How powerful are T5 dukes?

[aramis]

[m;]Ranke, Magnus: You're both out of line.[/m;]

You're both at the point of having dragged the thread WAY off topic. I can see valid points in both of your comments, but they're off topic and better suited to a Random Static discussion on "what constitutes a good/bad post?"

Which said, I wouldn't object to such a discussion... in the correct place.

[m;]Pendragonman: We don't usually close threads for either reasonable topic drift or 1 or 2 bad posts.[/m;]

We close threads because the mod/admin closing it thinks that...

• The thread as is can only go to forbidden places (politics/religion)
• The thread is attempting to drive/draw users away from COTI
• The thread has no redeeming value as a discussion (IE: whining about someone or something)
• The thread is likely to lead to multiple infractions for other board rules (eg: where can I find T20?)
• The OP is about something time sensitive and that time has passed.

The only threads where the OP has a right to limit who posts are those in the PBP area. There, I'll almost always close threads at the OP's request.

Further, requests for closure should be done via the report post button. (For PBP, it should be done by the OP and by reporting the 1st post, just to make the process easier. Sure, I read almost all posts on the board, but I read EVERY report. Marc reads most of them, too. And if he disagrees with a call, he lets me know. That's EXTREMELY rare.)

 

[pendragonman]

Aramis, I was seconding what I thought was a call to lock the thread. In the past, you have said that if two people call for a thread to be locked, you will lock it.

On the other hand, it was an excellent opportunity to backhand warn everyone on how to get a thread locked.

 

[rancke]

I'm not going to ask to have the thread closed, but neither am I going to post anything more unless others indicate that they would like to continue to discuss the actual topic.


Hans

 

[ken at sunrise]

A little getting back and forgive me for reposting but I think it got lost in the debate. If reposting is a violation please delete.

Do you ever get elevated and skip ranks?

How powerful is a count?

I see that he receives a land grant of 61 hexes on the Main World (assuming the grants are cumulative) and another 61 hexes on a non-Main World.

Under "Where" it states Sector. So would their fief be anywhere in the sector where he received his boon?

I'm guessing the 61 hexes do not have to be contiguous but is there any reason for them not to be?

Would a count be an ambassador, governor, etc... For a count to be the ruler/boss of a system I'm guessing that depends on the form of government and of course it would have to be under Imperial Rule.

Is there a norm/standard for Noble power beyond Land Grand in Traveller?

A lot of questions, thanks.

 

[aramis]

T5 and GT both differ from other editions' treatments considerably, Ken.

In general, prior presentation is that local worlds' Imperial Noble has ZERO authority. He's there to report (to the Subsector, Sector, Domain) and advise (in both directions).

Subsector Dukes authority in prior editions was to head the local bureaucracy, and to provide an executive with authority over Imperial Military forces assigned exclusively to the subsector.

Sector Dukes' authority in prior canon included the ability to proclaim sector-wide laws, in addition to the sectorwide authority parallel to a subsector duke, and appellate authority over Imperial Courts.

Domain Archdukes in canon vary by timeframe in Authority. In their early incarnation, they have all the same authorities as a sector duke, but over the whole domain, and further, the authority to create Knights and Baronets. By 1090, they're mostly administrative, have no authority over the Imperial Military, and have other limitations as well.

Note also: The Archduke of Antares directly rules a multi-world polity according to the [w]Atlas_of_the_Imperium[/w] (for CT).

T5 doesn't give a whole lot... but does give us fief sizes for personally ruled turf. It doesn't seem to remove the authorities of Subsector and Sector Dukes nor Archdukes.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Sort of...

A little getting back and forgive me for reposting but I think it got lost in the debate. If reposting is a violation please delete.

Do you ever get elevated and skip ranks?

Well, I have when (I created Mags in T5) in fact had a character get exiled, but get a C6 +1 from Personal Development. So, he did sort of skip ahead. I got me some of those wacky house rules regarding such things, but by the T5 Core Rules I think it counts as an elevation.

So I am not sure you can skip ranks.

Then again, if I had a character start the Noble Career with say Soc D, then they get Elevated to Marquis when they make their first successful Risk/Reward rolls, but then they don't get all the previous Titles and goodies. They start their Career as the Marquis de Missed Grants. Also they only get their Marquis Votes in the Moot which in this case is only 2 Votes, not the 3 that Sir Snidely Whiplash, KE, Marquis de Old School, Baron New School, Baronet La-De-Da has. (I don't know why, but in MTUs it seems that all Marquis are Marquis de Something or Other.)

Again, this just my house ruling on the spot, not anything official. Which is why I have such things as Landless Grants in my TU, because sometimes I like to mess with things. :smirk:

How powerful is a count?

Less powerful than a duke and more powerful than a viscount.

Seriously, depends on a lot of factors I should think, life being all complex and stuff. Still from what we have on page 93 (or one of my favorite page ) we see that their preferred (note that too, not that they are guaranteed that, just the Imperium prefers to send them there) hexes are assigned by the TCs Hi or In. So given that (and I did mean the nice things too) Hans has some points about the power of the Imperial Noble, I would say quite a bit. These are not small potato worlds here, they either have tons of Citizens and/or they are part of the industrial power of the empire. These are not worlds where the main goal is raise them up to Imperial standards or move them up to a better TC, but keep a strategic world in the fold.

Or that is how I see them functioning. How Marc sees it is quiet possibly a different matter.

I see that he receives a land grant of 61 hexes on the Main World (assuming the grants are cumulative) and another 61 hexes on a non-Main World.

Actually a count get 32 Mainworld hexes and 32 non-Mainworld hexes, not 61 hexes. Now they may very well have that when they are elevated up to count and get their spanky new holdings, but they don't get 61 hexes till they get the 32/32 to add to what they should have already.

Under "Where" it states Sector. So would their fief be anywhere in the sector where he received his boon?

Yep, or even several somewheres in the same Sector.

I'm guessing the 61 hexes do not have to be contiguous but is there any reason for them not to be?

Depends on if they miffed off the Emperor that week or not.

Though if Count Example went through the standard Noble Career and worked his way up from Baron Demonstration, then probably not. They will be by virtue of the TC preferences spread throughout at least a Subsector already.

And now you know why we get Yachts, not because we Nobles are so cool (I mean we are, but that isn't the thing here) but because often they will have to travel in order to conduct their business as rulers and stuff.

Would a count be an ambassador, governor, etc... For a count to be the ruler/boss of a system I'm guessing that depends on the form of government and of course it would have to be under Imperial Rule.

Yeah, pretty much to the last bit. And now to the fore bits. Sure why not, in fact that might very well be why they were elevated.

Is there a norm/standard for Noble power beyond Land Grant in Traveller?

A lot of questions, thanks.

You mean besides the Moot Votes and possibly a swanky Yacht.

My personal sources before T5 and my conversion to the Sect of Reformed Canonistas were the MT Imperial Encyclopedia or was it the Referee's Manual. Maybe both. Either way that had some nice stuff, though when it comes to the bits on Fiefs it has been changed due to T5 having things like Land Grants and Votes for all people in the Noble Career (though you could use if for those folks who might be nobles, but didn't go through the Noble Career. Also CT's Library Data N-Z(?) has a bit about nobles in it too.

 

[fridge]

Under "Where" it states Sector. So would their fief be anywhere in the sector where he received his boon?

I'm guessing the 61 hexes do not have to be contiguous but is there any reason for them not to be?

I am reading it that the larger-than-world Wheres eg subsector, Sector, Domain mean that the Nobles gets hexes throughout the area in question. They may have a main area where they reside, but they have interests throughout the area in question. This provides encouragement to look after the whole area, not just the one world where their main fief holdings are.

 

[Reban]

I am reading it that the larger-than-world Wheres eg subsector, Sector, Domain mean that the Nobles gets hexes throughout the area in question. They may have a main area where they reside, but they have interests throughout the area in question. This provides encouragement to look after the whole area, not just the one world where their main fief holdings are.

I like that explanation. It chimes with my reading of the table and comes up with a good reason for it ie. encouraging noble interest throughout the area that the Land Grants are located in.


I just had a thought about reasons why grant hexes might not be contiguous on a single planet. Suppose the Emperor is in a good mood and he gives me a Land Grant that puts me in economic control of every Spice Mine on a planet. Those mines might be located all over the planet so each terrain hex represents one mine. This works for other resources or indeed cities.

Imagine the ructions and upheaval if the Emperor created a Duke and spaced his terrain hexes out to cover major US cities on present day Earth. "New York: Under New Management"

My first proclamation is to name a particular street Duke Reban Street...... no not Broadway!

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

For the Resistance!

Imagine the ructions and upheaval if the Emperor created a Duke and spaced his terrain hexes out to cover major US cities on present day Earth. "New York: Under New Management"

My first proclamation is to name a particular street Duke Reban Street...... no not Broadway!

You were going fine there, Your Grace till the Broadway Incident. Now, though we must resist!

 

[Bloo]

Loose thought shook loose on this overall.

One problem/source of complaints has stemmed from treating Chargen as a method for generating NPCs, potentially including every NPC in a TU. I like that, I think that's the way to test/evaluate chargen systems where there isn't a magic 'levelling' system.

All versions of Traveller breakdown with high Soc (where Soc = Nobility) in this regard.

Why? Because there's a finite number of rank X in any hierarchical aristocracy.
1 Emperor (rank 1)
X Archdukes (rank 2)
Y Sector Dukes (Y < X) (rank 3)
Z Subsector Dukes (Z < Y) (rank 4)
A Non-subsector Dukes (rank 5)
B Counts (rank 6)
C Viscounts (rank 7)
etc.

So, if players are allowed to create characters that can enter those ranks, their character is filling one of those possible slots. That's fine. Any referee is only going to deal with so many PCs.

But if the same system were generating all characters in the TU, and all could enter the nobility, the numbers get wonky (as Hans as pointed out).

To me, this suggests that the choice to make C6 Nobility (Imperial or Planetary (really System-ary)), rather than just Soc or Cha or Cas, should be just that: a specific choice.

Thus, when I'm rolling up characters (which is one of the two games that comes in any RPG), which I do a lot, I'm going to actively choose when high Soc becomes Nobility. Systemically, IMO, only Referees and Players should have the authority to make that choice.

 

[BytePro]

Pretty much the way CT handles titles and Soc.

As to chargen including every 'NPC in a TU' - think about that one...

Is every career represented fully and proportionately? Even with an 'other' career - how does a random system cope with every possible career from actors to zoologists? Are NPCs really presented as representative of the entire population - or only those the PCs are potentially meant to encounter. Published NPCs are very often made to order - not simply the result of a chargen process. How does that fit with that notion? And the nature of NPC is generally based on circumstances including location. Ex: in a run down section of a startown one would expect to see a higher number of less well to do individuals, while in a Class A starport, a higher number of better off folks.

If you take chargen stats as universally representing an entire population - then all systems and every society, regardless of government type, law type, etc. would have the same proportion of well off vs. not so well off (or influential vs non, what have you); educated vs non; strong vs weak; etc.

I think of chargen as being made for PCs and NPCs - not entire populations. If I design a world with higher than normal G, then average Str goes up. If it is a safari, resort world, then median wealth and Soc go up and poor may be non-existent (or overly prevalent as a service class with no real 'middle class').

I'd be surprised if T5 expressly stated chargen was designed for generating entire populations - and expect it does expressly state they are for generating PCs and NPCs. Extrapolating the mechanics to something they were not designed for is generally pretty naturally going to result in inconsistent and illogical outcomes...

 

[Bloo]

Civilian career helps a whole lot.

 

[BytePro]

Helps? Sure. As a ready made detailed career type for PCs and NPCs, most especially random encounters, probably quite useful. However, given the number of actual skills and careers one could come up with for any number of societies likely to be part of a TU, is it explicitly comprehensive? Not believing that for the OTU, much less my own TU.

So, while useful and intended for generating NPCs and PCs, that doesn't address the entire population of a TU.

 

[Dragoner]

Extrapolating the mechanics to something they were not designed for is generally pretty naturally going to result in inconsistent and illogical outcomes...

I think the "how powerful" is a faulty assumption as well; for example if you compared the commander of fort ben Harrison in Indy with the mayor, the commander might be "more powerful", but the reality is that if the commander somehow antagonized the mayor, it would be to his detriment as his commander would pull him from his command; part of his duties is to be a goodwill ambassador between the army and the city.

Same as with Imperial and planetary nobility, if one made a pareto chart of their spheres of influence, they might not even overlap, and just as likely an Imperial noble might be a poor cousin to a wealthy individual on a rich world.

 

[rancke]

Same as with Imperial and planetary nobility, if one made a pareto chart of their spheres of influence, they might not even overlap, and just as likely an Imperial noble might be a poor cousin to a wealthy individual on a rich world.

Except that aristocratic social spheres tend to be more or less transitive. Not completely and not without a number of exceptions and oddities, but pretty much so. (Note: this assumes that those spheres are aware of each other and interact to a certain degree. Which is presumably the case with Imperial nobles and planetary nobles).

The spheres of influence of a Russian Grand Duke and an English coutry squire did not overlap at all. And yet the Grand Duke had a greater social standing than the country squire through the fact that English peers accorded the foreign Grand Duke a higher social standing than themselves and accorded their fellow countryman the squire a lower social standing than themselves. Transitivity in action.

Similarily, Imperial and planetary nobilities share some members that appear in both, which would serve to create links between them. If the Grand Autocrat of Argle-bargle is also an Imperial count, the Vice-autocrat would most likely be the social equal of an Imperial marquis or an Imperial baron even if the Imperium didn't give him an Imperial title in his own right.

Now, if you have a group of Imperial nobles who get fiefs that makes them about as powerful as rulers of major countries on their world (this seems to be the size of the fiefs T5 dukes get), they'd most likely have roughly the same social standing as rulers of major countries on worlds. Whereas Imperial nobles who rule over 30 words (i.e. subsector dukes) would be several levels above those aforementioned dukes (e.g. major country level rulers, continental level rulers, world rulers, cluster rulers, subsector rulers). And they'd fit in the same system through the existence of Imperial nobles and planetary nobles who meet and interact on the same world.


Hans

 

[Dragoner]

Except in traveller, dukes don't rule over 30 worlds, they are only responsible for them, the planetary governments are independent. So the paradigm of European nobility doesn't carry over; the duke in many aspects is a goodwill ambassador from the Imperium to those worlds.

 

[rancke]

Except in traveller, dukes don't rule over 30 worlds, they are only responsible for them, the planetary governments are independent.

The pre-T5 setting descriptions specifically put the subsector duke in charge of interstellar governance of the worlds in his subsector. The fact that his worlds have internal autonomy doesn't mean he doesn't have a higher social standing than the rulers of his worlds. And the rulers of those autonomous worlds would be superior to the lesser rulers of their respective worlds. Which, thanks to transitivity, would give subsector dukes greater social standing than the lesser rulers of member worlds.

Just how the retconned T5 OTU is supposed to work is still a mystery to me.

So the paradigm of European nobility doesn't carry over;

That was simply an example of two sets of nobles who had no overlapping influence but were still linked. And it carries over anywhere that two sets of nobles interact to any but the most superficial degree.

...the duke in many aspects is a goodwill ambassador from the Imperium to those worlds.

No. He's the hereditary governor of an Imperial province made up of member worlds.


Hans

 

[MCEvans]

The pre-T5 setting descriptions specifically put the subsector duke in charge of interstellar governance of the worlds in his subsector. The fact that his worlds have internal autonomy doesn't mean he doesn't have a higher social standing than the rulers of his worlds. And the rulers of those autonomous worlds would be superior to the lesser rulers of their respective worlds. Which, thanks to transitivity, would give subsector dukes greater social standing than the lesser rulers of member worlds.

-snip-

No. He's the hereditary governor of an Imperial province made up of member worlds.


Hans

But does he rule the worlds or "the space between the worlds" as has been stated in all previous renditions.
I believe that this is why there are fief hexes on other planets in the system/subsector/sector/domain it give the noble a reason to keep the space lanes clear.
For lower nobles this could be a reason for adventuring :devil:

Again two cents from a poor slob who does not have the new rules, Yet!

 

[Dragoner]

Hans, you need to read Library Data again, it is not hereditary:

Nobility is acquired through letters patent (patents of nobility) issued by the
Emperor.

and precedence is ex officio, not by title:

Precedence is accorded strictly on the basis of government position...

 

[Dragoner]

But does he rule the worlds or "the space between the worlds" as has been stated in all previous renditions.

What the duke has is called agency:

qui facit per alium, facit per se (i.e. the one who acts through another, acts in his or her own interests)

where:

An agent who acts within the scope of authority conferred by his or her principal binds the principal in the obligations he or she creates against third parties.

The principal being the Emperor or the Imperium and the third party being the member worlds.

That is why I say the duke is a goodwill ambassador, in that by antagonizing the member worlds, even if not bringing them to rebellion, the duke can cause the relationship to deteriorate and be removed:

Noble rank can be revoked by the Emperor, either personally or through the courts
(subject to his approval). Some reasons for such revocation are treason, murder,
kidnapping, and extortion as well other felonies. Incompetence can also be a reason
for revocation of a title. Occasionally, a noble rank will not be confirmed upon inheritance
(the Emperor has the option of not confirming, as well as does the holder).
The rank may then go to another member of the same family, or lie vacant for the
generation. Furthermore, the Emperor has the option of appointing a new family
to hold the noble rank, displacing the former line.