Have you ever considered how vast the 3rd Imperium is?

[Chuck Anumia]

I mean, it covers thousands of worlds over hundreds of parsecs and even traveling by jump 6 it takes more than a year for a one way trip from one end to the other.
How is it all managed?
How much corruption is there within the management system?
The Nobel’s are supposed to be the local managers over their domains of influence but they need clerical help right?
The Navy is in charge of security and anti-piracy/anti-rebellion actions in each sector, right?
Do they work alone or with the local militia?

The bureaucrats vary in their integrity from one planet to the next right? Much less from one system to another and from one sub-sector to the next.
Everyone uses the Emperor’s name as their authority but is it really his authority being exorcised or is it being abused?

Is there an entire fleet of Inspector General’s floating between systems checking up on the use and abuse of the Emperors power?
Does the intergalactic MOJ consistently enforce the laws?
How many cases slip through the cracks?
How much bribery or intimidation goes on behind the scenes? .

What about intergalactic intelligence service to the Emperor?
Who are they and who pays them? Who do they really work for?

What about an intergalactic relief organization for dealing with world damaging problems (wars, famines, disease and such chaos?)
Who runs them? Are they Imperially funded? Are they a charitable organization receiving donations from the Nobel’s in their sectors of operation? Do they draw the line at helping humans only or do they help whatever sentient being is in need?

Am I missing more of the big picture than these tidbits?
*Wanders off muttering to himself about the millions of missing bits of data he needs to solve the puzzle*

 

[Reban]

But filling in the detail is half the fun. Also in game the fact that the authorities vary in their corruptibility and vigor gives variety to PC encounters: *Jail cell door slams shut* "But Captain all I did was offer the usual bribe to the Customs Officer. I still can't figure out was he offended by the bribe or the amount!".

IIRC there is a White Dwarf adventure (The Snowbird Mystery?) that mentions Imperial Intelligence officials cleaning house before an Inspector General visits their sector. The Inspector Generals travel around with a small Imperial Marine Task Force in tow for discovery and correction.

When in doubt about a detail of how the Imperium works IMTU I look at how large historic empires did it in Earth history. The British Empire, Imperial China, Rome all have things to teach about how to run an empire with a large time lag between the seat of power and the frontier.

Some things will come down to empowering "Johnny (Eneri?) on the spot" to make a decission that benefits the Imperium's interest. Other things depend on spreading an ideal of "Imperial Culture" that teaches that Noble ideal of duty, honor and loyalty, to the Imperium and your fellow man.

Of course being humans you can depend that someones going to sell that Imperial Warship, or maybe even a colony or four to line their own pocket (muster-out benefits just won't keep the trophy wife in the style she's accustomed to). That's why the Emperor employs Bwaps. :rofl:

 

[HG_B]

I mean, it covers thousands of worlds over hundreds of parsecs and even traveling by jump 6 it takes more than a year for a one way trip from one end to the other.
How is it all managed?

It wouldn't last 200 years. Plus, once humans once past the "Age of Enlightenment" stage of development (and thus shed the belief of Divine Right) they don't tolerate hereditary nobility/royalty with much real power. HIGHLY implausible setting.

 

[GypsyComet]

Two hundred years is about how long the Terran attempt ran, too. The first and third Imperia managed more because they structured themselves as trade associations, and their "nobles" as firemen and taxation intermediaries. Truly authoritarian structures are very localized if they want to persist (and most do). You'll note that the Third Imperium only has a few simple rules, letting the worlds handle themselves for the most part.

 

[HG_B]

Two hundred years is about how long the Terran attempt ran, too. The first and third Imperia managed more because they structured themselves as trade associations, and their "nobles" as firemen and taxation intermediaries. Truly authoritarian structures are very localized if they want to persist (and most do). You'll note that the Third Imperium only has a few simple rules, letting the worlds handle themselves for the most part.

The part about hereditary nobility rule would still hold. The 3I would not exist.

 

[rancke]

It wouldn't last 200 years. Plus, once humans once past the "Age of Enlightenment" stage of development (and thus shed the belief of Divine Right) they don't tolerate hereditary nobility/royalty with much real power. HIGHLY implausible setting.

That part is perfectly plausible. The planetary elites get co-opted into the Imperial aristocracy and there's no way for dissatisfied members of the hoi polloi to get at the Imperial nobles above them. They may oust the planetary leaders, at which point they can accept the Imperium or be invaded and a new regime installed.

But mostly the hoi polloi isn't going to be annoyed with the Imperium in the first place. Everybody knows that an aristocracy is the only way for an interstellar government to function properly. Anything else would be worse. Sure, the Zhodani are said to have a sort of democracy, but they're Evil Mindrippers!!! We don't what that sort of thing here in the Imperium thank you very much!!


Hans

 

[esampson]

The part about hereditary nobility rule would still hold. The 3I would not exist.

Ankh-Morpork had dallied with many forms of government and had ended up with that form of democracy known as One Man, One Vote. The Patrician was the Man; he had the Vote.

-Terry Pratchett, Mort

Hereditary nobility existed long before the concept of "Divine Right" came about. In fact divine right came about because it was originally more palatable (you owe the King your allegiance because that's the way things are meant to be) than the previous reasoning (you owe the King your allegiance or else someone is going to come and kick your teeth in).

People have a lot of confusion as to how "hereditary nobility" worked. There's an assumption that the oldest son inherited, everyone did what the King said and that was that and there was never anything else. That is how it was presented in fairy tales but in truth the situation was far more complex than that.

For a King to rule he had to have the support of his Dukes (and other nobles). In that aspect it was something of an elected position. Sure, there was no gathering together and voting and if there was it wouldn't have been 1 vote per person but more like 1 vote per sword the person could raise but none the less a King who was without support would soon find himself without a kingdom. Very frequently the King was not the guy who could raise up the biggest army, he was simply the least objectionable choice to everyone. After all, if you're the second most powerful Duke in the land you've got two choices on who to back; the most powerful Duke in the land or the King.

So if a scion came along who really couldn't rally support for some reason or a King began to act too egregiously with his vassals the nobles would go out and find someone more suitable with some form of claim on the throne and would then find an excuse as to why the claimant/King's claim was invalid. If there were enough nobles who thought backing the new claimant was a good idea then the original claimant or King backed down (if he knew what was good for him). If the King was too obstinate or it wasn't clear whether the nobles had enough force of arms to throw out the old King (and that was less common then it might seem because if you were a noble you didn't want to play the 'you're done being King' card unless you were damn sure you could back it up) then you had a war.

Well, if this was the case then why was nobility so often hereditary? For a couple of reasons. The first was that kings were pretty sharp people. You didn't get to be the first of a line of kings by standing around with a stupid expression on your face. So one of the things they did was they promised their vassals that the vassals title would pass to their heirs as long as those heirs supported the King's heirs. Assuming this sharp King holds his country together until he dies and now you have a situation where the claims for a fair number of the existing nobility rely upon them recognizing this new person as King. If they want to say 'screw it' then their claim is no longer valid, which is not where they want to be if the new claimant has enough support, because now the claimant has a pretty legitimate excuse for rounding up all the people who are supporting him and going after Mr. I-Don't-Need-To-Honor-My-Commitments.

There was also the fact that if the nobles didn't recognize the new claimant as King then they were going to have to pick someone else, and how is that going to get settled? By lots of people getting killed, crops burned, and money wasted. So it often the best choice for a noble was to honor the family commitments and back up the obvious claimant, as long as he wasn't too unacceptable.

So that deals with noble to noble interactions. What about the commoner to noble interactions? Why don't they just rise up and throw off the yoke of their hereditary oppressors? Well, one big question would be 'how'? Sure, the citizens of a planet have their SDBs but exactly how long are the ships of a given planet going to be able to hold out against battleship class vessels? Those are owned by the Imperium, not systems, and if the Imperial strategists have any brains they keep those ships moving about and staffed in such a way that they are able to deploy a Tigress to deal with a rebelling planet that has no crew on it (or minimal crew) that view that planet as 'theirs'. To the crew of the Tigress they're doing their duty putting down a revolt by rebels, not repressing their families and friends.

The second biggest question would be 'what yoke'? It doesn't appear to me like the nobles particularly exploit their power. Since their function is to help hold the Imperium together I would imagine that any noble who was being too high handed might find himself 'reassigned', and if you think that as a noble they would be immune to that then you are kidding yourself.

"Congratulations, Sir Scumbucket. Reports have reached us about the quality of your work in Happysunnywonderplanet. Because of its astonishing descriptions that have reached us we are elevating you to Baron Scumbucket and are placing you in charge of Imperial holdings upon Pimpleonthebuttocksoftheuniverseland. Due to the unfortunate outbreak of exploding boils and the plague of what the locals term 'shrieking rats' we will be requiring you to relocate to your new holding immediately until such time as you are able to stabilize the region."

 

[aramis]

It's more like 10-11 months (of 13/year) via J4 to go from Regina to Terra. I've had players do so.

 

[HG_B]

Hereditary nobility existed long before the concept of "Divine Right" came about.

Yes, but once societies rejected Divine Right, ALL hereditary Nobility/Royalty with real power was abolished. Hence, the 3I isn't plausible.

 

[rancke]

Yes, but once societies rejected Divine Right, ALL hereditary Nobility/Royalty with real power was abolished. Hence, the 3I isn't plausible.

Aristocracy doesn't depend on divine right; that is merely a feature of one kind of monarchy.


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

Lol - heredity is alive an well in the son's and daughters of multimillionaires. Granting themselves a posh title is just the next step.

Remember the 3rd Imperium was founded by the richest of the rich who granted themselves noble titles. They maintain their wealth and pass it to the next generation and pass along the title as well. Sure the noble title is pretentious, but when you are filthy rich you can do what you want.

The rich style themselves as aloof and aristocratic and form the hereditary political class, based on wealth and being part of the establishment.

 

[esampson]

Yes, but once societies rejected Divine Right, ALL hereditary Nobility/Royalty with real power was abolished. Hence, the 3I isn't plausible.

This is most likely a case of 'post hoc, ergo propter hoc' (after it, therefore because of it).

One event does not necessarily lead to another, even if you think you can see a connection.

And again, the Imperium seems pretty secular. Nobles don't rule so much by Providentia Divina but by the principle "Age Quae Dicimus (nec incalcitrabimus vestros dentes)" (Do what we say [or we'll kick your teeth in]).

Why is that principle implausible? It has certainly worked in the past. It is, in fact, how we got our first nobles.

 

[savage]

The Imperium

Am I missing more of the big picture than these tidbits?
*Wanders off muttering to himself about the millions of missing bits of data he needs to solve the puzzle*

I think about a lot of these too. As is, the Imperium wouldn't stand. It's only 4 light years deep is a serious problem although we all work around it.

1. Nobility: Nobility is not a problem. The exchange divine right for corporate/property ownership. The problem is the fiefs are too small. Loot at GT Nobles. These fiefs are small and not well described. There are a lot of good things in that book but fiefs are not done well.
2. Organizations: Entire Imperium organizations are missing. ISS is not the only show. The Megacorp examples are also weak. Think of the outsourcing opportunities. They need to be Shadowrun thinking.
3. Navy: The navy is not tough enough but it is spread out. The navy needs a few serious heavy hitters. Enough to put fear into the hearts of all.
4. Crime: Enormous syndicates could constantly be keeping the status quo. It protects their environment.

But this is why i run a pocket empire.

 

[aramis]

Yes, but once societies rejected Divine Right, ALL hereditary Nobility/Royalty with real power was abolished. Hence, the 3I isn't plausible.

Disagree - the UK retained a significant role of the nobility until the 21st century, and abandoned divine right in the 19th.

Several micronations are royals as the executive and chief judicial function.

Polynesians have a number of non-divine right kingdoms with real power in the crown.

The Soviet Union essentially replaced the inherited nobility of the Imperial state with a functional nobility of the senior party members; the relationship isn't as strained as it might seem, as the Imperial Russian Nobility was constantly bolstered by new membership from the senior ranks of the military and Civil Service; climbing the party hierarchy of aporatchikij was very equivalent in difficulty, social effects, and economic advantage.

 

[Chuck Anumia]

I Agree

Danish Nobility has passed hereditary titles on for over 700 years so...?

 

[rancke]

Danish Nobility has passed hereditary titles on for over 700 years so...?

They lost their role in government several generations ago, though. I'm not sure just when the last nobleman got a government job because of his title, but my guess is it was back in the 19th Century.


Hans

 

[esampson]

Danish Nobility has passed hereditary titles on for over 700 years so...?

HG_B was referring to nobles who are able to 'rule' an area, not simply people who hold a title.
Now if the Danish nobility were to continue to rule, the country were to have large amounts of a vital resource so that they actually had international influence, and they didn't even hold national elections until the 21st century and those elections were for a group that only had the authority to act in an advisory capacity then maybe we would have some hereditary nobles.

Oh, and I guess they should be white. Even if they are a hereditary ruler they can't be a noble if they don't have the proper titles like 'Duke' or 'Baron'. Them there foreign titles don't count.

 

[arbitrary.remora]

Solomani Confederation seems to run quite smoothly without a bunch of pretentious, over-entitled toffs poncing about making up titles for themselves...

SolSec makes sure of it!

-a.r

 

[Drakon]

The Soviet Union essentially replaced the inherited nobility of the Imperial state with a functional nobility of the senior party members; the relationship isn't as strained as it might seem, as the Imperial Russian Nobility was constantly bolstered by new membership from the senior ranks of the military and Civil Service; climbing the party hierarchy of aporatchikij was very equivalent in difficulty, social effects, and economic advantage.

It is a source of amusement to me to note that Karl Marx was a minor noble, the son in law of the baron of Westphalia. Trading a "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie" for a "dictatorship of the proletariat" still leaves a dictatorship. For all his talk about a "classless" society, he ends up with party bosses deciding whose abilities are to be utilized to fulfill whose needs.

 

[Kilgs]

Disagree - the UK retained a significant role of the nobility until the 21st century, and abandoned divine right in the 19th.

In addition to the underlying basis of the Commonwealth of Nations being the recognition of the British Monarchy as the bind between them.

I think there is a significant amount of fiction/speculation in 2300 era novels (ie. Falkenburg's Legion) regarding plausible reasons for monarchies/nobility.

In the Honorverse, while opinions may vary, the rationale was that the nobility and the monarchy were the brains behind the original colonial effort and were awarded large grants of land/resources for their contributions. The difficulty of colonization and their influence led to ties that resulted in modern forms of monarchistic/democracy. Even Space Viking, "the" Traveller novel lays out reasonings behind nobility in an interstellar age.

I generally don't complain about realism in RPG's unless it hits that unknowable barrier that drives me nuts. Everyone has one and its usually something silly when compared to elves, magic, light sabers and so on. But it's legit; we all have one.

But I've been doing a lot of research on Rome (republic/imperial) for another project and I can't help see a lot of similarities. And it really shored up my acceptance of the chaotic and independent nature of planets/subsectors/sectors in the Third Imperium as it is described. Rome managed to maintain an empire where messages took months to get from one end to the other (like 3I) and they held it for a couple hundred years.

With swords.

I think the Imperium is not far-fetched at all. But I don't see it being very efficient except in times of war.