Archdukes and emperors are beyond the normal scope of play

[McPerth]

In WW1 Princes died in the trenches, in the War of the Roses the nobles exterminated themselves. In Rome patricians who wanted political power had to serve in the army. At Cannae both Consuls (POTUS and VP analogues) were present, one was KIA. Julius of impeccable lineage had no problem with standing in the front lines to inspire the troops.

Tech though began creating an easy out for upper types. Plenty of WW1 generals found no need to go to trenches, many stayed so far back they could barely hear the arty, aided and abetted by the static nature of the front and radios.

WW1 dead princes:
Prince Heinrich of Bavaria, Prince Friedrich Karl of Prussia and Prince Frederick John of Saxe-Meiningen, Belgium's Baudouin de Ligne as well as England's Prince Maurice of Battenberg.

Most of the cases you quote here are Major War (or worse, civil war in the case of the roses) issues, so most nobelity was involved on them, as their posts were in jeopardy. Most of traveller adventures are about pretty missions on wich hight nobles whouls be out of place (unless as patrons).

Hight nobles in 3I, as I understand it, are true administrators of large zones and larger populations, so they should be deserting ther posts if going on adventuring. So, if a player on a campaign I'm refereing comes to have too high SS, I assume it's a distant cousin of a hight noble, not a noble by himself.

Even if close kindsmen of hight nobles, I don't think they whould be allowed to go adventuring for fear of bein taken as hostages (look what happened when the grandson of the british queen was set to Afghanistan with his regiment and extrapolate it to 3I*).

That doesn't mean that a campaign may not be customized for hight nobles (or high rank military), either as political intrigue near Capital, as diplomats, or anything else a referee can think about (e.g. Arrival Vengeance, if you play it with the players as part of the senior staff).

*EDIT: After all, Afghanistan is a unconventional war, and a minor one for most people (hope no one takes offense, even if he/she disagrees in this point. There are no minor wars for those involved on them). I don't think the reaction whould have been the same if sent to a regular or major war (let's say, should he been sent with the BAOR to deffend Germany. Actually, his uncle fought on the Falklands and there seemed to be no worries about him to become a primary target or a hostage).

 

[Garyius2003]

An archduke can be on the other side of a crowded room, get a whisper in the ear and a head point from a staff member, and nod at the PCs after a big hero move, before he leaves the room. That's it.

A duke can induct into the Order of X, right before the PC is retired.

The Assistant Deputy Under Chancellor for the Sub Court, however, is free to secretly meet with the PCs.

 

[HG_B]

Most of the cases you quote here are Major War (or worse, civil war in the cas Actually, his uncle fought on the Falklands and there seemed to be no worries about him to become a primary target or a hostage).

The job he did had almost a zero chance of becoming a hostage. Also, the enemy they were fighting wouldn't treat captives as hostages. Not without risking the existence of their entire government in the bargain... Ie: never would have happened.

 

[McPerth]

The job he did had almost a zero chance of becoming a hostage. Also, the enemy they were fighting wouldn't treat captives as hostages. Not without risking the existence of their entire government in the bargain... Ie: never would have happened.

Agreed. Because that I said a regular (read conventional) or major war.

BTW, I'm affraid you messed in erasing the not aplicable parts of my entry you were quoting. As it is, it's difficult to undertand what parts of my entry are you taliking about . (EDIT: for those wanting to read the full text quoted by HG_B, is on entry 21, abrove, this same page)

 

[HG_B]

BTW, I'm affraid you messed in erasing the not aplicable parts of my entry you were quoting. As it is, it's difficult to undertand what parts of my entry are you taliking about .

Oops. Sorry 'bout that. Will be more careful in the future.

 

[bromdenlong]

agreed...

for my own play. YMMV, of course.

 

[Shonner]

I was at a store yesterday, not one Traveller item for sale. Mostly War Hammer, Pathfinder, and D&D games on the shelves. I looked at the Space: 1889 book for Savage Worlds and read about how nobles are treated. The book alters nobles a bit from the stock SW rules so that they can be played by PCs. It is assumed that nobles would be able to afford to travel to Mars, and they'd make up the majority of people there.

Maybe in Traveller, all players could be nobles if they were on a world where there are only nobles.

 

[Yavin_Prime]

I say disagree mainly because PnP is all about imagination and if you and your players can imagine it then go for it.

With that said I would think that any contact with an Archduke or the Emperor would have to be minimal, perhaps a mission giver. If you've been aiding the local sector for instance and Archduke may invite you and your players to participate in a grand battle. Heck having contact with these characters could lead to the ultimate way to wrap up a game completely. Then when you run future games you could have NPCs talk about the great battle. Perhaps your next game starts off with your new characters seeking out the remains of the old characters if they went 'missing' during the great battle.

Anyways I say have fun with the game and don't limit your imagination.

I was at a store yesterday, not one Traveller item for sale. Mostly War Hammer, Pathfinder, and D&D games on the shelves.

I have the same problem at my local store. I went there yesterday though and the owner is ordering some more books for me and I put up a notice that I'm starting a game. With luck Traveller will pop up again in Southern California.

 

[aramis]

Cryton's also running traveller in SoCal...

 

[Shonner]

I have the same problem at my local store. I went there yesterday though and the owner is ordering some more books for me and I put up a notice that I'm starting a game. With luck Traveller will pop up again in Southern California.

Where's that at? Empire games? Or Game Empire? (I can never remember its name) I think there is just one store left in San Diego. There used to be a Wizards of the Coast store which was all right back in the day. Or are you near Los Angeles?

 

[BardicHeart]

I voted disagree for several reasons.

One... what exactly is "normal"? To me the concept of a "normal" game means applying constraints to the game, limiting its scope. I prefer campaigns that have wider horizons.

Two... I can think of any number of scenarios where an archduke or emperor might be involved... a PC is knighted (only the archdukes or emperors can do this) and goes to court for the ceremony. Naturally during their visit they are drawn into some political intrigue and... Or they are summoned secretly for a special mission directly for the Emperor or an archduke. Or they finally get caught doing naughty things and are in serious trouble... but are offered an Imperial pardon if...

Three... given the size of solar system and planet, having one or more PCs made baronets or even barons with fiefs in one system can be a way of localizing the campaign. Then dealing with their own political intrigues, military skirmishes, and so forth. For the same sort of campaign on a smaller scale, the PCs are all knights in the service of a local baron on a balkanized world (allows the PCs more freedom to buckle some swashes on a regular basis in the later case). None of this directly involves an emperor or archduke other than when they are granted the title and fief, but the subject of nobles seems to have come up so what the heck.

Four... Traveller offers so much variety of possibilities, it seems a shame to always run yet another campaign of struggling homeless wanderers in their beat up free trader trying to survive whatever "adventure" they get thrown into this week. Honestly, to me that comes off like a bad sitcom after awhile.

 

[Orr]

I can think of any number of scenarios where an archduke or emperor might be involved...

Can you think of any where an archduke or and emperor are a PC? That's the thinking behind the question.

... given the size of solar system and planet, having one or more PCs made baronets or even barons with fiefs in one system can be a way of localizing the campaign...

Yes, that's one type of play and T4's Pocket Empires is written just for that type of play.

Of course long term politically focused campaigns aren't normal types of play. Such play is possible and supported, but it's not part of the normal scope. You see that such play isn't part of the normal scope because such play is played very differently.

 

[RandyB]

Four... Traveller offers so much variety of possibilities, it seems a shame to always run yet another campaign of struggling homeless wanderers in their beat up free trader trying to survive whatever "adventure" they get thrown into this week. Honestly, to me that comes off like a bad sitcom after awhile.

[tangent] It's a sign of a weak/unimaginative GM to me, after all these years; Firefly/Serenity notwithstanding. If a Traveller GM can't challenge a group of players and their characters any other way, I won't let that person GM Traveller for me. [/tangent]

 

[rancke]

One... what exactly is "normal"?

My guess would be that the OP was thinking of the kind of campaigns typified by a large preponderance of game material published by companies and fans alike. Footloose adventurers being hired by one patron after another or free traders stumbling from one adventure to the next or mercenaries hired for one task after another.

To me the concept of a "normal" game means applying constraints to the game, limiting its scope. I prefer campaigns that have wider horizons.

Your preferences don't really affect what 'normal' means, does it? I would prefer if the whole range of planetary noble ranks from (planetary) baron to World Emperor wasn't squeezed into one or two social ranks, but the fact remains that until and unless Marc Miller changes his mind about it, SL 10 is upper middle class and SL 12 is Imperial baron or the equivalent.

Two... I can think of any number of scenarios where an archduke or emperor might be involved... a PC is knighted (only the archdukes or emperors can do this) and goes to court for the ceremony. Naturally during their visit they are drawn into some political intrigue and... Or they are summoned secretly for a special mission directly for the Emperor or an archduke. Or they finally get caught doing naughty things and are in serious trouble... but are offered an Imperial pardon if...

The official adventure that came closest to this concept was the DGP Grand Tour adventure that had the adventurers presented to the Emperor in a short ceremony and then ushered out again (Though Strephon did spend a few extra minutes chatting to the Imperium-renowned roboticist who had accomplished a feat unsurpassed by the rest of the Imperial scientific community -- hardly your average player character).

Four... Traveller offers so much variety of possibilities, it seems a shame to always run yet another campaign of struggling homeless wanderers in their beat up free trader trying to survive whatever "adventure" they get thrown into this week. Honestly, to me that comes off like a bad sitcom after awhile.

It does seem a shame. But how many published adventures suggest that this is exactly what the normal campaign does? 80% of them? 90%? 95?


Hans

 

[far-trader]

Four... Traveller offers so much variety of possibilities, it seems a shame to always run yet another campaign of struggling homeless wanderers in their beat up free trader trying to survive whatever "adventure" they get thrown into this week. Honestly, to me that comes off like a bad sitcom after awhile.

[tangent] It's a sign of a weak/unimaginative GM to me, after all these years; Firefly/Serenity notwithstanding. If a Traveller GM can't challenge a group of players and their characters any other way, I won't let that person GM Traveller for me. [/tangent]

One way of looking at it I guess. You seem to also be implying that if the players want exactly that they must be stupid. I would argue that a free-trader game is not bad by default, and a ref running one is not automatically weak/unimaginative. I think it is your individual experiences colouring your pov, try to use a smaller brush

Would you pity the poor ref who has to rehash the same old junk trader adventures because that's what the players want, when what the ref wanted to run was something else entirely? And would you then be aiming your barbs at the players?

It does seem a shame. But how many published adventures suggest that this is exactly what the normal campaign does? 80% of them? 90%? 95?

It does seem so, and I've often wondered why there weren't on balance a lot more Navy and Merc (Army/Marine) geared adventures given the sales figures for the applicable supplements. Untapped market? Or disinterested players?

Anyway, as to the original question, I think it would take a fairly mature and unique group to run a game at the level of even Dukes, never mind the Archdukes and Emperor (note the singular, unless you'd be looking at an interstellar polity game, Zhodani vs Imperium vs Solomani.

The biggest thing at that level of play is there's not much in the room for roleplaying. You're pretty much tied to the job with little adventure opportunity or chance to get out of the palace. Maybe early in your life, while being groomed for office, but not once you're in. Norris' escapades beign an exception...

 

[Yavin_Prime]

Where's that at? Empire games? Or Game Empire? (I can never remember its name) I think there is just one store left in San Diego. There used to be a Wizards of the Coast store which was all right back in the day. Or are you near Los Angeles?

I'm in Ventura county, so north of LA

 

[Shonner]

I used to go to Oxnard. But I never had time to visit shops around there. Been to their Fry's though a bunch of times near Port Hueneme.

 

[BardicHeart]

Can you think of any where an archduke or and emperor are a PC? That's the thinking behind the question.

That would be a challenge to run as a campaign. Seems like it would end up a war game... playing out the Rebellion or something on the scale of the old Emperor of the Fading Suns computer game.

Yes, that's one type of play and T4's Pocket Empires is written just for that type of play.

From what I've read in Pocket Empires that's a couple steps above a knight in service to a baron. Seems to me the "knights" would be doing the grunt work and special tasks for a baron, which is loaded with potential for adventures.
... knights I have reports there has been a major archaeological discover in Nation B which they are concealing, I want you too sneak in and....
... knights we will be hosting a gala for the subsector nobility in a month, I'm charing you to head up security...
... knights two of the nations are on the verge of war, apparently some national treasurs have been stolen and they blame each other... find them!
... knights we have a spy in our midst, I'm tasking you to discover who it is and what they want (gets even more interesting if one of the PCs turns out to be the spy).
Its the Baron who is running the planet, or perhaps merely acting as a liason between one balkanized nation on a planet and the imperial government or some other such arrangement. If the Baron is just the liason, then its not pocket empires at all because they aren't running the planet nor the society, they're just representing them to the Imperial Moot. If the planetary dictator turns out to be a prick, or its a balkanized planet with multiple governments, that could get.... interesting.

Of course long term politically focused campaigns aren't normal types of play. Such play is possible and supported, but it's not part of the normal scope. You see that such play isn't part of the normal scope because such play is played very differently.

Normal for whom? I've seen plenty of such campaigns over the years. Guess it depends on where you are and who you game with.

 

[BardicHeart]

It does seem a shame. But how many published adventures suggest that this is exactly what the normal campaign does? 80% of them? 90%? 95?

Maybe I'm just showing my age... but who cares??? I started gaming back before there was a World of Greyhawk, before most games had published campaign settings and adventures. The two first games I owned (original Fantasy Wargaming and original Mechanoid Invasion - 3 small booklets printed on newsprint half the page count of the LLBs), neither came with any published adventures or campaign settings... you were on your own. Sounds to me like the wealth of published material that is the norm for many games today has limited people's thinking, that is a shame.

Its Traveller, people should write whatever adventures and campaigns they want and the only real limitation is their own imaginations.

To quote a song from Willy Wonka...

Come with me
And you'll be
In a world of pure imagination
Take a look
And you'll see
Into your imagination
We'll begin
With a spin
Travelling in the world of my creation
What we'll see
Will defy
If you want to view paradise
Simply look around and view it
Anything you want to, do it
Want to change the world
There's nothing to it

 

[rancke]

Maybe I'm just showing my age... but who cares???

Who cares? The OP (Original Pollster). People who engage in discussing the subject.

Obviously.

I skip threads I don't care about every day. Sometimes I wonder why anyone would care, but I try very hard not to succumb to the temptation to express my opinion[*], since it's difficult not to imply that those who do care are being silly. And I think that would be rude.


Hans

[*] I admit I've failed on occasion.​