it, I need to write up my perspective on religion in D&D, but I have some other posts I need to write before then.