Rules Only: Generic or Official Traveller Universe

[rancke]

Perhaps as a House Rule (or a suggested addition/clarification entry in the T5 errata document) would be to have C6/Soc for NPCs rolled on 3D6-6 (with a result less than 2 "bumped-up" to 2).

This makes SL9 day laborers and SL2 country squires a possibility, to name just two examples. Most days I'm not up to the strain on my imagination to explain either. Much easier to say that day laborers are usually SL2 and country squires are usually SL9. If you really must have a chance of variation, make a separate 2D throw and change the SL from the expected if you roll a 12.


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

Nobles have never been a focus of any of the Traveller gaming sessions I've been part of, either as ref or player. So a lot of my perspective is colored in that regard.

Nobility is assigned through papers through some recognition of service or accomplishment.
Nobility can be hereditary (though not guaranteed).
Nobility is feudal in nature, as is the Imperial interstellar government.
Nobility is required to be recognized in political office.
Nobility affords enfeoffment, usually no more than 100km^2 (though the essay shows a counter example).
Nobility allows a duke to rise from ruling a subsector to a sector, depending on circumstances.

Fiefs, by implication, are assigned for development (emphasis seems to be on economic usage).
Feudal fiefs were parcels granted for farming, rulership and protection, but the inference in the Noble essay very much suggests economic development, and not a "duchy", "barony", nor "county", but an economic holding.
A fief is not an association".

Allegedly there's no Imperial government below the subsector level, meaning worlds (save perhaps the subsector capitol, Duke's predisposition depending).

House Cav is defined in The Spinward Marches campaign.

The point of contention, given Magnus von Thornwood's revelation of "rule your world with pride/honor..." (whatever it was), is that even though lower ranking nobles are not of the peerage, and that the Imperial government begins at the subsector level, then, to me, and this is MY SPECULATION, it seems possible, (your level of likliness may vary) that the term "association" may have some cross-over meaning with the term "rule".

Eh. That is even though the Imperial Government doesn't administer small collections of worlds or single worlds, that a lesser noble, though his letters, possibly rules a world WITHOUT the Imperial bureaucratic apparatus.

I think the point of confusion and contention is what do lesser nobles do with worlds they are "associated" with, if there's no Imperial machine for them to be part of.

If the Imperium is a feudal system, then fiefs MIGHT be more than economic grants (though current material doesn't suggest otherwise, yet doesn't strictly prohibit other "applications").
If the Imperium is a feudal system, then, as per TSMC, house cav can be brought to the theatre of operations, but that OTHER forces are raised as a matter of noble function for the Imperial Government. But, again, private armies (as per many an allusion to mercenary tickets for megacorporations) are not prohibited, and are in fact institutionalized.
If the Imperium is a feudal system, and if there is no Imperial Government or any governance below the subsector level, then a minor noble may perhaps indeed rule an associate world, world government depending.

The thing that "gets me" is that the empire is a feudal system, but has an elaborate bureaucracy; as per Thailand, Spain, Denmark, Saudi Arabia, and any existing nation whose royalty still has a hand in government (note; I intentionally did not include the UK nor Japan, as those families are more figureheads, though I think the Queen of England is allowed some kind of power of ratification on legislation).

Gray Areas;
Do nobles, without the Imperial government, rule worlds?
Do nobles of all ranks raise private forces apart from house cavalry?
Do nobles, not of peerage, have any political or bureaucratic rank apart from the Imperial government, where they can use their title to "gain perks" or exercise powers?
What do Knights do?
What do Baronets do?
What do Counts do?
What do Marquis do?

Back to cleaning.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I guess we're done beating the nobility horse?

Loose tangent to the Mechs poll/thread, when I think of the OTU, I think of a pre World War One European like aristocracy that has a modern military machine, even though some of the people may be costumed in clothes with epaulets, sashes, brass medals and what not. The OTU is essentially a modernization of that zeitgeist, and with some ambiguities that I've tried to point out in the area of nobility.

Now, given all that, I wonder how many players just play the game with the OTU lurking in the background, but otherwise not playing a major role in the gaming session.

I put that question out there because that's kind of how I write anything. Story first, settign second. In this case our favorite Sci-Fi RPG Traveller.

 

[whulorigan]

. . . when I think of the OTU, I think of a pre World War One European like aristocracy that has a modern military machine, even though some of the people may be costumed in clothes with epaulets, sashes, brass medals and what not. The OTU is essentially a modernization of that zeitgeist, and with some ambiguities that I've tried to point out in the area of nobility.

I think that is a good analogy for the OTU, in general. In that paradigm, there are Nobles who simply have their titles and lands hereditarily, but without much responsibility, as well as those Nobles who have been appointed an appropriate position of responsibility/authority by the sovereign based on their Noble qulaifications for the post. Some (lesser) Nobles have the title as a reward of honor, without much of anything else.

Extrapolating from that, in the OTU a Noble that is assigned as a world-representative (and not all Nobles have such assignments), is somewhat like the antebellum European Noble above, where the Noble in question has been entrusted with a position of authority, in this case to oversee and administer the Imperial (but not local) interests of a world, and represent and/or advocate for it before the Subsector Duke and/or the Imperial Moot. Alternately, a Noble might be appointed to administer offices and functions of the Imperial Bureaucracy at the subsector level under the oversight of the Subsector Duke.

The general analogy of World Governments and Nobles is vaguely like the relationship between State Governments (= World Governments) and the Federal Government (= Imperial Government) of the USA in the 19th Century. Worlds govern themselves under the (loose) oversight of the Imperial Government, in which Nobles would be the analog of appointed US Federal Officials (who do not administer local affairs, which are the province of the State (i.e. = World) Governments).

First and foremost, Noble dignity is a cultural & social distinction (with perks), but the positions of authority that they hold (if any) are political appointments granted by the Emperor commensurate with the particular level of Nobility.

Now, given all that, I wonder how many players just play the game with the OTU lurking in the background, but otherwise not playing a major role in the gaming session.

I put that question out there because that's kind of how I write anything. Story first, settign second. In this case our favorite Sci-Fi RPG Traveller.

Personally, I have always preferred adventures/campaigns in which the OTU setting is in the background, but where the story does NOT put players in the position of movers and shakers in the Imperium. In my opinion a good OTU campaign either keeps the Imperium primarily as a mere backdrop-setting for the story, or alternately, as the campaign advances, moves to the "medium-level", so to speak, in terms of interaction with the Imperium. I don't like campaigns in which the characters' actions "change the destiny of the Imperium", so to speak. I find that too high level in general, unless you are specifically playing a campaign that is focused on Nobles and political intrigue at the Imperial Nobility level.

 

[rancke]

Extrapolating from that, in the OTU a Noble that is assigned as a world-representative (and not all Nobles have such assignments), is somewhat like the antebellum European Noble above, where the Noble in question has been entrusted with a position of authority, in this case to oversee and administer the Imperial (but not local) interests of a world, and represent and/or advocate for it before the Subsector Duke and/or the Imperial Moot. Alternately, a Noble might be appointed to administer offices and functions of the Imperial Bureaucracy at the subsector level under the oversight of the Subsector Duke.

I think it works a bit differently, but we've had that discussion several times before.

The general analogy of World Governments and Nobles is vaguely like the relationship between State Governments (= World Governments) and the Federal Government (= Imperial Government) of the USA in the 19th Century.

Agreed, but the analogy only goes so far. One major difference is that the Imperium is a three tier system, not a two tier: Imperium, duchy, member world. The Imperium tend to be weaker vís-a-vís the duchies due to the communication times, and the duchies tend to be weaker vis-a-vís the member worlds due to the Imperium's 'local autonomy' principle.


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

My personal interpretation is that there are probably two sets of nobles below Duke; landed and unlanded. In a feudal system a lesser noble might have responsibility for a member world, but his administration is done without the benefit of the Imperial bureacuracy; i.e. he has his own government, with offices of various sorts where people wear his coat of arms, so to speak, and the Imperial banner is only seen at the starport or the subsector capitol. Unlanded nobles would just have the title and some perks. That's my impression, and it seems to gel well with a "feudal system". But I guess Avery will let us know at some point.

On the adventures; reading past anecdotes of gaming sessions on this BBS (and elsewhere), I get the distinct impression that a good portion of players, not all, not even most, but a significant number of players seem to have those "shake the Imperium to its foundations" adventures. I shrug my shoulders at those.

I think far more satisfying are the adventures that offer a slice of adventuring life within the Imperium without disturbing the backdrop. As you way, interacting with the backdrop might be necessary every now and then. It's there to help players and the ref propel adventure. Once you go beyond that, then you start to jumble things a bit.

 

[whulorigan]

On the adventures; reading past anecdotes of gaming sessions on this BBS (and elsewhere), I get the distinct impression that a good portion of players, not all, not even most, but a significant number of players seem to have those "shake the Imperium to its foundations" adventures. I shrug my shoulders at those.

I think far more satisfying are the adventures that offer a slice of adventuring life within the Imperium without disturbing the backdrop. As you way, interacting with the backdrop might be necessary every now and then. It's there to help players and the ref propel adventure. Once you go beyond that, then you start to jumble things a bit.

As I mentioned, that is my preference. And my intuition tells me that is probably the preference of a lot of the people who prefer the GURPS Traveller timeline as well. They didn't like having the Classic Era shaken up by the Rebellion (or at least not in the manner that it evolved and worked out).

 

[mike wightman]

The Imperium can not grant land that belongs to a world government to a noble. The Imperium needs to own the land first.
Two ways I can see to do this:

purchase the land on a world and then grant it to the lesser noble

use Imperial resources to colonise a world and declare it Imperial property from the get go (there is canon precedent for this in the Spinward Marches)

A third method would be to cede land to a noble as part of Imperial entry conditions, but this breaks the Imperial rule about self determination (there is evidence to how this happened during the milieu 0 era)

 

[Blue Ghost]

I think by default the Imperium owns all the worlds, no matter the tech level or government type. It's just that the Imperial political machine and social bureaucracy doesn't extend below the subsector level, save for severe cases (GT mentions at least one, there may be others).

Like I say, if the Imperium is feudal in nature, and the Imperial government starts at the subsector level, then that might imply that local governance, or merely "control" or acknowledged control, of a world falls to the lesser nobles. There may be some world with a caveman techlevel that is a sentient/sophont species, and that world may be in trust to Sir Sam of Planet-X. But the paleolithic inhabitants probably don't know anything about Sir Sam, or have knowledge of him, much less anything beyond what they deal with on a day to day basis for survival. Just my take.

I need to get somethings done.

 

[rancke]

The Imperium can not grant land that belongs to a world government to a noble. The Imperium needs to own the land first.

Two ways I can see to do this:

purchase the land on a world and then grant it to the lesser noble.

That's how I see the Emperor gaining a lot of the land he gives away as landholds (I'm using the term 'landhold' instead of 'fief' for the sake of clarity because I think that's what's referred to when the term 'fief' is used. I will use 'fief' for mediaval-style fiefs; this does not mean that I think that's the way it is used in the Nobles essay). The Emperor becomes the owner of the land, but it is still subject to the world government unless the purchase agreement says otherwise.

use Imperial resources to colonise a world and declare it Imperial property from the get go (there is canon precedent for this in the Spinward Marches).

There is? Where? It is certainly possible for the Emperor to treat such worlds as real fiefs rather than landholds. I see that as contrary to Imperial policy, but that's just an opinion.

I also think the Ministry of Colonisation tend to spend its resources on helping Imperial citizens to colonise a world rather than to colonise it under its own auspices.

Mind you, the Imperium could, and probably does, have atypical situations all over the place. I just don't think it would be a common occurrence.

A third method would be to cede land to a noble as part of Imperial entry conditions, but this breaks the Imperial rule about self determination (there is evidence to how this happened during the milieu 0 era)

I think that ceding land to the Imperium in the Memberhip Charter is almost universal, but that this would be landholds rather than fiefs.

What's the evidence you speak of? (Not doubting you, just curious).


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

The Forboldn project library data entry in Kinunir and the various references to Ministry of Colonisation and Ministry of Conservation activities in S:3, and the mention of Imperial Reservations.

 

[rancke]

I think by default the Imperium owns all the worlds, no matter the tech level or government type.

I think you're wrong.

Like I say, if the Imperium is feudal in nature, and the Imperial government starts at the subsector level, then that might imply that local governance, or merely "control" or acknowledged control, of a world falls to the lesser nobles.

Or maybe the use of the word 'fief' for landholds mislead people into thinking that the Imperium is feudal. "It's got fiefs, that must mean that it's a feudality."

People jump to conclusions based on misunderstandings all the time.


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

i agree completely with Hans, the Imperium as we have it described does not own all the worlds. The core sectors of the Imperium may have many more worlds under direct Imperial rule, but the sectors we have described in detail show autonomous world governments who pay taxes to be members of the Imperial club.

The ducal "fief" is the governance of a sub-sector on behalf of the Emperor, not direct rule of planets or even bits of land on planets.

 

[rancke]

The Forboldn project library data entry in Kinunir...

Doesn't say anything about the political arrangement for the new settlers.

You can find my non-canon writeup of Forboldn here. I make the Ministry of Colonisation assist the people on Forboldn to expend their population and infrastructure. (Well, that's the plan, anyway).

...and the various references to Ministry of Colonisation and Ministry of Conservation activities in S:3...

Again there's no mention of the political arrangement. Except the obvious one that the governments are not Type 6 (Or are they? I haven't the patience to check through the entire book), so the Imperium isn't governing them directly.

...and the mention of Imperial Reservations.

Yes, those are manifestly owned by the Imperium. I shall have to see what their government types are.

I checked up on Lewis (specifically said to be privately owned by Leonard Bolden-Tukera). Except, that is, for a group of people who bought land from an ancestor. And the government type for Lewis is that of the settlers...

This is a world that is owned by an Imperial noble in his own right. And he is still not considered to be the government of its population of 70,000 people.


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

I think you're wrong.


Or maybe the use of the word 'fief' for landholds mislead people into thinking that the Imperium is feudal. "It's got fiefs, that must mean that it's a feudality."

People jump to conclusions based on misunderstandings all the time.


Hans

I believe the actual text of the rules uses the word "feudal", although it does have the trappings of an Imperial European setting, with nobles who are nothing more than just persons of a privileged class, but that said class affords them some minor powers.

Based on that, I think the OTU has a mix of noble types, but that that mix has never been described. My personal opinion is that there's a class of minor nobles below duke who rule without Imperial governance, but who owe fealty to the Emperor.

 

[Blue Ghost]

i agree completely with Hans, the Imperium as we have it described does not own all the worlds. The core sectors of the Imperium may have many more worlds under direct Imperial rule, but the sectors we have described in detail show autonomous world governments who pay taxes to be members of the Imperial club.

The ducal "fief" is the governance of a sub-sector on behalf of the Emperor, not direct rule of planets or even bits of land on planets.

Well, the Imperial government doesn't extend to the planetary level, nor even the system level. It's like the Federal government not drafting and enforcing local legislation for things like vagrancy, jay walking, speed limits on roads, bylaws for PTA groups and whatever else. All of that is done by your City counsel, County offices, or even on a state level. But this doesn't preclude that California is still part of the US.

Now there are exceptions. I think Indian Reservations are sovereign lands, and you need a Federal warrant to exercise any legal power there (as per treaty). And I think there are one or two examples of like holdings in the Imperium.

 

[rancke]

Based on that, I think the OTU has a mix of noble types, but that that mix has never been described.

Except loosely in the Nobles essay and in more detail in GT: Nobles.

My personal opinion is that there's a class of minor nobles below duke who rule without Imperial governance, but who owe fealty to the Emperor.

We've been over this before. A world held by a noble in fief to the Emperor would have a type 6 government. A world where part of it is held in fief to the Emperor would have a Type 7 government. Any other government type would not be holding the world in fief to the Emperor. Some of the worlds with type 6 and 7 governments may have nobles holding fiefs from the Emperor, but most if not all of the ones we have descriptions of are not among them.


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

I am NOT talking about FIEFS

Letters of nobility (or "for nobility") assign the noble to a world, system, or whatever. That's different from letters of enfeoffment.

Having said THAT, it COULD BE, that a noble has some OTHER POWERS than what is described as they PERTAIN to fiefs.

 

[rancke]

I am NOT talking about FIEFS

Then there's no reason to think that whatever you're talking about conveys rulership of anything and I don't understand what you're talking about.

Letters of nobility (or "for nobility") assign the noble to a world, system, or whatever. That's different from letters of enfeoffment.

Having said THAT, it COULD BE, that a noble has some OTHER POWERS than what is described as they PERTAIN to fiefs.

They do. GT: Nobles explain what high nobles (below the level of duke) do. They have imperium, the right to issue legal orders to Imperial servants within the area of their imperium; however, they are expected to exercise that power with discretion. The chief restraint is the knowledge that they will have to justify their actions to their superiors after the fact, possibly even all the way up to the Emperor. Abuse of their powers is a good way to lose their titles. Essentially they're a back-up set of controls for running the Imperium (the primary one is the Imperial Bureaucracy and the duchy bureaucracies run by the high dukes). They are supposed to step in when the primary controls fail. Think of them as somewhat analogous to ombudsmen.

And, yes, this is new information not found in any previously published material.


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

Apparently.

The "rules" state that there is no Imperial Government below the subsector level. Or, rather, the Imperial government begins at the subsector level, all the way up to the Moot and the Emperor.

But there's no definition of what relationship nobles below the rank of Duke have with the worlds which they are associated with.

It's either a just a formal recognition, a "nicety", or there is some other unaddressed power or relationship. The "rules" state that the relationship between nobles and the Emperor is a feudal one. The "rules" state that the Imperial government is a feudal system.

Feudal systems are defined as a ruler/protector who offers armed protection to workers and farmers on a parcel of land designated for the lord's rule. If that does not exist, then, by definition, it is not a feudal system. BUT, THAT is DIFFERENT, from the world "associated" with said noble. That's the distinction I've been trying to make.

With ALL this in mind, to me it seems clear that if it is a feudal system, then it has Imperial trappings that operate on a tier above, or independently of, the feudal system, which is established but not defined.

p.s. a fief may or may not be part of this in a "medieval fief" form, but we've argued that point, and I personally think the point is inconclusive, even though it is highly implicit that a "fief" in Traveller terms, is an economic holding.