World-building is essentially creating the setting for your story. What many people don’t think about consciously is that the setting has possibly one of the strongest effects on a well-told story, even compared to the plot and the characters. What is a plot-hole except a failure to match the plot properly to the full range of possibilities inherent in the setting. What is bad characterization except a failure to have your characters react properly to the setting? The interaction of the characters with the setting is what creates the plot on a basic level. You can’t have a restoration of the rightful monarch(read: farmboy hero) without having a monarchy, a false ruler, a rightful ruler, and someone who wants to change the status quo. Those are all elements of the setting, and when you start the machine of the setting ticking, it inevitably creates the conflict that drives the plot. You can start planning story with any of the three elements or a combination thereof, but essentially you are using abductive reasoning to tie all the elements together.
Now that we have that premise out of the way, the actual issue I want to talk about here is what technology is and what effect it has on a society. In particular, how does technology affect the gap between the rich and the poor. In order to explain these effects, I’ve found that the metaphor of a lever works particularly well. Both literally and figuratively. Technology is the lever and individual human ability is the force that’s being applied. Now, a lot of people like to say that technology raises the standard of living in the sense that the rising tide lifts all boats. Which is true to an extent. Anyone with a lever can do more than someone without. But, because the most privileged are starting ahead in terms of the force they can input into the system, their output is always going to be greater. Assuming two people of equal skill and ability, the poor man can never catch up to the rich man. If both men have access to the piece of technology, they both advance, but the rich man advances farther.
Here’s a simple mathematical example:
One man has 100 acres. Another man has 900 acres. They can both produce 10 bushels of wheat per acre, which totals to 10,000 bushels. The gap is thus 8,000 bushels between the rich man and the poor man. Now say we introduce a machine that increases productivity per acre by 50%. The first man can now produce 1,500 bushels of wheat. The second man can now produce 13,500 bushels of wheat for a total of 15000 bushels. The gap is now 12,000 bushels. Technology has brought up both men’s productivity, but it has also widened the gap between them.
The rich man can now afford to sell his products more cheaply, because he’s moving a higher volume, so customers buy his wheat and the poor man loses out.
Further, greater technology allows a leader to actively organize a larger power base, whether that involves an army, a workforce, a company, or resources. The greater the level of tech, the wider the reach of a given company. National chain businesses, for example, flourish better in a high tech world, while individual small businesses tend to fair better in a low-tech world because competition is less and it’s harder to synchronize business and products and suppliers.
Other factors excluded, a world with higher technology is likely to include wider inequality, even if the lowest level may have a higher standard of living on average than in a world with less technology.
Now, there are more kinds of inequality than economic inequality. A common topic in military discussion, whether fiction or otherwise, is how the disparity in technology might affect tactics, and even lock a given force into certain tactics even though they may not be effective in the situation. It also affects composition of forces.
For example, while better technology may mean an average soldier for one group is worth some multiple of soldiers in another group, the extra expense means that of two groups of relatively equal resources, the group with the better military tech will often maintain fewer soldiers to make up for the expense. The hope is that the better efficiency will make up for that, but it does leave holes open for the less advanced group to attack from another angle. You can hope to split the opponent up, ambush them, make use of terrain or inherent flaws. And the opponent may prefer tactics that leave them open to strategies they don’t have experience with because the technology is considered “inferior”.
This also applies to population. For most of the periods involved in fantasy, higher technology leads to greater population density. (Eventually you hit a peak, where the bottom of the standard of living is pushed so high that birth rates drop; this can be tied both to gender equality and technological advancement.) So a country with higher tech levels has more people, giving them an extra economic and military advantage. Magic may follow the same pattern depending on the style of magic in the world.
More population means you can occupy more territory, raise more food at the increased level, have more minds working on further advancement, etc.
Finally, we have the difficulty of living outside the system but near the same standard of living and level of technology. The greater the technology, the more integrated it is into the society, the more you need specialization of labor to keep things going. So an individual or small group can’t maintain self-sufficiency equal to someone in the web of society as easily.
The simplest example of the influence technology can have on the setting and thus on the plot and characters is steampunk. Theoretically an entire sub-genre based on the technological level of its setting,
Look forward to further entries in the Technology in Fantasy Seminar this month.