Captain Ludd: History & Myth
This post is all about a pretty major social movement in the early 1800s. While that is certainly a bit later than the medieval-ish historical epoch that a lot of fantasy draws from, the larger social point of the Luddites is one that can pretty easily be adapted for a fantasy setting that is undergoing any form of social change. The latter half of this post is entirely focused on how to use this social movement in a TTRPG, even a medieval-ish setting like the one that is standard for D&D.
If you want to download a fantasy / D&D-appropriate version of "Captain Ludd" and his followers that I made for use in your own campaigns, with a description of his goals, personality, tips for using him adapted from this article, support for playing as a Luddite through a 5e-compatible background and faction description, and a D&D 5e-compatible stat block, I've made that all available on DriveThruRPG and Itch.io as a Pay-What-You-Want title.
As a brief aside, also, the reason that this post is coming out today – the first major Luddite revolt began today, March 11th, in Nottingham, England, in 1811.
Historical Context
The Industrial Revolution
While the term Luddite is fairly infrequently used in modern conversation, when it is used, it is typically used in a derogatory fashion to mean someone who is scared of technology. This term derives from a group of textile workers during the Industrial Revolution who were afraid of new machines taking their jobs. While the smashing of textile looms and wool shearing machines may seem almost quaint today, modern people who claim the label of Luddite for themselves talk about the still very-present fear of technology taking peoples' jobs, particularly as the use of generative AI threatens artistic, journalistic, and even tech-sector jobs. For more on a modern reflection of Luddism, I recommend these two articles:
Smithsonian Magazine
Let's set the context for the historical Luddites so that we can get beyond their reputation as mere backward technophobes. Over the course of the 1700s and the early 1800s, new machines were rapidly being invented. Machines you might have learned about in high school like the spinning jenny made the art of textile weaving far easier. The main complaint of the Luddite movement was the invention and popularization of the power loom, a device that used steam (usually generated from burning either coal or wood) to make weaving thread into cloth practically automatic. Weavers were still needed to supervise the looms, but they no longer needed to actually power the looms.
Previously, weaving was something done in the home. The majority of people in the pre-industrial period were farmers; textile production was something that could be done after working in the fields or by the women and children of the household. People both made fabric for their own clothes and for sale to neighbors who might have specialized in other home crafts.
As the weaving process became more automatic, this shifted. First came the "putting-out system," where wealthy merchants would offer rentals of the expensive equipment that helped automate production and would sell the raw materials, in exchange for much of the profits of the finished textiles. Then, realizing more money could be made by owning all steps of the process, they made factories where textiles would be produced en masse, rather than spread out in various homes with rented equipment. These factories could work 24 hours a day by workers coming in shifts, rather than the equipment staying idle while people slept, as it did in the putting-out system where machinery stayed in the home.
This process removed the profit of their work from the actual workers. When textiles were produced in the home and by hand, anything that was sold went into the pocket of the weaver. Even under the putting-out system, the weaver usually received a share of the profits or was paid by the amount that they produced. Under the factory system, however, people were paid hourly – the invention of the modern "wage" – with all the profits going to the owner of the factory, someone already rich enough to afford the expensive machinery.
The creation of factories also removed a lot of the safety net that people had by making them dependent on others for their livelihood. Instead of being a farmer, where you were dependent on the weather for the success of the crops that fed you, now you lived in a city where you depended on your job to give you money to buy food. If you lost your job, you starved and had nothing, rather than still owning your land that you could work.
As technology grew better and better, it became easier for owners to fire their workers without it negatively impacting their output. Richard Guest, a contemporary author who wrote a history of textile manufacturing in 1823, noted that the mechanization in factories led to an increase in productivity of a factor of 20; the output of 2000 home weavers could now be done by only 100 people working in the factory. While this brought down the cost of fabric, it also left 1900 people who were formerly employed and who had previously valuable skills in weaving now without a source of income. With the huge mass of unemployed workers, wages decreased further as those who demanded higher wages could simply be fired and replaced by those so desperate for some income that they would work for pennies.
So, Who Were the Luddites?
This brings us to the Luddites. Primarily drawn from the ranks of these unemployed former weavers, the Luddites blamed the conditions of their unemployment on the machines that had mechanized their work, making it possible to do by fewer, less-skilled people. Starting in 1811 and lasting until 1816, the Luddites broke into factories and smashed weaving machines, trying to force a return to the system of weaving that, if less efficient, provided a livelihood for more people instead of just making the rich richer. Historian Malcolm Thomas writes that, with unionization made difficult due to the tremendous surplus of labor (as any union organizers or agitators for better wages or conditions would simply be fired and easily replaced), attacking the machines was one of the few avenues that could actually exert pressure on employers. The Luddites varied in their specific targets and level of organization by region, attacking machines deemed a specific threat to the local industries of each region--and often skipping over the machines of factory owners who paid a fair wage.
The Luddites were immediately a major source of government concern, as many of the people who served in Parliament--an institution dominated by the rich--were the same people who owned the factories that the Luddites targeted. In 1812, the British government dispatched 12,000 troops to stations across the country with the specific aim of suppressing Luddite riots. This decision was made in the middle of a multi-front war: in 1812, the British were also expending major resources fighting Napoleon in Europe, as well as fighting the Americans in the War of 1812.
Also in 1812, the government made "frame-breaking" – the destruction of machines – a capital crime, one punishable by death. In 1813, this law was used to sentence over 30 Luddites to death or exile in a mass trial. While Luddite riots still broke out until 1816, the deployment of active military forces in England and the harsh punishments did work to suppress Luddite activity.
The modern use of the term "Luddite" as someone afraid of technology and progress is based on a relatively simplistic image of the Luddites as just machine-breakers. In reality, the Luddites were often highly organized workers, many of whom were technologically savvy and adept at using the new weaving technology but who had lost their jobs simply because of the efficiency of the machines resulting in a lower demand for labor. They were striking out at the one pressure point that they could use to fight for better treatment, targeting exploitative factory owners until they were ruthlessly put down by a government dominated by the wealthy.
The Mythology of Captain Ludd
So where does the name Luddite come from? It sounds derogatory, but it was actually the name given to the movement by its own members. It comes from a folktale about "Ned Ludd," a likely fictional worker who, it is claimed, broke two mechanical knitting devices in a fit of rage. As the Luddite riots gained energy, the story goes that bosses would ask their workers who was responsible for the broken machinery. The response from the guilty workers, refusing to snitch on one another? "It must have been Ned Ludd."
The original story of Ned Ludd's fit of rage, and even the existence of a worker called Ned Ludd, is probably fictional. It can be traced to a newspaper article in the local Nottingham Review from December 1811--a few months after the riots had already begun, making it far more likely that this was a news story meant to tell a tale to an audience already primed for stories about machine-breaking heroes.
Whatever the origin, the term "Luddite"--a follower of Ludd--spread quickly and was adopted by the rioters. It was already in popular use in 1812. Letters and petitions, delivered justifying the actions of the machine-breakers, would be signed "Ned Ludd." In areas where the Luddites were more organized, establishing their own hierarchy of a military-esque command for their protests, "Ned Ludd" was given a military title like Captain Ludd or General Ludd, or even King Ludd.
Adapting the Luddites to Fantasy
We now know who the Luddites were, what they fought against, and how they were ultimately defeated by a government dominated by the wealthy. What do we need to do to authentically reproduce the Luddites as a faction in our RPG campaigns?
Adapting Social Context
The Luddites fundamentally are a reaction to the intersection of technological changes and capitalism. They are more complex than simply being anti-technology, as we've discussed, and they are a potent force opposing the use of technology for the capitalist exploitation of workers.
"If Brennan [Lee Mulligan] is the DM, the bad guy is capitalism, and I don't know how the bad guy is capitalism in Fairy Tale Land, but I am confident that he will have found a way." - Siobhan Thompson, Dimension20 Neverafter campaign.
The wildly popular Actual Play D&D series Dimension20 engages with the premise we'll need to use for building an effective Luddite faction, with many of its campaign villains being centered around the problems of capitalism and greed. There are countless ways to engage with capitalism in fantasy; it is somewhat anachronistic in a medieval-esque fantasy world, but it so pervades the world we live in that it is difficult to fully imagine a pre-capitalist worldview. Even the way that markets and gold are usually used in RPGs is proto-capitalist more than it is historically accurate, so engaging with the ideas and backlash to capitalism is, I think, fair game even for a campaign trying to take lessons from history.
Employing the Luddites as a faction works best, however, in a campaign that does more than just center around concepts of greed and businesses and labor exploitation--the premises of a capitalism-critiquing campaign. The Luddites emerge at a specific moment in history; to use them well, there needs to be a new and rapid technological shift.
This does not have to be necessarily an invention in the textile industry; in fact, I think that is somewhat boring and mundane in a fantasy world unless your campaign is rooted in clothing. However, it should be a shift impacting a widespread industry for common laborers. Personally, I'd recommend it being some sort of new magic or magical ability.
Perhaps a necromancer has begun using the undead as a tireless workforce. Some will cheer as it will drive the price of goods down and productivity increases, but as countless previous workers lose their jobs and find that social services have not been put in place to take care of them, they grow angry at their capitalist necromancer new overlord.
Or, perhaps a gnomish tinkerer has created a machine that will make clothing and armor significantly faster and easier. The party can purchase plate mail at a fraction of the price, giving them a much-wanted boost to their armor class, until their favorite blacksmith NPC is driven out of business and is found begging on the streets for spare coins because no one needs his services anymore.
Whatever it is, it needs to be something that many will see as good, something that increases productivity and lowers prices, something that many–including, ideally, the party–will see as technological progress. Then, because of this new efficiency, it needs to put people out of work. The new unemployed class--even skilled workers, and especially NPCs artisan craftsmen established earlier and beloved by the party--will make up the bulk of the forces of our Luddite faction.
Captain Ludd
No good faction is complete without having a specific character who represents it: the faction's "face." Full credit for expressing this idea to the AngryGM, who I've referenced in previous articles and is one of my go-to GM advice blogs.
The obvious face of the Luddite faction is Captain Ludd himself. Fictional in real life, our game gives us a prime opportunity to make him into a real character. Feel free to pick a first name that suits your world's naming conventions; I'm going to be sticking just with his title, as "Ned" does not fit mine.
What our historical sources tell us about the Captain is his origin story, smashing machines in a fit of rage. He is an elusive leader, dodging civil authorities to inspire rebel bands across the country. His forces train by night to avoid being seen. One historical source reports a militiaman spotting Captain Ludd with “a pike in his hand, like a sergeant’s halberd,” and a face that was a ghostly unnatural white. Because he's fictional, that's pretty much all we have on Captain Ludd himself.
To me, Ludd's origin story tells us that he is a barbarian, in D&D 5e terms. He is quick to anger, particularly about perceived injustice or exploitation. He is bold and brash, willing to take on even the royal army, but he knows he must be stealthy or he will get caught. He's willing to make risky gambits, but he is not stupid in his boldness; he trains his troops with military precision at night.
I think all these traits suggest that Captain Ludd was once a soldier. He knows how the military functions; it is what lets him dodge their patrols, and it is what gives him the expertise to drill his own forces under the cover of darkness. He still wields a sergeant's halberd. His ghostly skin fits with the elves in my world, a ghastly and inhumanly pale species; he could also be a dwarf or a gnome, based on the D&D characterization of them as craftsmen--he could be any species, really. Mechanically, I'm going to draw influence from the barbarian; Ludd is tough to kill, and once battle is joined, he is filled with uncontrollable anger. The result is a careful planner, a disciplined military man who, once in combat, is unleashed in a frenzy of violence.
Using the Luddites
I don't want to make the Luddites an enemy faction by default. My hope is that this article makes the Luddites a more sympathetic faction historically, going along with the trend of re-examining the Luddites in a more friendly light (as seen in the Smithsonian and New Yorker articles) driven by the rise of AI. I am going to provide stat blocks for them (you never know when conflict will arise in D&D), but I don't see them as a necessarily antagonistic faction.
Rather, they are a potential ally but a difficult to control one. In the example I wrote of the necromancer whose zombie laborers have driven the Luddites into unemployment, perhaps the characters have a different reason for taking on the necromancer. They'll seek out the Luddites as allies in weakening and attacking the necromancer's holdings, but when Captain Ludd's forces draw the attention of the royal army and Ludd demands that the party go kill a duke that has historically been friendly to the party to weaken the army's strength, a good GM can use the situation to test the party's morality. The Luddites have little financial incentive for the party; the Duke can offer a lot if they turn in Captain Ludd, and he won't block them from also taking on the necromancer. They'd just have to do it alone. What is more worth it to them? Will they dare make the Duke their enemy? How much do they need the Duke's gold to buy that new magic item?
Wrapping Up
The opportunities for using the Luddites are wide open because economic conflict is such a powerful driving idea. Real-world moral questions can be used to make a richer, more nuanced story filled with a deep and interesting conflict.
I've released a Luddite faction for sale, available on DriveThruRPG and Itch.io. Inside the product, you'll find suggested system- and setting-neutral quest hooks and moral quandaries to place your party in (like the necromancer situation, just more fleshed out); you'll find a description of the faction, its goals and aims; you'll find a custom 5e-compatible background to play as a Luddite; you'll find a more fleshed out write-up of Captain Ludd, his backstory, and his personality; and you'll find D&D 5e-compatible stat blocks for a generic Luddite and a tactically-interesting Captain Ludd.
If that sounds interesting to you, either as a GM or a curious player, please check out the product. Any and all paid purchases go to support the site's upkeep, to let me continue sharing my history-inspired homebrew like this, so if you do decide that the product is worth some money, it is greatly appreciated!
Thank you for reading and for supporting Veritas Tabletop!