PDA

View Full Version : Frankish kingdom of Jerusalem expy



paladinofshojo
2012-12-22, 10:16 PM
I'm thinking of making a campaign with a kingdom of European-esqe invaders occupying several Arabian influenced lands. While they're obviously a bit darker than the rest of the campaign world, I prefer to NOT turn an entire civilization into guilt-free exp fodder for my PCs. I was hoping that you guys can give me a hand in creating a fantastical version of the Frankish Kingdoms of Jerusalem and Antioch and the other Crusader States.

I need help fleshing out their:

1) military

2) society

3) Mentality

4) Culture and traditions

*Anything else that would make sense to add is also appreciated.

Roland St. Jude
2012-12-23, 01:35 AM
Sheriff: This is the kind of thing that can be difficult to discuss here. As long as the discussion stays purely fictional, it's fine, but real world religious and political discussion, even in the context of a gaming discussion, is against the Forum Rules.

It's not impossible, though, so I welcome people to offer whatever advice they have that they feel isn't in violation of the Forum Rules.

Ninjadeadbeard
2012-12-23, 04:07 AM
I'm thinking of making a campaign with a kingdom of European-esqe invaders occupying several Arabian influenced lands. While they're obviously a bit darker than the rest of the campaign world, I prefer to NOT turn an entire civilization into guilt-free exp fodder for my PCs. I was hoping that you guys can give me a hand in creating a fantastical version of the Frankish Kingdoms of Jerusalem and Antioch and the other Crusader States.

Question: How long has the occupation lasted? It does tend to color the situation a bit. A first generation Frankish Knight is going to be really Frankish. His son or grandson however will pick up the local dialect/customs/whathaveyou far more easily as he grew up there.


1) military

Well, the obvious difference between the two regions would be armor and weapons.

Armor: Northern Europeans would have worn chainmail, and lots of it. Heavy Mail plus helm and surcoat. Add on some fur and the like for flavor. Middle Eastern Armors would also have been chainmail, but with a touch of scalemail as well, and most of that covered up with silk robes and surcoats in the like. Desert sun gets hot, and the Crusaders had to learn the hard way that armor heats up likewise.

Weapons: While both sides used a straight sword, I've always been given the impression that the Arabs used some sort of curved cavalry sword as well (that traditional curved scimitar was only really widespread post-crusades). The straight sword held the advantage on foot, but it was easy to get stuck in someone if you rode past them. Curved swords meant that you could remove your sword from an enemy horseman's chest easier, meaning you held the advantage in cavalry combat.


2) society

Frankish society would logically be more hierarchical (being from Feudal Europe), thus resembling a military society. Think of Mass Effect's Turians. Very organized, logical, and focused on following orders.

Intellectualism, particularly the sciences and the classics, was kept alive in the East during the Dark Ages, so the pseudo-Arabian culture would have an emphasis on education, literacy, art, and civics. Perhaps an emphasis on democratic ideology would be interesting as well, seeing as how they possessed much of Classical Greek's literature (which included political works).


4) Culture and traditions

Going by what I know of Northern European history and culture, the Frankish expys will be a bit rough, to say the least. The first Arab trader who visited the Vikings (according to Historychannel's Mankind series) noted how they were dirty, smelly, and big into human sacrifice. So there's probably more blood and guts in the occupiers' cultural background. Also lots of traditions and stories that make more sense in a colder environment (case in point: Thor fought Ice Giants).

Living in a desert will make the other group more inclined to traditions supported by that environs. Nomadic tribes exist in the Sahara. Water is a bit rarer and valued highly. Really, the Middle East (particularly the region you're talking about) has weather very similar to the American Southwest or Mexico, so if you have any experience with those regions, you'll have a good idea what it's like to live in a dry, warm area. Surprisingly pleasant as long as you can stay out of direct sunlight.

Also, this seems like something more belonging to World-Building. But if the Sheriff didn't make a fuss...

Vitruviansquid
2012-12-23, 04:08 AM
Since we're talking about a Crusader state expy here, and not the real deal, I'm assuming we need to cover more possibilities than those that come up in history.

1. Military

Start by thinking about what your invaders have versus what the natives have. You may want to exaggerate the differences to get across how different they are. Now think, if it came down to a fight, would this kingdom be able to field more of the invaders' type of military or the native type of military? On one hand, the invaders are the rulers and will probably favor their own tactics and troop types, especially considering they've already brought an army with them when they conquered the place. On the other hand, since the invaders have come from a faraway place, they may have decided that the local styles of warfare are more suited to the land and tried to adapt themselves. Perhaps they've also found a need for and a way to recruit locals into their military?

2. Society

My rule number one of fantasy conquest: Genocide is extremely extremely hard to do and usually undesirable. Whatever events took place when the invaders took over, they have to somehow rely on the natives if they want to set up a stable, long term power base. But how does this relationship work? What do the natives feel about doing things like paying their taxes (are there extra taxes for being a native)? What about being made to build things like fortifications for the invaders? On their part, how far do the invaders trust the natives? Would the invaders levy the natives into their armies during crises? How much leeway do the invaders give the natives in order to gain their cooperation? Or perhaps, what kind of tools do the invader use to coerce the natives? How effective is it?

What do the invaders and the natives think of each others' society? And are the stereotypes more or less correct? What do they find abominable about each other and what do they grudgingly respect?

3. Mentality

I probably folded everything I could ask about mentality into society.

4. Culture and Traditions

Same as above, or perhaps I'm just lazy... well, let's call this a good starting point. :|

Falconer
2012-12-23, 04:15 AM
EDIT: just a note, when I say crusaders here, I'm talking about the expies that we're creating here simply for expediency, rather than the RL, historical crusaders.

Well, for starters, why exactly are they there? They're crusader-influenced, so I imagine it's colored by their religion, but any specifics? Do they want control of sacred sites, like the crusaders did, or are they there pretty much just because their high priests told them to be? There's a lot of stuff that I feel could spring from those questions.

Also, there's plenty of ways to make them sympathetic/relatable while firmly remaining antagonists. If they're conquering the land, then there's definitely going to be colonists and their families following in the soldiers' wake--farmers, merchants, all kinds of people looking for a better life for themselves and their loved ones. There'll be pilgrims, too, if there's holy sites that have been conquered. There's no reason those people should be particularly villainous.

Anyways, thoughts:

1) Military: A lot of this would depend on the crusaders' objectives. What drove them to invade in the first place? What are they after? If it's the land itself, they're going to be focusing on garrisoning the cities, probably, and building fortresses in the countryside. Vital ports/logistical points will be the most fortified and heavily garrisoned (that's where the soldiers, settlers, and pilgrims are coming from, after all), followed by the shrines themselves. Lots of clerics, lots of crusaders (the class), probably some knights amongst the baddies that have class levels.

2) The two big societal powers here will probably be the nobles/military and the church--and there will probably be some tension between the two over who, exactly, is calling the shots. On the one hand, the military is going to be running most of the show, but they get their legitimacy (and their big objectives) from the church. Hell, the church probably has soldiers of its own--crusading orders and such--who don't get on too well with the regular soldiery. If you're looking for some tension within the crusader camp, the high priests and the nobles would be fun to play off of each other; the nobles would be more in on the crusade for personal, material gain (plunder, slaves, power & prestige) while the clerics keep on forcing them towards things like recovering relics and capturing non-plunder-filled holy sites in the name of <Insert Deity/ies Here>.

3) Mentality is where you'll have to make some decisions. What is the religion like? Is it a fairly benign faith that has been taken over by corrupt, power-hungry priests? Or is it more Mordor-ish, actively promoting death and destruction? I'd personally go with the former, though the latter might actually be fun to flesh out and humanize (why do they promote death and destruction? how do they justify it?).

But for the average crusading soldier, who is probably the youngest son of some peasant farmer, consider that he's halfway across the world in a land where he's probably not even the same species, if your setting is anything like most D&D worlds. He's there because his liege lord told him to, because the clerics of the church told him it was a Righteous Cause (tm) and thirdly (and, I think, most importantly) because it's a chance for new start. If you're borrowing the medieval social structure, a lot of the soldiers are probably hoping for enough plunder to actually rise in social rank, or at least start his own farm. But regardless, most of the crusaders--regardless of alignment--probably don't think of what they are doing is wrong, outside of maybe a vague "it sucks to be you" towards the people they're attacking. For the average crusader in your civilization, for all the talk of killing infidels and such, it's probably not that personal--the people they are at war with are too different for it to be so.

4) If you're basing them loosely off of the Crusader States, you're probably gonna be taking a lot of cues from Medieval Europe. First of all, I'd actually say keep that--the culture with the knights in shining armor is usually on the protagonist's side in such stories, and making them villains is a fun subversion. But I'd also recommend shaking them up a bit: mix and match cultural elements, or make stuff up entirely. My favorite thing when homebrewing a culture is to start with a real-world expy and then slowly molding it by taking the trappings of a generic D&D world to their logical conclusions. Maybe your crusaders come from a land that has been plagued by undead for centuries--so they always, always cremate the remains after a battle, even the bodies of their enemies, then meticulously spread the ashes such that no parts remain. Customs and traditions arise in a culture through that culture's interaction with the world around it, so ask yourself: what is the world like to the crusaders? What is their homeland like? What is its history?

Andrewmoreton
2012-12-23, 04:28 AM
1)Military
Looking at the traditional Crusader states /arab military combination

The Crusader states had limited manpower at hand but occasional bursts of massive reinforcements (Crusades) this coloured their military tradition. They built lots of Castles, more than the same cultures did in Europe these fortifications could tie down an invading army long enougth for reinforcements to arrive. One reason for the shortage of manpower was a strong reluctance to arm none christian natives for fear they would desert to the other side/

Cavalry The Europeans had bred BIG Horses and developed a strong heavy cavalry tradition this meant their heavily armoured knights were unstoppable by any native force in a direct charge, however they had a strong cultural prejudice against the bow which meant the nobility/heavy cavalry did not use missile weapons from horse back. The Arabs used much more medium andlight cavalry particularly armed with missile weapons .
This lead to Arab tactics being to draw the Crusaders into a charge which failed to hit home and then cutting down the exhausted and scatterred knights after the charge . The Crusaders sought to maintain discipline, only charge when they could hit something and then stop before they got too tired and scatterred and withdraw on the Infantry to prepare for another charge.

Crossbows/ These were mainly used by the Crusader states and where uses to defend castles or to provide the infantry with protection against the arab cavalry

Military orders. Hospitallers, Templars, Teutonic knights . These groups supported by European wide financial sources and recruitment could field bands of heavily armed and very highly disciplined knights decisive in battle and excellent at holding castles

Magic. Perhaps the Crusaders only use Divine power while the Arabs make use of more Arcane magic but this is going to depend on the wider world

2)Religion. NO COMMENT ON THE REAL RELIGIOUS ISSUES. You are going to have to decide why the Crusaders are there , even more so in a fantasy world where typically priests can display obvious and immediate divine power. Decide how and why sacred sites of the Crusaders became controlled by another religion and if these sites also have religious significance to the Arab equivalants

Spiryt
2012-12-23, 04:45 AM
Weapons: While both sides used a straight sword, I've always been given the impression that the Arabs used some sort of curved cavalry sword as well (that traditional curved scimitar was only really widespread post-crusades). The straight sword held the advantage on foot, but it was easy to get stuck in someone if you rode past them. Curved swords meant that you could remove your sword from an enemy horseman's chest easier, meaning you held the advantage in cavalry combat.


Turks are generally assumed to bring sabres and curved swords - steppe riders 'invention' into Islamic world - swords of the Arabs, Maurs and so on were definitely straight in pretty much all cases.

If your sword is buried into your opponent chest that deep, you don't really need advantage anymore. :smallwink:



Frankish society would logically be more hierarchical (being from Feudal Europe), thus resembling a military society. Think of Mass Effect's Turians. Very organized, logical, and focused on following orders.


Well, that's not really accurate...

In the first place, Islamic states in Middle Ages were very much feudal as well, probably even 'more' than most European states - in the sense that feudal structure was more hierarchical and solid in the 11th-13th centuries.


Frankish crusades were pretty 'famous' from being disorganized with many conflicts between leaders and important figures.


Perhaps an emphasis on democratic ideology would be interesting as well,

Well, actually, Germanic, and to some extent Slavic, people actually had strong traditions of tribal (war)democracy.

not much/any of such tradition in Egypt, among Semitic people etc. as far as I recall.


however they had a strong cultural prejudice against the bow which meant the nobility/heavy cavalry did not use missile weapons from horse back.

I don't think there was any 'cultural prejudice' and knights were using bows, or rather crossbows, very often.

There was just not much of a horse archery tradition, that's pretty specific thing, mostly from the great steppes, so likewise, among Islamic armies, horse archers mostly hailed from Turkish/Black Sea regions.

Arab/Egyptian heavy cavalry wasn't using missile weapons very often as well, it's not all that practical to go full jack of all trades. :smallwink:

North_Ranger
2012-12-23, 12:17 PM
It would also be good to consider the influence of different cultures living side by side in relative harmony. The crusader states of the past were a major venue of cultural influences from the Arab world - and through them, the Persian, Indian and Chinese cultures, courtesy of the Silk Road. You cannot really talk about a crusader state expy if you cut out that piece of history, namely the transition of new tastes, new literature, new ideas etc. via trade and general exposure. Consider what kind of influences the crusader expies are exposed to. New forms of magic? New spells? New precious substances? New knowledge (eg. new kinds of magic items)?

To give some examples, the Crusades are historically seen as a time when Europe was re-introduced to classic texts and ideas of the antiquity, much of which had been lost in Europe but preserved in Arabic translations. New castle designs, science, medicine, architecture, algebra, optics, and others are mentioned as influenced by or learned from the Arabs. Purely in terms of material goods, there were spices, ivory, diamonds, jade, silk, oranges, apples... and early forms of gunpowder, if you wish to include the possibility of primitive firearms in your campaign.

And you should also recall that the historical crusades was not just a matter of Christianity v. Islam, no matter what Robin Hood movies and Ivanhoe might tell you :smallwink: In terms of religion, there were also the Eastern Orthodox, the Copts, the Armenians and the Jews, just to mention the most well-known religious groups. So in terms of expy religions, you could include a number of competing and co-existing religions, and have influences from different religions color the ways of worship, the styles of dress and architecture, the hierarchy etc. of other religions in the area. Some of these could be minor religions, excluded from the top echelons of the society or limited to a certain ethnicity, race or cultural stratum, or any combination thereof, but they are still there.

For reference and general viewing pleasure I recommend Crash Course World History: The Crusades (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0zudTQelzI).

Spiryt
2012-12-23, 01:26 PM
It would also be good to consider the influence of different cultures living side by side in relative harmony. The crusader states of the past were a major venue of cultural influences from the Arab world - and through them, the Persian, Indian and Chinese cultures, courtesy of the Silk Road.

To give some examples, the Crusades are historically seen as a time when Europe was re-introduced to classic texts and ideas of the antiquity, much of which had been lost in Europe but preserved in Arabic translations. New castle designs, science, medicine, architecture, algebra, optics, and others are mentioned as influenced by or learned from the Arabs. Purely in terms of material goods, there were spices, ivory, diamonds, jade, silk, oranges, apples... and early forms of gunpowder, if you wish to include the possibility of primitive firearms in your campaign.



Well, actually, Silk Road, Persians etc. trade and contacts are obviously 'effects' of Crusades in any way - in fact one of hard, economical reasons for them were gaining control over those trade routes etc.

A lot of Chinese ideas that got 'imported' reached Europe by Mongols, naturally.

As far as I've read, major cultural exchange was anyway happening trough Muslim Spain, and possibly Mediterranean trade/etc. (with growing Italian cities etc.).

I'm not really knowledgeable, but this makes a lot of sense, as constant warfare between very hostile organisms is not 'optimal' for exchange of non-military stuff.

North_Ranger
2012-12-23, 02:23 PM
Well, actually, Silk Road, Persians etc. trade and contacts are obviously 'effects' of Crusades in any way - in fact one of hard, economical reasons for them were gaining control over those trade routes etc.

A lot of Chinese ideas that got 'imported' reached Europe by Mongols, naturally.

As far as I've read, major cultural exchange was anyway happening trough Muslim Spain, and possibly Mediterranean trade/etc. (with growing Italian cities etc.).

I'm not really knowledgeable, but this makes a lot of sense, as constant warfare between very hostile organisms is not 'optimal' for exchange of non-military stuff.

EDIT: Decided to remove my earlier content, don't want to break the forum rules. Mainly it was about how the Crusader States weren't constantly at war with their neighbours, but that's still a political discussion.

Essentially I just wanted to point out that the history of those kingdoms wasn't just constant warfare, but also years of peace. Tense peace for sure, but peace nonetheless. And that kind of a situation might be an interesting roleplaying opportunity, instead of just plain ol' war. Heck, didn't they make a game out of that a few years back... what was it called again, Backstabber's Oath or something like that? :smallwink:

Roland St. Jude
2012-12-23, 03:43 PM
...And you should also recall that the historical crusades was not just a matter of Christianity v. Islam, no matter what Robin Hood movies and Ivanhoe might tell you :smallwink: In terms of religion, there were also the Eastern Orthodox, the Copts, the Armenians and the Jews, just to mention the most well-known religious groups. So in terms of expy religions, you could include a number of competing and co-existing religions, and have influences from different religions color the ways of worship, the styles of dress and architecture, the hierarchy etc. of other religions in the area. Some of these could be minor religions, excluded from the top echelons of the society or limited to a certain ethnicity, race or cultural stratum, or any combination thereof, but they are still there.

For reference and general viewing pleasure I recommend Crash Course World History: The Crusades (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0zudTQelzI).
Sheriff: Thread locked.