How powerful are T5 dukes?
- Thread starter rancke
- Start date
In T5 land grants are awarded at each level and are cumulative. Therefore you’d start as a Baron with a 4 hex grant, then when you got elevated you’d gain an additional 8 hex grant (for a total of 12 hexes) ... if you are elevated all the way to Duke (f) then you’d end up with a total of 124 hexes of land (although there’s nothing to say these are contiguous or prime real estate). If, however, as a Marquis you advanced due to a direct +1 SOC rather than by normal elevation, then you skip the Viscount rank (and the corresponding land grant of 16 hexes) and will only have 108 hexes of land at the end (although you would get to Duke quicker).
How much income this land generates depends on where it is. Each hex earns KCr10 per trade code per year ... if no trade codes then each hex earns KCr5 per year. So, ignoring preferred world rules, you could earn between MCr0.54 and MCr6.20 per year ... but probably around MCr2.48 per year.
Then there are Moot votes. As a Duke you automatically have 4 votes of your own but you can gain extra votes (lesser nobles give you theirs to vote on their behalf, ie. proxy), this is determined in the ‘mustering out’ benefits. These votes can be used directly in the Moot, given in proxy, or traded away to a politician for MCr0.1 each per year.
Other ‘mustering out’ benefits include...
How much income this land generates depends on where it is. Each hex earns KCr10 per trade code per year ... if no trade codes then each hex earns KCr5 per year. So, ignoring preferred world rules, you could earn between MCr0.54 and MCr6.20 per year ... but probably around MCr2.48 per year.
Then there are Moot votes. As a Duke you automatically have 4 votes of your own but you can gain extra votes (lesser nobles give you theirs to vote on their behalf, ie. proxy), this is determined in the ‘mustering out’ benefits. These votes can be used directly in the Moot, given in proxy, or traded away to a politician for MCr0.1 each per year.
Other ‘mustering out’ benefits include...
- One-time cash awards of upto KCr260,
- Ship shares (different ships have different numbers of shares, a yacht has 3),
- Life ‘insurance’ (DNA and memory scan archived to build a clone as a replacement if needs be),
- A minor corporate directorship (influence, use of corporate facilities, and KCr36 per year),
- and/or a life membership in TAS.
What's the size of a hex?
Surely the population of the world (or rather, the population of the fief, but I presume there would be some sort of correlation, though I'm not sure how strong it would be) would enter into it somehow?
Hans
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
That depends on the GM and the player involved. Some will want that level of detail, and will raise correspondingly higher incomes. Most will want to be adventuring types and be happy with the "this is your rents" payment that the KCr 10 per trade code per hex represents.
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Hex size is 1 KM I believe, and abstractly local pop has nothing to do with it. If you and your GM decide to be more hands on, then the local pop can have an effect. Not everyone will want that hassle, but if that is your joy spot, go for it.
Original_Carl
SOC-12
That depends on the hex. A Terrain Hex, such as those in Land Grants where the holder has Economic Control is 6,500 square kilometers (100km diameter). A Local Hex, such as those in Land Grants where the Holder has Outright Ownership is 65 square kilometers (10km diameter).
Original_Carl
SOC-12
Regarding income for Land Grant hexes...
It does as the population of the world factors into the world's Trade Codes.
It does as the population of the world factors into the world's Trade Codes.
For me and my players (when I have any -- I'm not running a campaign at the moment), it's not so much about the level of detail as about the level of verisimilitude. I (and my players) would expect a noble with an annual income in the megacredit range to have a retinue along when he's adventuring. Mind you, we wouldn't expect one to go adventuring in the typical Traveller campaign sense except in very exceptional circumstances. And if he happens to be on his home planet, we'd expect him to have a lot of resources, human and material, to call upon.
Even a local noble with an estate would be a problem as a typical PC adventurer because of the wealth he can aim at problems (and the jobs he can afford to turn down). An Imperial noble would be an even greater problem, since just his ability to walk into the subsector duke's palace and get an interview would short-circuit a lot of adventure plots.
At that level a lot of local nobles and royals are going to be looking down their noses at those (relatively) poor Imperial nobles. But I'm glad to hear that it's not planetary map hexes, as I had a horrible suspicion that it would be.
Hans
Population factors affect trade codes in a very oblique way. A world that goes from being Rich at pop 8 can become <no trade code at all> when it becomes pop 9. There's no difference whatsoever between rich worlds with pop 7 and pop 8 or high-population worlds with pop 9 and pop 10. Etc., etc.
Hans
Original_Carl
SOC-12
An Archduke could acquire a good slice of a continent (or ocean) in his/her 256 Terrain Hex Land Grant upon elevation from Duke, which works out to nearly 3.5 World Hexes.
A bit of a comedown from the entire world archdukes used to get for their fief.
But be that as it may, a world has 500 hexes. Plenty of room for local nobles that can look down on people with a mere 3.5 hexes to their name. (Though the extrality would be cause for envy).
Still, with 3.5 world hexes, archdukes would seem to be the kind of Imperial nobles that can expect to be invited to planetary level social events. Not so, evidently, Imperial dukes (well... maybe dukes too) and counts and marquesses and barons and baronets and knights. Unless it's a world with very limited population, of course.
Either an Imperial noble is a major powerful figure on the subsector level, let alone the planetary level, in which case he's not suitable PC material[*], or he is suitable PC material, in which case he would be a pretty small fry. This attempt to telescope the two paradigms together is... exceedingly belief-breaking.
[*] Not that you couldn't come up with a campaign for powerful nobles, but it would be a very atypical campaign.
Hans
I've known folks with considerable financial resources who did not fit your conceptions... wealthiest I've know had a worth in the low nine figures. I routinely witnessed him taking solo taxi rides dressed in khaki's, T-shirt, worn sneakers, and ball cap. In business dealings I had with him (I was in charge of a paltry $1.6 million U.S. RFP) he made no attempt to capitalize on his wealth nor potential influence.
Its not unheard of for people with status and wealth to eschew both in favor of adventure or simple social interaction.
A bored Duke or some such could find challenge in tagging along with a rag-tag group of adventurers - away from trappings of nobility and wealth. While Traveller supports the notion of 'average Joes', adventures are, by definition, exceptions to the norm. Likewise, in chargen, the nobility being discussed are exceptional (at least in so far as 2d6 allows).
A Ref is always in charge of what he allows in the way of resources and access for PCs - I'm certain the rules support that notion. Sure, a Noble might have 'access to local dignitaries' in principle - but that says nothing of actual practice where they may be given excuses and setbacks at every approach (maybe they are universally shunned for their association with adventuring hoodlums :devil
. Likewise, their lands/funds might be inaccessible for any number of 'rational' reasons.
The setting norm in no way has to apply to individual PCs - most especially when it breaks the Ref's suspension of disbelief.
Its not unheard of for people with status and wealth to eschew both in favor of adventure or simple social interaction.
A bored Duke or some such could find challenge in tagging along with a rag-tag group of adventurers - away from trappings of nobility and wealth. While Traveller supports the notion of 'average Joes', adventures are, by definition, exceptions to the norm. Likewise, in chargen, the nobility being discussed are exceptional (at least in so far as 2d6 allows).
A Ref is always in charge of what he allows in the way of resources and access for PCs - I'm certain the rules support that notion. Sure, a Noble might have 'access to local dignitaries' in principle - but that says nothing of actual practice where they may be given excuses and setbacks at every approach (maybe they are universally shunned for their association with adventuring hoodlums :devil
. Likewise, their lands/funds might be inaccessible for any number of 'rational' reasons.The setting norm in no way has to apply to individual PCs - most especially when it breaks the Ref's suspension of disbelief.
A roleplaying game is not real life. How many players have you known that didn't take full advantage of any and all advantages their characters had? And if you have to require your players to fail to avail themselves of their advantages in order to make a campaign work, what's the point of letting them have those advantages in the first place?
You mean use a false identity or put him in some other situation that makes it impossible for him to use his wealth and social position? Yes, that will work. In fact, it's the classic way to let such characters in literature have adventures. From what I've heard, though, that's not the solution the rules seem to support.
As I said: Either an Imperial noble is a major powerful figure on the subsector level, let alone the planetary level, in which case he's not suitable PC material, or he is suitable PC material, in which case he would be a pretty small fry.
Why are you so sure? The previous versions of the rules never did. Characters would get access to ships even if the campaign didn't require ships and fail to get access to ships even if the campaign did require it. It took a referee that fiddled with the rules to make that work.
Sure, a Noble might have 'access to local dignitaries' in principle - but that says nothing of actual practice where they may be given excuses and setbacks at every approach (maybe they are universally shunned for their association with adventuring hoodlums :devil
Oh yes, that's going to make for a cheerful campaign, with the referee forced into an adversarial relationship, constantly thwarting the players' attempts to explore their characters' advantages. And once again I must ask, what's the point of making someone a noble if he's not allowed to take advantage of being a noble?
The ability of a referee to ignore rules that don't work does not mean that a rule that doesn't work works.
Hans
Last edited:
Why not?
Little Title, small duties and problems, or large Title and big duties and problems.
It is just a question of the Referee remembering that Nobles to have work to do. Once you do that you shouldn't have problems. Also, if they are going to take full advantage of their wealth and power then you give them their responsibilities or they bum around and just a get some cash from the rents and stuff, but then they don't get all that prime access.
Rent Lords don't get as much power and ability to just get an interview with the Local Duke. Working Nobles on the other hand might, but then we get into things like the local politics and who might not want the Local Duke and their Nobs to do this thing and thus we have conflict. :smirk:
EDIT: Also, depending on how much detail and such you want to deal with hypothetically the Noble might even have access to a fraction of the Worlds RU. But if they are using the RU then they are going to have to do real work for the Imperium and of course Improve their Hexes. And raise that unit of military or naval forces to contribute to the Defense of the Realm. It's not all prime rib samiches and parties you know. That is mostly on the weekends.
I do not understand why an Imperial Noble can't be both a powerful figure and a Traveller. Why not run a campaign where the Noble actually does stuff?
Little Title, small duties and problems, or large Title and big duties and problems.
It is just a question of the Referee remembering that Nobles to have work to do. Once you do that you shouldn't have problems. Also, if they are going to take full advantage of their wealth and power then you give them their responsibilities or they bum around and just a get some cash from the rents and stuff, but then they don't get all that prime access.
Rent Lords don't get as much power and ability to just get an interview with the Local Duke. Working Nobles on the other hand might, but then we get into things like the local politics and who might not want the Local Duke and their Nobs to do this thing and thus we have conflict. :smirk:
EDIT: Also, depending on how much detail and such you want to deal with hypothetically the Noble might even have access to a fraction of the Worlds RU. But if they are using the RU then they are going to have to do real work for the Imperium and of course Improve their Hexes. And raise that unit of military or naval forces to contribute to the Defense of the Realm. It's not all prime rib samiches and parties you know. That is mostly on the weekends.
Last edited:
You can do that, but only if you tailor the problems to the noble's problem-solving abilities.
Referee: "The Vargr you rescued tells you his name is Gvoudzon and that the brooch in the museum belongs to him."
Tom: "Sounds like we're supposed to break into the museum and recover the brooch."
Dick: "I'm not going to commit a felony on behalf of a chance-met stranger!"
Harry: "Don't worry, there are lots of other options. First thing tomorrow we'll consult the best lawyer on Aramis and see if we can recover the brooch by suing the museum. I'll pay. If that won't work, we could try buying it from the museum. If the director isn't willing to sell, I'll talk to Marquis Leonard and ask him to lean on him. Perhaps I could offer to make a donation to the museum. If that fails we might bribe a security guard to get it for us."
Tom: "What about those thugs that attacked Gvoudzon? What do we do if they try again?"
Harry: "Good point. I'll hire a dozen bodyguards tomorrow."
Dick: "We'll be here for months and we won't be making any money!"
Harry: "Don't worry, I'll cover the payments."
Tom: "Sounds like we're supposed to break into the museum and recover the brooch."
Dick: "I'm not going to commit a felony on behalf of a chance-met stranger!"
Harry: "Don't worry, there are lots of other options. First thing tomorrow we'll consult the best lawyer on Aramis and see if we can recover the brooch by suing the museum. I'll pay. If that won't work, we could try buying it from the museum. If the director isn't willing to sell, I'll talk to Marquis Leonard and ask him to lean on him. Perhaps I could offer to make a donation to the museum. If that fails we might bribe a security guard to get it for us."
Tom: "What about those thugs that attacked Gvoudzon? What do we do if they try again?"
Harry: "Good point. I'll hire a dozen bodyguards tomorrow."
Dick: "We'll be here for months and we won't be making any money!"
Harry: "Don't worry, I'll cover the payments."
The problem is somewhat analogous to running an AD&D campaign where one character is level 12 and the rest are level 1. Problems that the low level characters can help out with the high-level character can handle on his own; problems that makes the high-level character sweat is beyond the power of the low-level character to help with. (The analogy is not perfect, but I hope you get the drift).
Except that the duties are dull and incompatible with the adventuring life. And the rules don't require nobles to work for thier income, do they?
Why not? Russian grand dukes that vacationed the US got escorts from the army when the went on hunting trips. (Or so the fictional tales I remember told me).
Why not? They're the same social class; common courtesy would do it.
You mean they won't have time to go adventuring? My point exactly.
Though I understand that the RAW does not require a noble to work for his income. Or am I mistaken?
Hans
Okay, I have a bit of breakfast, so let's go.
No, in Traveller5 as in all Traveller editions you can be a typical Rent Lord and just sit back and take the CrImps. But then I have read Adam Smith and we share a dislike of those types of people and since I don't run a dark Empire, they are below the working Nobles in my TUs. Also, I tend toward trying (due to my meatspace crew having a minimum of 5 Terms each) run an Operational Traveller, where in the Adventure is dealing with politics, logistics, that next war coming and how to win it, so my adventures rarely feature impoverished Free Traders.
And last, from what I can gather you run the Adventures. I don't, I run a sandbox so my players don't really have the ability to "short circuit the adventure" since most of the time, I am not running out of book with limited space to deal with all the monkey wrenches players can toss into a finely tuned adventure. But as I noted above, I can if I have to (because I am actually running out of pre-published adventure).
So, where is the problem here? My response as the Referee (since I do believe we are running CT's Traveller Adventure on Aramis?) is "Excellent. So, let's see about that Lawyer...". And then we get to that part of the Adventure: Dealing with Underling (Exit Visa style). They have to get an appointment. And let us not forget that this Adventuring Noble is from off world so it's not like they are someone important to the Lawyer or at least till Marquis Leonard can be convinced to lean on the Lawyer. But then we get to who does Leonard owe and do they want this mess cleaned up?. Conflict does not always mean Combat. It can take many forms and as Ref you should be able to work the ones that fit the crew you are running.
No, it is not. In Traveller, Skills are way more important than pure-dee ass smashing power, which is what D&D characters are about. Also, having a Merchant or Marine in the crew means things the Nob might not have a clue about can and are handled by the folks who do. Traveller doesn't have levels, it has Careers and that, my friend is a big difference in how it plays.
Why do you think their duties are dull and incompatible with adventuring? Have you seen the Presidents of the United States? They all go in looking middle aged, little to no gray hair and they come out after one four year Term looking as if they aged by ten years. All old and gray. That to me says their lives are anything, but dull and incompatible with adventuring. It really depends on what you think is dull, which running a world must be. Me, I think it is adventure all its own and run it so. In fact in the PbP, I have a newly minted Baronet having just taken out an Ad for Retainers, which is part of his Personal Adventure: New to the Nobility. :devil:
Well, that should have never happened in the US as the SS is in charge of protecting visiting Dignitaries, but then this may have happened before the SS was created, never heard the story myself. Sadly, this nation (the US) still has this love affair with Nobility. (And yes, sadly, I too suffer a bit of affection towards my Titled Cousins across the Pond, but mostly it reserved for HM the Queen, she rocks.)
Not really. By letter code, yeah, but in the living, breathing TU of that the players live in, hell no they are. One sits around and collects rents, but does nothing to better the lives of their constituents, nor are they working for the benefit of the Imperium. The other is out there doing work, they are keeping things from collapsing, making sure that the Imperial Armed Forces are ready for that next war, and so forth. If it comes down to seeing the Rent Lord or the Noble who is making sure the Imperium wins the next Frontier War with Zho, I don't see how the Rent Lord is getting in first. Maybe that is just me and my understanding of the real world and its complexities or the fact that like timerover51, I too dig the study of logistics and other un-fun things that make the world work.
No, point is that their Adventures are different from the scrabbling Free Trader.
No, in Traveller5 as in all Traveller editions you can be a typical Rent Lord and just sit back and take the CrImps. But then I have read Adam Smith and we share a dislike of those types of people and since I don't run a dark Empire, they are below the working Nobles in my TUs. Also, I tend toward trying (due to my meatspace crew having a minimum of 5 Terms each) run an Operational Traveller, where in the Adventure is dealing with politics, logistics, that next war coming and how to win it, so my adventures rarely feature impoverished Free Traders.
And last, from what I can gather you run the Adventures. I don't, I run a sandbox so my players don't really have the ability to "short circuit the adventure" since most of the time, I am not running out of book with limited space to deal with all the monkey wrenches players can toss into a finely tuned adventure. But as I noted above, I can if I have to (because I am actually running out of pre-published adventure).
The problem is the one I expanded on in my next paragraph. That the rich noble has a disproportionate amount of problem-solving ability. Harry is going to be the one who takes the lead here[*]. Tom, Dick and Sally never really got anything for their characters to do. (Sally? She's the one with the ex-marine combat-oriented character).
[*] Just as in the aforementioned AD&D campaign, the level 12 character is going to take the lead with most problems that isn't specifically tailored to one of the level 1 characters.
I wouldn't have that option with my old batch of players. I've already run an Exit Visa style adventure, and my players made it clear to me that if I ever pulled anything like that again, they'd strike.
But if I did run the lawyer like that, who'd be the lead character in running the bureaucratic maze? Harry's, that's who.
Unless the lawyer likes to earn money.
No, he can't. That was what I tried to explain. Problems that Harry's character can handle, the other players' characters need not contribute to. And problems that Harry's character can't handle, he can hire people to help him with.
Which is why I use the terms 'somewhat analogous' and 'the analogy is not perfect', hoping that you wouldn't insist on taking the analogy absolutely literally but instead think about how it was somewhat analogous. To wit: That the rich noble character (~the level 12 character) can handle a lot of problems (~combats) better than any of the other characters (~the level 1 characters). Not all problems, but a disproportionate number of them.
Not big enough.
Because they appear to me to require the noble to stay at home and handle problems that I don't find exiting.
Oh, I'm sure that if I was handling a Cuban Missile Crisis, I'd feel the adrenaline pumping. But what's the rest of my party doing in the meantime?
You'll be running in a typical Traveller campaign then? Not a campaign tailored to the baronet with the other PCs playing second fiddle to him?
(Yes, I know that's not what you said. But it's what I said nobles were unsuitable for: Typical Traveller campaigns. Pointing out that it's possible to run an atypical campaign for a noble (as long as the other players are content to be his retainers) doesn't refute that).
So? They're still peers, they're still 'One Of Us'. That's how nobilities have worked in all the historical societies I know of.
Oh, I quite agree. I just don't agree that it will come down to a choice. I think the working noble will come in first and THEN the rent noble will come in afterwards. Unless he happens to show up on the day the news of the next Zhodani attack arrives. But a referee can scarcely use a new Zhodani attack every time his player tries to get to see the local lord.
That too. Which is why I was careful to use the qualifier 'typical'. And by 'typical' I mean as in just about every campaign ever published.
Just to sum up: The big problem with a rich noble is that he has a disproportionate amount of problem-solving ability. Not only does he take the leade in many social situations, he can also hire hirelings and accumulate henchmen that can infringe on the spheres of the other PCs. What's the use of Tom's character having Astrogation-2 if Harry's can hire someone with Astrogation-4? That was what I tried to show in my example. Instead of the team having to break into the museum, the rich noble had several less dangerous options.
Hans
Last edited:
I completely forgot to point out one potential flaw in solving the problem of a rich noble player character by tailoring the campaign to suit a rich noble character: what if the referee doesn't want to run a campaign tailored for a rich noble character?
Hans
"Let's run a free trader campaign. Roll up your characters."
"I'm afraid you can't run a free trader campaign. I rolled up a rich noble, and he'd be totally unsuitable for such a campaign. So I guess you'll have to scrap your campaign and come up with another one."
"I'm afraid you can't run a free trader campaign. I rolled up a rich noble, and he'd be totally unsuitable for such a campaign. So I guess you'll have to scrap your campaign and come up with another one."
Hans
Then the ref disallows the character. Ref runs the game. Such has it ever been.
We don't have a "Living Traveller" RPGA thing going (though that might be nice and would pressure a final, and hopefully workable, answer on the effect of Soc B+).
As far as a rich player having disproportionate problem-solving power, that's essentially true. But the craft of game mastering has a long history of separating characters from their stuff (including connections) to draw upon.
Noble Adventurer hires someone with Astrogator-4. Damn, turned out to be a pirate.
Hires a bunch of bodyguards. Damn, they really work for someone else. Or, they're opportunists and rob the noble and friends. Or, they're inadvertently made hostile due to a cultural faux pas and now the Noble Adventurer is blamed for an interstellar political incident and is persona non grata in the system, or has to do some crappy, non-profitable, and probably dangerous task for a superior noble.
Tries to buy the museum or sue. Damn, now he's pissed off someone with more money and more local connections (and "all politics is local"). The macguffin gets stolen back. Or it was fake all along (someone already stole it and the Noble gets blamed). Or Gvoudon thinks they're trying to swindle him so he turns on them.
These are Referee problems. If the referee doesn't want to deal with rich Noble Adventurer problems, don't allow Noble Adventurers. There is no problem here.
We don't have a "Living Traveller" RPGA thing going (though that might be nice and would pressure a final, and hopefully workable, answer on the effect of Soc B+).
As far as a rich player having disproportionate problem-solving power, that's essentially true. But the craft of game mastering has a long history of separating characters from their stuff (including connections) to draw upon.
Noble Adventurer hires someone with Astrogator-4. Damn, turned out to be a pirate.
Hires a bunch of bodyguards. Damn, they really work for someone else. Or, they're opportunists and rob the noble and friends. Or, they're inadvertently made hostile due to a cultural faux pas and now the Noble Adventurer is blamed for an interstellar political incident and is persona non grata in the system, or has to do some crappy, non-profitable, and probably dangerous task for a superior noble.
Tries to buy the museum or sue. Damn, now he's pissed off someone with more money and more local connections (and "all politics is local"). The macguffin gets stolen back. Or it was fake all along (someone already stole it and the Noble gets blamed). Or Gvoudon thinks they're trying to swindle him so he turns on them.
These are Referee problems. If the referee doesn't want to deal with rich Noble Adventurer problems, don't allow Noble Adventurers. There is no problem here.
