Idea for a Fantasy Nation

[Celebrim]

In a world were one hero really can be worth 100 or 300 warriors, skilled retainers are certainly a resource you'd try to dominate.

There are several parallels in real history. In the bronze age, a healthy athletic and experienced armored warrior really was worth dozens of poorly trained, poorly equiped, unamored conscripts and militia. A few of these could make a kingdom and battles really were largely decided by which side had the stronger heroes. The Illiads account of warfare in the bronze age is pretty accurate from its tribalism writ large to the fact that the battle really turned on issues of morale and the key to turning the morale was the actions of the champions on both sides. Heavy bronze armor temporarily tipped the scales in favor of defence sufficiently that a skilled champion really could seem invincible, and a reputation of invincibility goes a long ways toward routing a foe. Or consider the similar accounts in the Old Testement of biblical heroes (David and his 'mighty men' come to mind).

A city state which could attract the alleigence of a few Heracles, Ajax's, David's, Samson's, or Achilles really could dominate its neighbors.

Similarly, the early medieval period with its armored knights had a similar math and political logic going. One armored knight trained almost since birth in martial arts was worth a couple dozen unarmored peasants with spears and farm implements. A core group of knightly retainers could win you empires. And so we have mythic and half-mythic accounts of Beowulf, King Arthor and Lancelot, and Charleslemange and Roland (who sword Durindana incidently was said to be an artifact of that earlier age of heroes) and ultimately we have from those same myths D&D.

So I'm going to first suggest that you've reinvented what is I think supposed to be the default D&D setting. Every D&D nation, any D&D lord that wants to be anything, has to have a band of loyal and powerful retainers, and the more of these that they can keep on a leash the more powerful that nation is.

I think that you can have a 'Land of Heroes' which is exceptionally powerful because it has an abundance of higher level characters in service at its court. The problem I think this raises is how does this nation keep all those people on retainer. At some point, I'd expect that average PC party to start looting Heroville. Or if the PC party, then certainly one of the other adventuring parties. And how do you get all those egos to get along? Traditionally, adventuring parties in D&D are all rivals of each other and prone to fighting whenever they encounter one another. Besides which, how do you end up with a surpluss of heroes without attracting them from all sorts of varied nations and cultures and ethnic groups. But surely these heroes will bring with them thier own pre-existing loyalties, biases, philosophies, and hatreds. It's highly unlikely that such a cosmopolitian community will just get along without bickering unless the pool of candidates is basically a monoculture initially. And in anything but a democracy, its highly unlikely that the band of heroes is held together by anything but the personal charisma of the leige lord. I can't see that loyalty persisting from generation to generation. Eventually someone's kid is going to turn out to be a loser.

There is an even more subtle problem with trying to recruit foreign heroes.

Lawful heroes will tend to remain loyal to whatever they gave thier loyalties to in the first place. So if you are successful, the tendancy will be to recruit mostly self-interested individuals of a chaotic disposition (this is a problem that makes it hard to recruit large numbers of loyal mercenaries of any sort). These are hardly the ideal retainers, and the trend is going to greatly effect all of the problems mentioned above.

If I'm a peasant I want to live there! The streets are probably safe, there's sure the heck no bandits.

The streets are probably safe because thier are adventurers around? I'm not so sure. I'm of the opinion that one person's hero is likely to be another person's bandit. After all, what are adventuring parties known for if not pillaging, murdering, and looting?

 

[Lalato]

OK... what if this King found a passage to the "Hollow World" (you can even use the old Hollow World material if you have it). He needs adventurers to "discover" the riches there.

I have a side question. If there are no taxes, how does the kingdom prosper?

--sam

 

[Meloncov]

China isn't small, but their treasure ships plan was quite good for dominating their neighbors. The key was propping up leaders who were sympathetic to them. If they didn't pull back their forces when they did, most of Southeastern Asia would be under Chinese rule today.

Quite likely a lot more then that. Jung He spread Chinese influence as far as Africa.

 

[Wolfwood2]

Let's look at it from the investment side. What does it mean to "invest" in adventurers?

My guess would be training academies.

Start with the premise that PC-grade classes = military power. Even the better grade NPC classes like Expert and Aristocrat can't compare when it comes to killing people and breaking things, much less what medium to high level magic can do.

Now it's a fundamental idea in many D&D campaigns that not everyone has the stuff of heroes. Sometimes a young man given even the best fighting training will come out a warrior instead of a fighter. Not everybody can learn magic. Not everybody can learn to Rage like a barbarian, and not everybody can form the bonds with the natural world necessary to be a ranger or a druid.

What you want to do is identify people who do have the potential as early as possible and give them educations and training to take advantage of that potential. The kingdom should partially or fully fund this education in return for the loyalty and patronage of their "graduates" later in life.

These training academies are actually going to end up pretty similiar to the classic D&D tropes. You've got your classic mage academy, a high cathedral where young men of faith are brought to devote themselves to a lawful good deity, a warrior's academy where feats and battlerage can be taught, an espionage academy, and a friendly druidic circle where those who are attuned to nature can go. And of course you're going to want some cross-training for those that have multiple areas of potential.

Graduates won't necessarily go on to high levels, but some will. And even a level 3 wizard or ranger have their uses.

So going back to the original post, a kingdom that invests in adventurers won't just look to recruit existing adventurers. They'll look to create them, by providing training to let people take PC classes.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The only fly in the ointment: Not all adventurers are good, and even the ones that claim to be are mostly just violent mercenaries. I don't know that the common person is free from non-stop low-level harassment by adventurers and I'm not sure that I'd feel particularly safe as the king or as any major merchant.

 

[KrazyHades]

You could have it so that adventurers had to have a license/permit from the government, and that the government taxed all of their gains, but also payed them a decent salary (higher than those ordinarily earned by the lower class, so as to attract them). In addition, you could have all places that give someone their first level in a class (all the temples, monasteries, armed forces, druidic circles) controlled by the state, or need state permission to train new individuals, who, at the start of training, must register with the government. The state could be Lawful Neutral in order to fiercely enforce the law, and accepting evil people as long as they followed it. To be caught by a (NAME OF PRESTIGE CLASS HERE), the secret police among the adventurers, while not paying ones taxes or otherwise fulfilling the duties to the state would result in harsh punishment, such as having one's equipment confinscated, being cursed, being exiled, or being executed.

That's how I would do it, at least...there are other ways, such as, say, making all adventurers become loyal to the King/Supreme Council/whatever (Geas, for example). To be caught adventuring without said Geas applied results in execution.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Just make sure you don't end up with something like Union, where even the fishmongers are epic-level.

Oh, gawd, no!

So I'm going to first suggest that you've reinvented what is I think supposed to be the default D&D setting. Every D&D nation, any D&D lord that wants to be anything, has to have a band of loyal and powerful retainers, and the more of these that they can keep on a leash the more powerful that nation is.

Very good point, and one that I had considered. My world runs more to the late-medieval, and nations are a little more advanced in their ability to deal with most PC-types, but your point is well-taken. All nations would cultivate powerful retainers to some degree, but this one would do it to much more extreme extent - the hows and whys and results of that are what I'm hoping make it interesting.

The streets are probably safe because thier are adventurers around? I'm not so sure. I'm of the opinion that one person's hero is likely to be another person's bandit.

I tend to agree! I'm reminded of all those superhero comics where half the city gets blown up in the course of saving it. In any case, a key component of this idea is that the adventurers aren't in the main country - they're out in the hinterlands, building empire and making money for themselves and the crown.

I have a side question. If there are no taxes, how does the kingdom prosper?

Good point. Taxation is kind of required. But higher remuneration is required to make it worthwhile for the adventurers. The adventurers become the tax collectors.

Let's look at it from the investment side. What does it mean to "invest" in adventurers?

My guess would be training academies.

That could be one way to go. What I'm thinking here is of a place where already existing adventurers go to get their chance - after all, Columbus was an Italian who sailed for the Spaniards, and many explorers worked for countries other than their own. This does create a problem in regards to insuring loyalty - in my mind's eye I imagine the King of the nation being a charismatic ruler, probably with a certain amount of personal power himself.

The only fly in the ointment: Not all adventurers are good, and even the ones that claim to be are mostly just violent mercenaries. I don't know that the common person is free from non-stop low-level harassment by adventurers and I'm not sure that I'd feel particularly safe as the king or as any major merchant.

That's definitely something to keep in mind. I'm thinking that the ruler may have some kind of "test" or standards that they at least claimed to keep to. In desperate times, they might relax those standards, causing all kinds of grief...

You could have it so that adventurers had to have a license/permit from the government, and that the government taxed all of their gains, but also payed them a decent salary (higher than those ordinarily earned by the lower class, so as to attract them).

I don't think that would appeal to the level of adventurer we're talking about. I see the compensation being more along the lines of the exploration of the new world - to go back to Columbus, he was to be Prince or King of the lands he discovered, IIRC. I'd expect the adventurers would be expected to bring a certain amount of gold back to the king, but any amount beyond that they can bleed off would be up to them, subject to the (as yet undetermined) moral limitations placed by the ruler...

 

[fusangite]

For reasons unrelated to the thread, I was thinking about Portugal, and how they created an empire from a tiny, tiny nation - largely because they saw the importance of sea power and exploration, and used the monetary gains to reinvest in that sea power... Eventually, they fell by the wayside, but were pretty powerful for a while.

I was thinking about creating a nation in my campaign world that pursued a similar path - but then it occured to me: What if a nation decided to exploit a different resource to build an empire, namely adventurers.

I'm assuming a small nation that decides to use adventuring parties to build their empire.

Actually, that sounds like the Spanish Hapsburgs. That's what the conquistadors were. Pizarro, Cortes, Aguirre, de Soto and a host of less famous ones led small, multi-ethnic parties that were largely self-financed and operating at arm's length to the crown. The adventurers who obtained the Aztec and Inca gold were not really that different from your average adventuring party, except in size. Furthermore, the most adventuring party-like endeavours were the subsequent quests for El Dorado in South America and the Seven Cities of Cibola in present-day New Mexico -- these groups were even smaller, more competitive and bigger risk-takers.

KrazyHades also makes a good point about licensing. Licensing was pretty important for the Spanish Hapsburg conquistadors. But the best stuff on licensing adventurers was in the 2E Runequest campaign scenarios Pavis and Big Rubble. There were all kinds of regulations, a bureaucracy dealing with adventurers and, in what I think was a tip of the hat to Paranoia, fabulous adventuring forms for the players to fill out.

How would they do it? How would they maintain control (over the land, and over the adventurers!)?

Adventuring, to succeed, cannot be centred on your core territory. It has to be a way of expanding your territory. New territory obtained through adventuring or, more likely, territory the empire never owns but raids periodically does not need to be heavily controlled by imperial authorities. They can let the adventurers set up all kinds of personal fiefs; as long as your world doesn't have giant smallpox epidemics, the chances that territory temporarily seized and plundered by adventurers could one day be fully incorporated into your empire, possibly rivaling the centre for power is next to nothing.

So, let the crazy risk-takers run their little military colony or despotate until the locals manage to throw them out. As long as the empire keeps getting a share of the plunder or tribute being exacted from the territory, it gains much and loses nothing by delegating its administration to the unstable individuals who are extracting wealth from it.

What cool adventuring possibilities come to mind as a result of this strategy?

Well, I think the adventurers having to set themselves up as despots in order to keep extracting value from an imperial march, borderland or uncharted territory adds interesting political and economic dimensions to the game.

I used to game with a guy who, every time we cleaned out a dungeon or ruin would proclaim, "Awesome. Let's make this place our base!" It would be great if instead of being a ridiculous impulse, this became central to campaigns.

Anyway, lots of other great ideas in this thread. It sounds like you have hit upon an excellent idea.

 

[CruelSummerLord]

For reasons unrelated to the thread, I was thinking about Portugal, and how they created an empire from a tiny, tiny nation - largely because they saw the importance of sea power and exploration, and used the monetary gains to reinvest in that sea power... Eventually, they fell by the wayside, but were pretty powerful for a while.

I was thinking about creating a nation in my campaign world that pursued a similar path - but then it occured to me: What if a nation decided to exploit a different resource to build an empire, namely adventurers.

I'm assuming a small nation that decides to use adventuring parties to build their empire.

How would they do it? How would they maintain control (over the land, and over the adventurers!)?

What cool adventuring possibilities come to mind as a result of this strategy? How could it be worked into a campaign?

What do you think?

This is a fantastic idea. There are all sorts of possibilities here:

-The Epic Exploration Campaign: The king of this small kingdom may not have much of an army, but he probably has good sea power. And he'll put that sea power to use by searching out new resources, new alliances, new trade routes, new lands, anything and everything like that. Some areas may be conquered, others be allied with. Just like Columbus (an Italian who sailed for Spain) or John Cabot (real name Giovanni Caboto, an Italian who sailed for the English), ambitious players seeking wealth and prestige can go off on these voyages.

The king finances the journeys in return for ultimate sovereignty or alliance with the explored areas, and the adventurers get peerages and a share in the wealth they attain. This lasted for centuries, ranging from Columbus, Pizarro and Cabot through to Francis Drake and Magellan and as late as the 19th century with Cecil Rhodes and Dr. Livingstone exploring Africa. In every case, the sponsoring countries gained phenomenal wealth and power-why should your king be any different?

Your late medieval campaign world is ideal for this, since by then seafaring technology had improved to the point that Columbus could sail to the New World, even though it'd be extremely dangerous-which is what you as DM want, after all. Your players could be pioneers who'd change the world forever.

As to who they meet along the way, whether they fight or ally with the cultures they come in contact with...that's up to you.

-The Expansion Campaign: Since the beginning, D&D has offered adventurers the chance to develop their own followers and fortresses. In real life, historical kings would give peerages to those who performed great services for them, so ambitious adventurers will obviously go this route. By clearing a place out, setting up towns and a military presence, and then pledging allegiance to a ruler, the adventurer gets the prestige of becoming an aristocrat and noble, and the benefit of having his title recognized by a true and powerful monarch. The monarch, for his part, gets additional resources and tax revenue, has fewer monsters roaming around, and a powerful ally to call on in times of trouble.

A country reeling from the effects of civil war or a destroyed aristocracy has plenty of opportunities for ambitious adventurers. A weakened monarch might offer great patronage in return for allegiance...and your players can respond. If the Wars of the Roses had taken place in a campaign setting, the Lancasters and the Yorks would no doubt have offered rich rewards for powerful adventurer-types who might want to join their cause.

-Preparation for Active Expansion/Getting Them First: Adventurers could function as the equivalents of the Mossad or the C.I.A., destabilizing their government's enemies in preparation for power-grabbing by the monarch. A government that is organized and ready for battle is a much stronger foe than one that is already suffering from internal strife and confusion...which adventurers can easily cause.

Take the current Forgotten Realms, for example. Cormyr is currently reeling from its recent war with a red dragon and its minions, and the new Princess Regent is using adventurers to take care of many situations and problems within the kingdom. Now, if Cormyr were to invade and conquer, or even simply loot, Westgate or Sembia, that could go a long way to getting Cormyr back on its feet. But destabilizing Cormyr's rivals is necessary for an invasion, both weakening the enemy and giving Cormyr time to re-establish itself.

Now, who better to destablize and damage the governments of Sembia and Westgate than all those adventurers? Alusair and Caladnei might send them to assassinate prominent nobles and officials, to commit economic terrorism through attacking caravans or merchant ships, to stir up monsters and forment rebellion and strife...anything and everything that can be done to cause chaos until Cormyr is ready to invade. (And yes, I think Cormyr is quite capable of this. The idealists among the Harpers might protest, but I think the more realistic ones would know that this is the way the world works. Besides, someone like Storm Silverhand might be happy to help cause misery for the Sembians, for example...)

That's just one example of how a government can use adventurers to one-up its enemies.

 

[Drawmack]

Here’s my take on this:

Back Story

The country was originally run by a very power, but evil monarch. You can play with this all you want. I would probably base it on the Nazis performing genocide on a demihuman race which was nearly a majority in the region prior to this evil regime, and are now nearly extinct. While run by a monarchy, it was a very powerful monarchy, therefore not easily toppled.

Then one day, along comes an epic level adventuring party. They battle their way through the hordes of military and even the king’s guard and topple the evil empire. However, now they are left with an empire in moral and financial ruin that is pretty much universally hated the world over. This party is not the “normal” four person party, but rather a party in which every core class is represented. So how are they going to fix this?

After much discussion and research, they decided that the moral and economic degradation can be corrected through education. So they set up a public school system. From the ages of 5 – 12 all children are given a general education. Sure this education include reading, writing, and arithmetic; but it also includes introduction to nature (druid/ranger), introduction to religion (cleric/paladin), introduction to theater (bard), introduction to warfare (fighter/barbarian), introduction to arcane (wizard/sorcerer), introduction to subterfuge (rogue). None of these introductions is enough to give someone a level in the class, but enough that they kind of understand what the class does.

At the age of 12 every citizen is given a comprehensive abilities test. Wherever the citizen shows aptitude is where they continue their education. The majority of people are going to show an aptitude for things like leatherwork, metalwork, woodwork, farming, etc. However, probably about 25% of the population is going to show an aptitude for one of the player classes on an even split between them. These people then continue training at the academy for their class.
​

[Just 30 years ahead – so things can be explained that would be hard to role-play]

Academies

There are six academies in the capital city. These academies are seminary, theater, nature, combat, arcane, and spy school. Hopefully you can see how these map to the classes. Upon graduating from an academy you are first level of your class. First level characters are conscripted into service to the state. They are assigned to a ship headed out to the “new world”. At this level they are under the regulation of a governor, who is level 8 – 13. This person decides how to pay and treat their conscripts without input from the council. So some are good and some are not. They adventure in the new world until they achieve level 5.

At level 5 they are promoted to teacher at their home academy. Only a small percentage of the conscripts (5 – 7 %) will achieve this level. While teaching at their home academy they are expected to keep training themselves as well as be on call to the empire. If there is an uprising or whatnot, the teachers put it down. They teach until they reach 8th level.​

Governors

At 8th level the teacher is promoted to governor. Only about 50% of those who make it to 5th level will make it to 8th level. Once 8th level is attained the empire gives them an army of conscripts, a horde (about 100) of settlers, a couple of ships, some supplies (mostly tools), and the dead to some land in the new world. They now are pretty much in charge of this new land and have to send a portion of any resources from this land to the empire. The empire of course is going to use scrying and teleportation magic to keep the governors in check.​

Lords

Upon achieving 14th level governors are promoted to lords. Only about 20% of governors make it to this level. Lords fill one of three roles. They may return to the capital city and take a position in management at one of the academies, or they may take a position overseeing a number of governors. Additionally they may choose to stay in the new world in which case the empire gives them some unsettled land, allows them to take any of their military or plebes who “choose” to go with them, and allows them to set up their own sovereign states on this land.​

What do you think?