How powerful are T5 dukes?
- Thread starter rancke
- Start date
Obviously this is what you want - its not what the rules provide. That is what 'is given'.
The current 'future' of the historical nobility you take as a foundation obviously doesn't work that way, either. RW. The conception of the 'big a part of society as Imperial nobles are of Imperial society?', given the 'millions' of nobility provided and the expanse of resources and people, doesn't fit the rules nor any historical model.
Would it work? Surely not, IMO - its a fantasy setting, pure and simple.
Believable to you - appears not. To me, either - nope. 'Broken' because a Ref must accommodate his own game? Nope. Unless the rules tie your hands in such a way that requires changing the rules to 'backfill', calling them broken is an exaggeration.
Just because the rules provide for PCs to muster out with MCr of cash and the same rules provide for Battledress doesn't mean that their PC can just have Battledress. The rules say that? Likewise, even if rules provide for wealth and other benefits for 'nobility' does not mean automatic advantages in a game. The rules says a Player can just magically have his 'wealthy' PC hire bodyguards? Not likely - that is the job of the Ref. Just like the RW, why should there be any guarantee of anything? So I let your PC put out a few KCr to hire a bodyguard entourage - only to have them not show up when your party's ship is departing... <shrug>
Really ... Psionics?
Last edited:
Obviously this is what you want - its not what the rules provide. That is what 'is given'.
The current 'future' of the historical nobility you take as a foundation obviously doesn't work that way, either. RW. The conception of the 'big a part of society as Imperial nobles are of Imperial society?', given the 'millions' of nobility provided and the expanse of resources and people, doesn't fit the rules nor any historical model.
I'm afraid I can't figure out just what you're trying to say here. We have a setting that tells us that interstellar governance is in the hands of an interstellar nobility. If that interstellar nobility doesn't work pretty much like the historical nobilities the referee can be expected to be familiar with, the rules/description should jolly well explain how it works instead. If high social standing doesn't work like high social standing works in societies the referee is familiar with, the rules should explain how it does work.
It's not my job to explain away apparent discrepancies in the rules; that is the job of the game writers. And "I'm sure there has to be a way" is not an adequate explanation.
Would what work? How does the Imperial nobility work if it doesn't work like historical nobilities?
Broken because the details appear to be inconsistent.
Actually, the T5 rules do seem to require me to change them, since the rules explicitly provide PCs with the possibility of acquiring high social standing and lucrative fiefs.
I don't think the rules allow for battledresses as mustering out benefits. If they did, I would certainly call that a broken rule.
I've said this several times before, but let me try once more. Perhaps if I rephrase it a bit, it will become clearer: A broken rule is one that doesn't work if you use it. Pointing out that a referee is free to refrain from using the rule doesn't mean it suddenly works.
No. The rules says the PC has lots of money. Common sense says he can use that money to hire minions. Common sense and the fact that the referee is running a logical and self-consistent universe where human nature works just like human nature works today.
I've already addressed that. Refusing to allow a PC to exploit his advantages on a regular basis is bad refereeing. Rules that force a referee to referee badly are bad rules.
Really ... Psionics?
I beg your pardon. Make that 'That human nature in the Far Future works pretty much like human nature today'.
That's a given.
Hans
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm... that would be Solomani nature, though. In the Imperial nobility (etc.), Vilani predominate - who have a whole different culture, society, ethics etc.
Human nature is human nature. Human cultures differ, but human nature remains the same.
Incidentally, every official Traveller adventure I know of assume that the PCs will have the attitudes of 20th Century Westerners. Even when they are assumed to be lawbreakers, it's 20th Century Western laws and mores that they are assumed to be breaking. When laws and mores differ from those of the 20th Century West, they are explained; otherwise they are taken for granted.
Hans
How does a Jump drive work?
Traveller is not a historical simulation - its constructs are givens, not extrapolations from reality. At least at its roots, its 'nobility' and governance appears rooted only in Science Fiction stories, not any RW history. If you want its nobility to work like historical nobility - please provide an example of such that spans multiple star systems for me to hang my believability hat on... :smirk:
Bear in mind - Traveller originated in the US. The US has never had a nobility in the sense you are familiar with. There is no common 'historical nobilities the referee can be expected to be familiar with'. Honest - I've worked in the system - there is no national general requirement for such education.
Of course you'll have to change the rules to meet your own wants where they do not match the creators. However, I would also not be at all surprised to find that, just like with CT starships and nobility, that the actual rules as written are being ignored out of knee jerk reactions to pet peeves...
The rules provide a framework for you to make a setting - what you do with them is up to you.
Mixing 'suspension of disbelief' and game mechanics appears a poor attempt to claim the rules are broken, instead of just not to your liking.
Exactly - the rules likely don't give battledress as a benefit - they give credits. Just as the rules probably don't give minions... nor do they give the only rationales for why PCs adventure.
No, common sense says credits are of use in hiring minions - that says nothing of availability, dependability, quality, etc. of any such thing. And neither do the rules. That's something you choose to make up.
Chargen provides plenty of other opportunities for starting 'wealth'. High social status coming with wealth certainly seems a logical enough thing.
As I've said, I generally change the benefits to match my games - and any other rules I see fit. Just because I don't like the rules - or they don't fit my games - doesn't mean they are broken, though (for anyone but me).
What regular basis? Chargen only happens once per PC (well, cloning might change that
). Noble PCs are not common. The rules leave plenty of opportunity to deal with all the so called issues you've raised without a single change...If a Ref is simply 'refusing' a Player's desires for no other reason than his own ego, etc. - that's one thing. But if a Ref is logically and consistently working to make the game fun and interesting (rather than a done thing and boring) - that is most definitely not a bad ref. If a Player's ego can't deal with that - well, I'll let you figure out what type of Player that is...
Or what?
Is it? In a science fiction game?
Sure, it can be a given, if you want it to be. But, then the rules are a 'given' as well...
Really?
So what is 'human nature'? To kill? To steal? To lie? To cheat? To deceive?
To love? To have compassion? To protect? To go without clothes? To dye gray hair? To shave?
Sorry - the only things that are really 'human nature' are things dominated by the nature of biology... breathing, eating, reproducing, etc. And many of those things can be subjected to cultural variations - because humans (generally) have brains with the capacity to work around nature.
Exactly. The 'human nature' assumed in such are based on culture - not any fixed universal 'human nature'.
Except that nobility in SF stories function the way the reader is familiar with. To wit, similar to historical nobilities.
[Snipped a paragraph that I couldn't find a civil way to reply to.]
Are you telling me you're ignorant of how various historical nobilities here on Earth used to work? Would you like me to provide you with a few links?
Or you could always read the essay on Imperial nobility first printed in Library Data (N-Z) if you want to know how the Imperial nobility used to be described prior to T5.
You may not be surprised to find that, but can you actually demonstrate that such is the case? I would be very surprised to find that you could.
Not so. As I understand it, T5 provides one and only one picture of an interstellar nobility, one with very specific details.
There you go mixing up the two different issues I spoke of. And after I pointed out the difference to you. Shame! :file_28:
Insofar as the game rules don't work when you use them, they're broken. Insofar as they imply specific setting details, 'suspension of disbelief' in the setting that they imply comes into it.
Exactly - the rules likely don't give battledress as a benefit - they give credits. Just as the rules probably don't give minions... nor do they give the only rationales for why PCs adventure.
But if you have money and try to buy a battledress, the referee can say "You can't find one for sale" and be plausible. If you have money and try to hire a hireling, the referee who says "No one wants to work for money" is talking through his hat. Next that referee will tell his players that there's no food to be had in the supermarket because he wants the PCs to go foraging in the wilderness.
Common sense says a great deal about that. Unless it's in a culture that differs markedly from generic cities (in ways that explain what the difference is) it's going to be pretty much like availability, dependability, quality, etc. inthe sort of cities we are familiar with. That's what happens when the writers don't spend wordage on detailing background features: they are assumed to be like similar features with which we're familiar. As Traveller writers have been doing for 36 years.
It certainly is. Just as it seems a logical enough thing that high social status coming with social influence. Which is why high social level tends to have disproportionate problem-solving powers.
Go back and see what it was you were proposing that elicited my reply. If you constantly deal with PC wealth by nullifying it by fiat, you're doing it on a regular basis.
That sort of thing can work fine for rare occasions, but if you do it over and over again, it becomes really annoying for the player.
Or what?
Or I don't find their games fun, of course.
A science fiction game featuring humans? Of course it is. If it wasn't, they wouldn't be human beings.
Also, see reply to Topaz just above. Not only is it a given, it's a demonstrable fact that it is a given in the universe where the official adventures are set.
Hans
Yes, really. But it's not worth getting into a discussion about that, because...
...the assumed culture is the one that provides the details I'm taking for granted about how the Imperial nobility works. So even if nobilities based on some hypothetical different human natures are conceivable, the default background that the Imperial culture is based on is demonstrably not based on any such different human nature[*]. So can we put that red herring to rest?
[*] And if it was, I'd still want an actual description of this different human nature.
To repeat: If Imperial nobility doesn't work pretty much like the historical nobilities the referee can be expected to be familiar with, the rules/description should jolly well explain how it works instead. If high social standing doesn't work like high social standing works in societies the referee is familiar with, the rules should explain how it does work.
Hans
So where is the standard across all of the earth throughout all of time?
The standard starts in the dawn of recorded history. The common features being land-holding, differential rights, participation in governance and being atop the social ladder. Given that the Samurai, Ancient Egyptian royals, Roman Patricians, all the European states, the pre-communist Chinese, the Norse peoples (including the Rus), The pre and post islamic Arabians, the Huns, and the Incas, Aztecs, and Mayans all had those four in common, and even the current UK nobility do (tho' that's scheduled to be altered, costing them role in governance), that's pretty damned broad a cross section.
The wikipedia listing is taxonomic rather than functional...
Set apart by precedence and/or privileges
Typically hereditary
Government acknowledged and sanctioned
Infeudation was rarely more than 2 layers (below the crown but above the peasants and serfs):
Typically:
- Sovereign (Emperors, Kings, sovereign Princes, Sovereign Archdukes, sovereign Grand Dukes)
- Great Barons (including: Barons, Viscounts, Counts, Earls, Grafs, Margraves, Dukes; occasionally non-sovereign grand dukes, archdukes and princes), household knights of the sovereign.
- Vassal Knights, household knights of Great Barons,
- Peasants, serfs, household knights of vassal knights
The deepest I've seen historical proofs of is about 5 layers of infeudation...
The imperium is:
- Emperor
- Nobles: Baron, Viscount, Count, Marquis, Duke, Archduke
Knights: Imperial orders or the Order of Sylea
Worlds: most member worlds directly - Nobles: baronettes (Vassals of the Archdukes)
Knights: the various domain orders are properly vassals of the Archduke) - Non-nobles on feif.
Note that the non-nobles are subjects of their worlds except on fiefs.
The explicit taxonomy of the landed noble hierarchy mirrors real world western europe, but without vauvasars via the Barons other than Archdukes.
Note that the administrative hierarchy is different than the infeudation - this was not atypical of systems with nobles across much of the post reformation world.
The administration hierarchy:
- Emperor
- Archduchy†
- Sector
- Subsector‡
- World
‡ Authority very limited, primarily a report collator. Has some authority to obtain Imp Navy assistance.
As an aside: several of the dictatorships constitute a nobility system as well... the Dictator, his immediate family and friends, and everone else. The children of the dictator often assume power, and continue the practice. See also Cuba, Haiti, and north Korea.
Maybe folks need to look at what happens in the real world with Nobles. There are many Houses of nobility still extent in the world other than The House of Windsor. Speaking of which, we have a Crown Prince flying RAF SAR choppers and his current successor has two Combat Tours under his belt.
I personally know one Gentleman who runs a nice little lodging house in Ireland, is a Knight of the Realm and a member of the House of Lords and ... heir the the long vacant throne of Ireland. He works what might be considered at boring stuff, but has in his life commanded troops in battle (Aden) after graduating from Sandhurst. Folks, I give you Sir Conor Myles John O'Brien, 18th Baron Inchiquin. As we would say in Aussie, a Bloody good bloke and very down to earth. Dare I say ... Salt of the earth (Especially from an old Soldier like myself's perspective).
Then there is Fr. O'Neill, of the Franciscan order who last year retired from his missionary work in Africa who is The O'Neill (i.e. The Chieftain of the O'Neill Clan) and the second of the three men who can lay claim to the Irish Throne.
His cousin, Hugo O'Neill of Clannaboy I believe is a Solicitor (My memory is not what it was) and related to the Portuguese Royal Houses.
Count Tirconnell of Austria is currently Marcus, a former Military Officer and works in Finance I believe.
Whilst the House of Windsor refuses to recognise these folk and even in Eire, they are not commonly recognised, they are afforded rights and privileges by all the European Houses of Nobility and The Republic of Ireland affords them basic courtesies. Those "rights and privileges" include free or discounted public transport and invites to social events as appropriate. Not much else to it other than the individual being able to use certain titles etc.
There are so many real life nobles running around as regular working stiffs, I find it hard to believe that a Ref' couldn't find a work around to fit a "Noble" into the game whilst retaining the spirit of the rules.
A real quick idea as I type as to why a noble may be adventuring ... simply google Jeffery Archer (The Writer) and take a look at his life. Google may be easier if you look for "Jeffrey Howard Archer, Baron Archer of Weston-super-Mare"
In games I have run in the past, I have never had a problem finding a reason why a Noble has a reason to be running and gunning with th "rabble" as it were.
Here's a seed. Subplot to the main game is that the Noble has been accused of a heinous crime, a frame up for sure and he's turned to the only person he can trust ... pick one of the PC's as a former Military comrade from the Nobles time as a Line Officer. The Noble is working to clear their good name but in the mean time, cut off from all funds/support, has to help the party just to pay the bills and survive. The PC's will in turn help out as time permits with the Nobles cause.
Seriously, this can be fun and is yet another twist for the Ref' to exploit to make life interesting for the PC party.
Anyone arguing against nobles as PC's are looking at it the wrong way I reckon.
YMMV
Cheers,
I personally know one Gentleman who runs a nice little lodging house in Ireland, is a Knight of the Realm and a member of the House of Lords and ... heir the the long vacant throne of Ireland. He works what might be considered at boring stuff, but has in his life commanded troops in battle (Aden) after graduating from Sandhurst. Folks, I give you Sir Conor Myles John O'Brien, 18th Baron Inchiquin. As we would say in Aussie, a Bloody good bloke and very down to earth. Dare I say ... Salt of the earth (Especially from an old Soldier like myself's perspective).
Then there is Fr. O'Neill, of the Franciscan order who last year retired from his missionary work in Africa who is The O'Neill (i.e. The Chieftain of the O'Neill Clan) and the second of the three men who can lay claim to the Irish Throne.
His cousin, Hugo O'Neill of Clannaboy I believe is a Solicitor (My memory is not what it was) and related to the Portuguese Royal Houses.
Count Tirconnell of Austria is currently Marcus, a former Military Officer and works in Finance I believe.
Whilst the House of Windsor refuses to recognise these folk and even in Eire, they are not commonly recognised, they are afforded rights and privileges by all the European Houses of Nobility and The Republic of Ireland affords them basic courtesies. Those "rights and privileges" include free or discounted public transport and invites to social events as appropriate. Not much else to it other than the individual being able to use certain titles etc.
There are so many real life nobles running around as regular working stiffs, I find it hard to believe that a Ref' couldn't find a work around to fit a "Noble" into the game whilst retaining the spirit of the rules.
A real quick idea as I type as to why a noble may be adventuring ... simply google Jeffery Archer (The Writer) and take a look at his life. Google may be easier if you look for "Jeffrey Howard Archer, Baron Archer of Weston-super-Mare"
In games I have run in the past, I have never had a problem finding a reason why a Noble has a reason to be running and gunning with th "rabble" as it were.
Here's a seed. Subplot to the main game is that the Noble has been accused of a heinous crime, a frame up for sure and he's turned to the only person he can trust ... pick one of the PC's as a former Military comrade from the Nobles time as a Line Officer. The Noble is working to clear their good name but in the mean time, cut off from all funds/support, has to help the party just to pay the bills and survive. The PC's will in turn help out as time permits with the Nobles cause.
Seriously, this can be fun and is yet another twist for the Ref' to exploit to make life interesting for the PC party.
Anyone arguing against nobles as PC's are looking at it the wrong way I reckon.
YMMV
Cheers,
Nice post, I mean that, but the differences are huge as well; the samurai for example were recent and oriented towards law enforcement, Roman nobles we ex officio and my mother's family, eg the dragoner of my nic, my great grandfather, was a graf, the title given up in 1918, on purpose as he was looking for being a capitalist with his patchwork of entitlements. The Rothschilds bought their title, French nobles wore fancy lace and makeup before they were brought down, then in revival by Napoleon, their character changed incredibly. England, read the Lion and the Unicorn or Remains of the Day to see how degraded they became. China, India, it becomes far different and europe and eurocentric nobles are nothing to brag about, my grandfather told me his father told him that normal people were nothing but animals and worth about as much ... not something I want in my game.
Indeed, I am ignorant of how a great many nobilities used to work - and could care less in this context as its not relevant to a fictional setting spanning interstellar empires and demonstrably based on other fictional settings.
I like CT, but T5 is not CT - so if Marc changed things, that is his prerogative. I wouldn't have to like it - but that would not mean it is 'broken'.
'Imperial' nobility I presume you mean, but at present your understanding is based on hearsay from what I gather. In full context I would not be surprised if the rules don't explicitly allow for exceptions.
From this thread it seems nobility is entitled to lands, monies and votes. That's belief stretching? <shrug>
Claiming not to being doing something being done doesn't mix me up in the slightest.
By your stated logic he can't - if the rules don't explicitly say Battledress may not be available the Ref would be 'constantly deal[ing] with PC wealth by nullifying it by fiat'.
Twisting what was posted so its obviously false I will simply put done to a mistake - otherwise its hardly worthy of response.
Having actually been in grocery stores emptied of food prior to a potential hurricane - this is quite plausible. :rofl:
A Ref providing a rational for adventuring is hardly a bad thing. Sure it can be done badly - but that is a situational issue, not an intrinsic one.
As opposed to psionics, starship shareholders, highly skilled gamblers/streetwise/etc. or any other high attribute holder?
What disproportionate powers are implied for nobility when facing a gun, attempting to avoid a crash, talking aliens out of eating you? So what if a PC has a few paltry mega-credits due them - in comparison to the cost of a starship, heck even just its annual maintenance in many cases...
A governing vote doesn't guarantee help when its time for sentencing for an existing infraction of local laws (though it might be used just like bribery skill might be used... perhaps?).
A character with a 15 stat having greater 'problem solving powers' is hardly surprising. Yet to see any example where 'disproportionate' is justified in anything but special cases or due to exceptional non-problem solving abilities of a 'bad ref'...
Well, that 'of course' hardly follows from 'I do require'... So, in other words, you meant you prefer your referees to provide logical and self-consistent game universes.
Of course.
Nice post!
Ditto - and I never liked the Social Status = Nobility bit, but the odds are against it, and when it happened I and my Players found no issue in working it into the game.
I've run games where I used the old 'royal relative' or 'royal patron' as a source of a starship... having a PC fill the role works as well. T5 supports that - okay.
If nobility is in the setting, having a chance randomly generated PCs could be nobles seems reasonable.
Yes indeed. There's a long-standing tradition of royal scions joining the military. But a typical Traveller band of adventurers are not military. And I sincerely doubt royal princes were usually allowed out of tracking range of the authorities for any length of time.
Which might possibly earn him a social level equal to an Imperial knighthood, though probably not.
Does this mean you're agreeing with me that a referee ought to allow PCs with high SOC significant social advantages if he allows them at all?
Two points: 1) Imperial nobles are not (or were not before T5) just piddling planetary kings and princes. They are rarer than emperors are on Earth. 2) It's perfectly possible to fit nobles into a normal adventuring band -- PROVIDED they don't retain their wealth and social influence. Which is, however, hard to justify for actual titleholders with fiefs. Remittance men and disenfranchised nobles work perfectly well. But remittance men and disenfranchised nobles do not have titles and fiefs and the associate social standing.
I've lost track of the number of times I've seen people confuse 20th Century minor nobles with Far Future interstellar nobles who happen to use the same title for two vastly different levels of rank. It seems that no matter how many times I point out the difference between a class of people of which there are perhaps one in 10,000 (i.e. barons) and a class of people of which there are perhaps one in 250 million (i.e. Imperial barons), people blip right over it and continue to conflate the two.
Please take notice: Imperial barons are not the kind of barons that Austen and Dumas wrote about. They are elevated enough to sneer at the most socially prominent person that has ever lived on Earth.
Have you allowed any of the nobles you ran an income in the megacredit range and the social advantages of someone who can expect to be given entrance whenever he seeks an audience with the local planetary ruler and the interstellar nobles?
I'm not arguing against all nobles. I'm arguing against nobles with vast personal incomes and social standing high enough to let them hobnob with the interstellar level of nobility.
Hans
Last edited:
Who me? 
Fair enough, and I did like some of your suggestions, like the three dice and half.
Nice post Antaine. All the best mad nobles of the past present and far future have some Irish in them. I myself know the current Baron Bellew of Barmeath, Co. Louth in Ireland a former Guards officer and current Colonel of 27th (Inniskilling) Regiment of Foot, a Napoleonic re-enactment unit, not bad for 70
I don't think it's broken because I don't like the fact that he has changed it. I think it is broken because I think it doesn't work. The two things are not related.
No, I meant interstellar nobility. The Imperial nobility is one specific example of an interstellar nobility, not generic rules for interstellar ruling classes.
It would ease the work of discussing with you if you would pay enough attention to what I write to remember it. I've already addressed that.
Claiming not to be mixed up when you are mixed up does not make you not mixed up.Claiming not to being doing something being done doesn't mix me up in the slightest.
Yes.
I never claimed wealth and social influence were able to solve all problems. Just a much bigger variety of problems than any of the other factors you mentioned.
EDIT: And if attribute scores of 15 and high skills were as versatile as wealth and high social standing, they would be equally hard to referee.
An annual income of Mcr2 could pay for the annual maintenance of 54 free traders. Or the annual maintenance and all the bank payments of one.
Nor does any of the other factors you've mentioned.
If I don't have fun, I don't play. So I stand by my statement.
Hans
Last edited:
A quick note.
}), I have to point out that in the last two centuries or so humans have changed. We used to think that owning other humans was just par for the course, now we have pretty much outlawed this a bad thing the world over. Mostly. So, humans and their cultures do change and sometimes quite quickly, thus assuming that the Far Future humans are the same as 20th Century humans I think is a big mistake.
But that is just me.
See that is another thing I disagree with you on, I don't see humans as unchanging over several thousand years. Since you like to drag the real world in (which is both cool and understandable, not trying to be ass {this time
}), I have to point out that in the last two centuries or so humans have changed. We used to think that owning other humans was just par for the course, now we have pretty much outlawed this a bad thing the world over. Mostly. So, humans and their cultures do change and sometimes quite quickly, thus assuming that the Far Future humans are the same as 20th Century humans I think is a big mistake. But that is just me.
