Orders of Knighthood - help/discussion request

[qstor]

There's an article on www.livinggreyhawk.com on the Wizards site on the Knights of the Watch for Greyhawk. That might help somewhat.

Check out the local library for books on the Crusades, that might be one angle. Reading about the Leper King after seeing "Kingdom of Heaven", it was interesting to see the relationship of the Kingdom of Jerusalem to the Pope. That might also give you some ideas for you campaign if you have a detailed organized religious structure for one deity.

Hope those comments are helpful.

Mike

 

[S'mon]

Thanks Mike.

 

[gizmo33]

I have PCs at all levels in the campaign world from 3rd through 18th to Deity (40+), all with their own agendas.

The idea of a PC deity is pretty interesting. I've considered something similar with having some of my semi-retired former players take the rolls of heads of state in my campaign. Do you put some sort of constraints on divine intervention? What is the "worship points" system you refer to?

 

[S'mon]

The Worship Points System basically gives deities WPs depending on the number & enthusiasm of their worshippers, they determine the deity's status (demi, lesser, etc) and can be spent like XP to make items & spell effects.

Divine intervention is limited by the actual capabilities of the deity (I use 1e Manual of the Planes for deity powers) and by the willingness of other deities to intervene to stop deity-level attacks on their followers. The deities don't want an all-out inter-deity war as that would mean Ragnarok and the end of everything, so most deity intervention is by more or less subtly guiding their worshippers, especially their Agents like Ulfius, rather than by blowing things up.

 

[gizmo33]

Maybe in some kind of peaceful transition? Certainly in a violent coup one side will want to wipe out the other. Talking to Craig yesterday he/Thrin wants to 'corrupt' Tarkane's newborn son to Thrinism somehow to gain power peacefully when the son inherits.

Well, your Waffen SS analogy IMO was very creative and something I would have never thought of since my mind tends to stick in the medeival period for examples of things. So as far as peaceful transfers of power - I'm not an expert on political history by a long shot (I tend to be more interested in social and cultural things as IMO they are more applicable) but I can't think of an example of a peaceful transfer of power like that in a monarchy.

Actually, there's the "shogun" situation in Japan - and perhaps that's a close fit. I don't know much at all - but my basic impression is that the shogun was the chief general with actual power while the emporer became a figurehead with religious authority (as a descendant of the Sun Goddess). Since the rulers of your main kingdoms seem to be at the head of religious organizations, perhaps something like that could happen - a powerful military leader takes control in an effort to provide stability (perhaps in an effort to prevent a civil war in the Overkingdom) while the former ruler maintains the theoretical rulership and favor of the gods.

Do you know any references that give synopses of how the Elector system developed? Currently I have what looks like a first-generation dictatorship, Tarkane obviously wants his son to succeed him without fuss.

I'd have to Google for the exact details. My impression is that an Elector is a greater noble (duke). There are a fixed number of electors and they have their positions as a result of heredity - perhaps in some ancient time when the 6 most powerful chiefs of the kingdom decided to join together for mutual defense, they chose one of their number to be king, and the 6 original chiefs claimed for themselves and their decendants the power of "elector". It's probably a matter of custom/law, for example and that Duke of SuchandSuch is always an elector. Some of the Dukes of Germany, AFAIK also possessed titles that were household positions in the royal household. For example - one of the Dukes was the "Royal Cupbearer". I can't imagine a Duke doing a lot of cup-bearing if they're busy ruling their own lands, but I supposed the position had some sort of customary honor associated with it. I don't know of the facts of the election - if the Electors were rubber-stampers or if they had actual power, and what happened if a king were chosen from a different family.

 

[S'mon]

There's a perennial "Immortals Handbook" thread Upper_Krust runs on the House Rules forum, he'll be publishing (eventually) an expanded & 3e-ified version of my Worship Points System - you could ask him about his plans for it there.

 

[S'mon]

The idea of a PC deity is pretty interesting. I've considered something similar with having some of my semi-retired former players take the rolls of heads of state in my campaign.

Lots of retired NPCs IMC are kings/monarchs, as are some active PCs like King Sigurd of Trafalgis. I've thought about running a political rivalrous game where everyone is a monarch, I'm not sure how to make it reasonably balanced though when some kingdoms have 16 million people and some have 150,000.

 

[S'mon]

Actually, there's the "shogun" situation in Japan - and perhaps that's a close fit. I don't know much at all - but my basic impression is that the shogun was the chief general with actual power while the emporer became a figurehead with religious authority (as a descendant of the Sun Goddess). Since the rulers of your main kingdoms seem to be at the head of religious organizations, perhaps something like that could happen - a powerful military leader takes control in an effort to provide stability (perhaps in an effort to prevent a civil war in the Overkingdom) while the former ruler maintains the theoretical rulership and favor of the gods.

I'd have to Google for the exact details. My impression is that an Elector is a greater noble (duke). There are a fixed number of electors and they have their positions as a result of heredity - perhaps in some ancient time when the 6 most powerful chiefs of the kingdom decided to join together for mutual defense, they chose one of their number to be king, and the 6 original chiefs claimed for themselves and their decendants the power of "elector". It's probably a matter of custom/law, for example and that Duke of SuchandSuch is always an elector. Some of the Dukes of Germany, AFAIK also possessed titles that were household positions in the royal household. For example - one of the Dukes was the "Royal Cupbearer". I can't imagine a Duke doing a lot of cup-bearing if they're busy ruling their own lands, but I supposed the position had some sort of customary honor associated with it. I don't know of the facts of the election - if the Electors were rubber-stampers or if they had actual power, and what happened if a king were chosen from a different family.

Re Shogun - Thrin would love for Ulfius to become Shogun ("Marshall" or similar) to a figurehead Emperor. The Japanese analogy is interesting, thanks, though my political stuff in the game comes more from Machiavelli. - Tarkane to a large extent is based off Mussolini.

Re Electors - in the Norse part of my campaign world King Sigurd of Trafalgis was chosen as king by a Council of Jarls in just this fashion, I guess the Elector system might have had Norse/Teutonic roots? That would explain why it seems so un-Roman. The Jarls of Trafalgis would demand the right to name the next king after Sigurd too, good point to bear in mind...

In the Overkingdom by contrast there's pretty much a void when it comes to high-level representative institutions, it's a post-colonial state (part of a foreign power the Albine Empire for nearly 200 years, now independent again) and you could say the people are struggling to work out a workable form of governance. Tarkane harks back to ancient times (the Roman-style Old Imarran Empire) and wants a centralised hereditary autocracy as the new Imarran Empire, but the current situation is far more decentralised and feudal.

 

[gizmo33]

Divine intervention is limited by the actual capabilities of the deity (I use 1e Manual of the Planes for deity powers) and by the willingness of other deities to intervene to stop deity-level attacks on their followers. The deities don't want an all-out inter-deity war as that would mean Ragnarok and the end of everything, so most deity intervention is by more or less subtly guiding their worshippers, especially their Agents like Ulfius, rather than by blowing things up.

I think there is a whole spectrum of deity intervention between apocolypse spells and non-involvement. Your reasoning is pretty typical for people's campaigns, but I've always been somewhat uncomfortable with it. A deity could theoretically blip onto the Prime, throw a few meteor-swarms at an opposing army, and leave. Or they could grant all of their high level followers magic items, or whatever. I'm sure for every situation I can think of, someone could think of a counter for it. IMC I have a "Divine Compact", inspired by Mayfair's Demons modules. It's a list of "thou shalt nots" for deities - it keeps me from having to continually monitor balance of power situations to be sure that deities aren't appearing on the Prime. It requires a 30 INT to understand, so I don't feel the need to explain it to PCs (other than general guidelines). Although in your campaign you have a deity PC, so I guess that wouldn't work. "Not wanting an all-out deity war" is something I can't imagine a PC deity being too concerned about in general - I suppose that your player in this case is pretty modest in their deity goals.

 

[gizmo33]

Lots of retired NPCs IMC are kings/monarchs, as are some active PCs like King Sigurd of Trafalgis. I've thought about running a political rivalrous game where everyone is a monarch, I'm not sure how to make it reasonably balanced though when some kingdoms have 16 million people and some have 150,000.

When you say "retired NPCs" I suppose you mean retired adventurers?

I think that the secret to balancing a 16 million vs. 150,000 person kingdom would lie in (what I see as) a somewhat more "historical" approach to kingdom design. A 16 million person kingdom would dominate, but I think this would be offset somewhat (in terms of player experience) by the coalition that usually has to exist to govern more populous nations. Unless you're running things in the age of monarchies, you could design the large kingdoms in your campaign so that they have a number of powerful nobles ruling them that require the King to maintain some sort of consensus with them (the Elector example being an extreme). A monarch in those systems would not have complete freedom of action, and internal politics would be as exhausting as external. Whereas in a 150,000 person kingdom, the monarch would have fewer of those headaches (no risk of a powerful lord rebelling or switching sides). However I'm not sure true balance could be achieved, but as a player I think I could enjoy either situation, and in terms of survival of a particular dynasty, the chances could be fairly even.