PDA

View Full Version : Establishing Pollitical Roles



Zovc
2009-10-30, 11:11 PM
On the continent I'm currently working on for my campaign, there are Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, and Humans.

I'm currently developing early-age civilizations--this is the most advanced continent, and the one players will first experience. The races have 'resolved' conflicts between themselves and become a nation that spans the entire continent. The basic infrastructure has each race having it's fourth of the land. Each race has it's own effective country, but is supervised by the other races. The capital of each country (probably in the middle of the land or against the coast opposite of the borders) has a ruler of its dominant race, and has a council of three (one of each other race). The council advises the ruler of how their races feel about situations in the country, and also is are supposed to point out tensions between their races and the dominant one. In smaller cities, at least one advisor from another race is required. Most large cities have a full council, but almost all have at least two members.

These are not necessarily the races you're accustomed to, as far as 3.5 SRD stats are concerned.

Dwarves are master craftsmen. They are stalwart, and capable fighters, and tend to be faithful, particularly to the god of Crafting, Earth, and Metal. Dwarves tend toward traditions and laws. Dwarves do well economically when their craftsmanship is in demand.

Gnomes tend to be incredibly savvy with magic. They are well known for their talents with magic, and are sometimes extremely pious and equally often godless. Gnomes tend to be rather... unhinged, and tend towards chaotic alignments--they usually push political change. Gnomes economic strength mostly relies on magical trinkets, although they are often introducing technological advances, as well.

Halflings make great spies and soldiers. Many of them have little loose morals. Halflings are able to take others things and run with it in many ways. Halflings make money from farming and military efforts, but also pass information around secretively. Humans and Gnomes like halflings a lot more than Dwarves do. The only thing Dwarves like about Halflings is their skill on the battlefield, and even then, they often don't approve of the dirty tactics. Halflings' economy booms most when there is strife of any sort.

Humans are particularly keen traders, and do well in nearly any profession, but don't actually excel anywhere. Humans tend to maintain good relations with other races because they are able to supply changing demands well.

On this continent, technologies are just starting to "spread." In other words, you'll not find many magic items outside of the Gnome owned, Dwarven supervised city of Snibblesmiff, as the facilitations (knowledge in particular) for making them aren't anywhere else. Trades are done at particular locations, because you won't find it in another place, if that makes sense.

What are some neat city ideas? What sort of conflicts do you think would crop up between the races that could interest players? What should regions outside of the governments' reach look like? Should there be mixed races in those locations, or would rebels prefer the races stay apart? What about half-races? Should they be prominent yet? Should they exist at all?

bosssmiley
2009-10-31, 06:23 AM
What are some neat city ideas? What sort of conflicts do you think would crop up between the races that could interest players? What should regions outside of the governments' reach look like? Should there be mixed races in those locations, or would rebels prefer the races stay apart? What about half-races? Should they be prominent yet? Should they exist at all?

You tell us. Pose a question, and take the most interesting answer based on what you already know. Do this a few times, work out the social and cultural implications of the decisions, and you have an interesting game setting.

Cities you can afford to tend towards the epic scenery, crazy-go-nuts elements in a D&D world. Why have yet another pseudo-medieval walled burb, when you can have a domed city, or one entirely built under an overhang, or one that's all canals, or one that's a series of levitating platforms, or one that's entirely built on a giant stilt-walking platform (Baba Yaga as urban developer), or one that's built in the interstices of another, older city. The nutso urban scenery will, in turn, modify how people live in the city, thereby creating more interesting choices for you as world builder.

For pointers on race relations, politics, and how the dispersion of new tech affects a society just look at RL history. There's always going to be (interesting, plot-hooky) conflict between the haves and have-nots whenever the status quo changes. Oh, and all these rebels are going to have their own separate agendas; rebels against a central authority are usually a coalition of conflicting interest groups, not a homogenous guerilla army.

Yahzi
2009-10-31, 11:27 AM
What sort of conflicts
You state that each city has a ruler. But you don't state how that ruler got his job. Is it hereditary? Elected? Meritorious (in D&D, that basically means who ever has the highest level)?

Most political conflicts are over who gets to be ruler next, so how you get there is important.

Also, you haven't explained why all these races live in harmony. That seems like a very modern view.

But most of all, you haven't answered the single most important question about any given D&D setting: what is the highest level caster? If your cities routinely have 13+ casters, I don't think there is such a thing as a "rebel" cause. At best there are rebel lords. The historical experience of a small, motivated force of citizen-soldiers holding a large, sophisticated army at bay does not work in D&D. Not once you have 5th level spells.

Zovc
2009-11-01, 12:57 AM
You tell us. Pose a question, and take the most interesting answer based on what you already know. Do this a few times, work out the social and cultural implications of the decisions, and you have an interesting game setting.

Cities you can afford to tend towards the epic scenery, crazy-go-nuts elements in a D&D world. Why have yet another pseudo-medieval walled burb, when you can have a domed city, or one entirely built under an overhang, or one that's all canals, or one that's a series of levitating platforms, or one that's entirely built on a giant stilt-walking platform (Baba Yaga as urban developer), or one that's built in the interstices of another, older city. The nutso urban scenery will, in turn, modify how people live in the city, thereby creating more interesting choices for you as world builder.

What sort of crazy cities can there be in a rather "low-tech," low-magic setting? I suppose Dwarves or Gnomes could be cave dwellers, but I just don't see any practical options. Wizards and Clerics are able to solve issues with their magics, but they're not quite able to make permanent effects or anything of that sort, clerics work kind of like doctors (or leaders), and wizards do odd jobs, if they are 'occupational' wizards.


For pointers on race relations, politics, and how the dispersion of new tech affects a society just look at RL history. There's always going to be (interesting, plot-hooky) conflict between the haves and have-nots whenever the status quo changes. Oh, and all these rebels are going to have their own separate agendas; rebels against a central authority are usually a coalition of conflicting interest groups, not a homogenous guerilla army.

This is a good point, all of the guerrillas are against "the establishment," but for different reasons. Some Halflings might just not like humans, while some Dwarves might have a problem with all these god-wannabe wizards.


You state that each city has a ruler. But you don't state how that ruler got his job. Is it hereditary? Elected? Meritorious (in D&D, that basically means who ever has the highest level)?

Most political conflicts are over who gets to be ruler next, so how you get there is important.

Also, you haven't explained why all these races live in harmony. That seems like a very modern view.

That is a good question. I was thinking this was a democratic system, what are some good sources on various actual government systems--do any have similar hierarchies to the one I described?

Well, you're right when you say that it's a modern view. I don't know why the races understand that this is the best way for things to be. I mean, I think it's easy for us to see how free exchange of ideas between multiple civilizations can benefit them all, but how long have the races been friendly? When did the races first confront one another? I don't know! >.<


But most of all, you haven't answered the single most important question about any given D&D setting: what is the highest level caster? If your cities routinely have 13+ casters, I don't think there is such a thing as a "rebel" cause. At best there are rebel lords. The historical experience of a small, motivated force of citizen-soldiers holding a large, sophisticated army at bay does not work in D&D. Not once you have 5th level spells.

4th level spells seem about on-par with what the strongest wizard would be casting at this point in time. I imagine Fly (a 3rd level spell) would be out of most wizards leagues. Sorcerors might be more powerful than wizards (which, their slower learning of spells allows them to have more levels, too).