Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gilladian" data-source="post: 9033386" data-attributes="member: 2093">In my last campaign in my homebrew campaign world (which is 40+ years old), the PCs rescued the main kingdom from being taken over by a lich and used as his "springboard" to conquer the world. Now I am contemplating a future campaign in said kingdom. The situation they left was that the Elder of two princes had been taken over (magic jarred) by the lich, and when he inherited, all the BAD STUFF (tm) began to happen. The PCs rescued the missing younger prince, discovered that the elder prince was NOT WHO HE SEEMED, and eventually managed to slay the lich and rescue him as well. Because explaining that the Prince was NOT REALLY BAD was hard, he has stepped back from ruling, and the younger Prince will be taking over as King, merging the old kingdom with several independent groups, and forging a larger, more democratic government - a small but strong council led by the King, and a larger but less powerful Parliament of sorts (I haven't worked out the exact details, and may never do so, but my idea is that this would have members elected by the citizens, Counts and Barons, Churchmen, Guildmasters, etc... all as possible members, while the small Council would be the Prince, the Duke, The High Priest of All Gods, and a selected Senior Guildmaster or two, plus ONE elected by the People). Does this sound at all reasonable? The tech/feel of the world is pre-Enlightenment, but of course pretty socially-modernized in many ways. Another thing I'm trying to decide is HOW FAR into the future I want to move for the next campaign, which I hope will focus less on Greenvale's politics, and more on the larger world. Typically, when I end one campaign and begin another, I move maybe 5-10 years into the future, so I can plausibly still have all the same people/places exist in my major towns, etc... It's a bummer having to go in and develop dozens of new NPCs and update tons of places that the PCs visited. But if I moved things 50 years into the future, while I'd have to do a bunch of that, I'd also be alot freer to be able to say "People don't really care about what happened way back THEN, and this is how things are now..." What would be your pro's and cons of each option?</blockquote>

Verification