• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Nobility

Understood. I think the GT:Nobles definition was worded in such a way in order to be a mechanism to explain the traditional proliferation of Noble PCs and NPCs in the Imperium generated in earlier editions of Traveller (especially those with initial high Soc values). (I.e. Characters with no significant responsibilities - people with a title and ready cash who were relatively free to do as they pleased, as opposed to being tied down with responsibilities).
Well, that's the honor noble without an Imperial job. As opposed to the honor noble with a job (and the high and rank nobles who all by definition have jobs). Prestige goes with the title; authority requires a job.

Having a corresponding Imperial courtesy title would certainly help standardize and regularize the precedence of said titles and at the same time generate a sense of being part of something bigger than one's parochial position.
I can only agree with you 100%. I had the same idea a couple of decades ago and have suggested it to both Loren and Jon, but neither of them went for the idea.

Here's an abbreviated version of what I came up with:
The concept of rank exists in all but a very few of the socio-economic systems known to mankind. A lot of newly-colonized planets start out with a ready-made hierarchy brought along from the mother planet. When, for example, a feudalistic society colonizes another planet, that society is usually transplanted lock, stock, and barrel, a duke or prince on top and all the rest of a feudalistic system under him. Private colonization efforts often start with built-in differences based on how much each participant has contributed to the project, and even when a colony starts out as some kind of democracy, many of them sooner or later turn into oligarchies, tyrannies, or dictatorships. Furthermore, only the most fanatically egalistic society does not have SOME kind of hierarchy of their own. Most democracies make as much fuss of their elected leaders as other systems make of their hereditary leaders.

In the vast conglomeration of worlds that makes up the Imperium, all sorts of social systems abound. The Imperium does not usually interfere with the shape and form of any planetary government as long as it pays its taxes and obeys a few basic rules.

Problems arise, however, when dignitaries of different worlds come into contact with the interstellar society of the Imperium and, through it, with each other. How does one decide the precedence of the Grand Director of Vilis, the Speaker for All the Tribes of the Grundish Steppe on Sorel, a Commander of a Thousand Sails of the Southern Archipelagic Confederation on Overnale, and the Lord High Syndic of Thorshavn on Marastan? And of course things get even more complicated when the same titles are used for positions of vastly different importance. The Duke of Troura, however sovereign a ruler of his few thousand sparsely populated square miles of Tirem, is with his 80,000 subjects certainly not the social equal of Duke Lionel du Nord, Regent of the Rheltan Highlands, even though Duke Lionel is not a sovereign but a vassal of the King of Caledonia; and neither of them are the equal of Duchess Avaraja of Glisten*. Worse, in some cases a title that sounds utterly common to one person will denote high rank to another. To most people, for example, Captain, Astrogator, Purser, Master-at-Arms, and Chief Pilot are just the titles of simple working spacemen. But on several planets colonized by misjumped ships they are the titles of high-ranking officials like the hereditary ruler, his heir apparent, the Minister of Agriculture, and the commanders of respectively the army and the air force. Related to this phenomenon is the confusion caused when some societies reverse the order of importance of some titles, like on Caledonia where a marquis is superior to a count (or earl as they call it) instead of the way things are in the Imperium.

The Imperium has solved this problem by creating the Imperial Division of Heraldry* (IDH). This is ostensibly an Imperial department for the registration of heraldic coats of arms and equivalent devices, but in reality their most important function is to evaluate local titles, offices, and positions and translate them into equivalent Imperial social positions. On the recommendation of the IDH the holder of a given title, office, or position automatically receives a knighthood in an appropriate Imperial order. This just as automatically gives him or her a fitting position in Imperial society.

[...]

There is a large number of Imperial orders of knighthood. Some of these, like the Most Valorous Order** of the Emperor's Guard (E.G.), the Most Courtly Order** of the Starship and Crown (S.C.), the Most Illustrious Order** of the Arrow (O.A.), and the various orders of the domains are used to reward individuals for service to the Imperium; they are not normally used just to grade local planetary dignitaries. For this purpose the most commonly used are the Most Excellent Order of the Third Imperium (T.I.), the Most Distinguished Order of the Golden Sun (G.S.), and the Most Exalted Order of the Star of Sylea (S.S.) (The last should not to be confused with the Most Noble Order** of the Domain of Sylea (D.S.)).
* Canon.
** Not canon.

There's more on how to grade a planetary title and several examples, but this should give you the idea.


Hans
 
That was EXTREMELY helpful. The best explanation of the differences I've yet seen.

Did previous versions of high nobles also presume the same amount of land grants that T5 does? I guess I presumed that one could have been a baron or count or whatever without any physical holdings.

"I'm rich, of course. The whole family, for that matter. But the funds are all tied up in trusts with the usual sorts of investments in the usual sorts of megacorps. You know, index funds and like. Such and such shares of this at such and such a price. It's all very tedious, and really, I only need to know how much credit I can draw on this week in whatever backwater system I happen to find myself."

T5 makes it certain that nobles have tangible land holdings.
 
Order of Peerage

My only comment is that the levels of peerage is , in my opinion, not quite right


a Viscount and Count are superior to a Marguis or Margrave... very odd. I have taken the time to and looked at many european peerages . A Marquis or Margrave is almost always superior in order of Peerage.

IMO-

Knight/Ritter - B
Baronet - B*
Baron- C
Viscount/Count - D
Marquis/Margrave - E
Duke/ ? Landgrave - F
Sector Duke -F*
Archduke- G
Imperial Family. -H
 
a Viscount and Count are superior to a Marguis or Margrave... very odd. I have taken the time to and looked at many european peerages . A Marquis or Margrave is almost always superior in order of Peerage.
The Imperium is not a European country. I've always thought that this little misunderstanding on the part of whoever made up the Imperial titles was a charming reminder that the PCs weren't in Kansas.

IIRC, Loren or Jon came up with an explanation for the reversal in GT: Nobles, but I've never paid much attention to it, because I didn't think any explanation was necessary. But there is one. I think.


Hans
 
My only comment is that the levels of peerage is , in my opinion, not quite right

a Viscount and Count are superior to a Marguis or Margrave... very odd. I have taken the time to and looked at many european peerages . A Marquis or Margrave is almost always superior in order of Peerage.

:CoW: It's an old argument. :):CoW:

Marquis being junior to a Count (and later Viscount) goes all the way back to CT. T4 reversed the order to the "proper" historical order, and then later editions changed back again. GT:Nobles has an in-universe explanation for the change in precedence from the early Imperium as compared to the latter usage:

GT:Nobles, p.17:

Oddly, at the beginning of the Imperial period the titles of viscount and count were actually inferior to that of marquis. A marquis was usually associated with a large and important world, while a viscount or count often had only a scattering of backwater worlds. However, as the Imperium expanded the viscounts and counts became increasingly important, especially with regard to the administration of new territory. In particular, the old Vilani shakkanakhu families were critical to the continued functioning of the Imperium during the Civil War.

Emperor Zhakirov finally recognized the realities of the situation, and issued a decree reforming the Imperial nobility in 669. This decree “promoted” Imperial viscounts and counts to be senior to marquises in precedence. This move was generally accepted at the time, since it did fit the situation as it had evolved. Even so, it caused resentment among the numerous Solomani marquises of the Rim, and contributed to the growing conflict between the Emperor and the Solomani Movement.
 
Did previous versions of high nobles also presume the same amount of land grants that T5 does? I guess I presumed that one could have been a baron or count or whatever without any physical holdings.

In prior editions (and even in T5, based on the Article in Imperiallines #7) a noble did not automatically get land. A Letter of Enfeoffment was separate from a Noble Patent, and was generally only granted to High Nobles.

MT expanded upon the basic info in CT: Library Data and granted fiefs (as appropriate) as follows:

Knight: maximum 10km2
Baron: maximum 100km2
Marquis: maximum 1000km2
Count: maximum 10,000km2
Duke: maximum 100,000km2
Archduke: maximum 1 world

In T5, the grants are:

Knight: 1 Mainworld Terrain Hex & 1 non-Mainworld Terrain Hex
Baronet: 2 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 2 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Baron
: 4 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 4 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Marquis: 8 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 8 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Viscount: 16 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 16 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Count
: 32 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 32 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Duke: 64 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 64 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Subsector Duke: 128 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 128 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Archduke
: 256 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 256 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
 
In T5, the grants are:

Knight: 1 Mainworld Terrain Hex & 1 non-Mainworld Terrain Hex
Baronet: 2 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 2 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Baron: 4 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 4 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Marquis: 8 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 8 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Viscount: 16 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 16 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Count: 32 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 32 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Duke: 64 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 64 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Subsector Duke: 128 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 128 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Archduke: 256 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 256 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes

"Non-mainworld" has a changing scope as the noble rises in rank. Through Baron those extra hexes are generally in the same system or very nearby, while the various Dukes may administer Imperial holdings across an entire sector, and an Archduke could conceivably be making money from or control a palatial estate on most of the important worlds in his Domain. Since a particular sub-holding doesn't need to be a full hex, Nobles with a lot of hexes to spread around can have their fingers in a lot of pies.

Top of head, not-necessarily-Canon example: Wonder why Ilelish Transworld Shipping is found on every world in the Domain? Because the Archduke controls (at least) enough Imperial land on every world to plant a company depot on AND owns a slice of the company. And that's just getting him started...
 
"Non-mainworld" has a changing scope as the noble rises in rank. Through Baron those extra hexes are generally in the same system or very nearby, while the various Dukes may administer Imperial holdings across an entire sector, and an Archduke could conceivably be making money from or control a palatial estate on most of the important worlds in his Domain.

This may be an area where I am still a bit fuzzy.

My understanding has been that the "Mainworld" hexes are allocated based on the "Where" column of the T5 Land Grants Table (i.e. Same System / Same Subsector / Same Sector) relative to the titled fief-world (with hex-preferences on worlds of Pre-Ag/Ag, Pre-Ri/Ri, Pre-Hi/Hi, and Pre-In/In), and that the non-Mainworld hexes were in the same system relative to any given assigned Mainworld Hex.

Is my understanding incorrect?
 
That was EXTREMELY helpful. The best explanation of the differences I've yet seen.

Did previous versions of high nobles also presume the same amount of land grants that T5 does? I guess I presumed that one could have been a baron or count or whatever without any physical holdings.

"I'm rich, of course. The whole family, for that matter. But the funds are all tied up in trusts with the usual sorts of investments in the usual sorts of megacorps. You know, index funds and like. Such and such shares of this at such and such a price. It's all very tedious, and really, I only need to know how much credit I can draw on this week in whatever backwater system I happen to find myself."

T5 makes it certain that nobles have tangible land holdings.

Land Grants are a T5 thing; no other edition has clearly spelle out the expected fiefs.
 
In T5, the grants are:

Knight: 1 Mainworld Terrain Hex & 1 non-Mainworld Terrain Hex
Baronet: 2 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 2 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Baron
: 4 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 4 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Marquis: 8 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 8 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Viscount: 16 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 16 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Count
: 32 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 32 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Duke: 64 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 64 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Subsector Duke: 128 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 128 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
Archduke
: 256 Mainworld Terrain Hexes & 256 non-Mainworld Terrain Hexes
What's the definition of a mainworld? Does it go by population size? Or is it the most important world in a system, regardless of the population?

In the second case, the nobles who get their mainworld hexes in a low-population system will be relatively poor (unless their non-mainworld hexes compensate by being on non-mainworlds with sizable populations). Indeed, they could (at least theoretically) be poorer than the average citizen of high-tech worlds.


Hans
 
"Non-mainworld" has a changing scope as the noble rises in rank. Through Baron those extra hexes are generally in the same system or very nearby, while the various Dukes may administer Imperial holdings across an entire sector, and an Archduke could conceivably be making money from or control a palatial estate on most of the important worlds in his Domain. Since a particular sub-holding doesn't need to be a full hex, Nobles with a lot of hexes to spread around can have their fingers in a lot of pies.

Top of head, not-necessarily-Canon example: Wonder why Ilelish Transworld Shipping is found on every world in the Domain? Because the Archduke controls (at least) enough Imperial land on every world to plant a company depot on AND owns a slice of the company. And that's just getting him started...

I don't see any practical difference from the pre-T5 state of affairs. Anyone whose family has held a domain for five or ten centuries could be expected to be wealthy enough to buy such plots of land on their own. The only difference is that here the plots are on loan from the Emperor (Which means said archduke would have bought up other plots of land that belong to him and not the Emperor).


Hans
 
What's the definition of a mainworld? Does it go by population size? Or is it the most important world in a system, regardless of the population?

In the second case, the nobles who get their mainworld hexes in a low-population system will be relatively poor (unless their non-mainworld hexes compensate by being on non-mainworlds with sizable populations). Indeed, they could (at least theoretically) be poorer than the average citizen of high-tech worlds.

I am taking Mainworld to mean what has been the traditional usage in Traveller: the Primary World in the system (i.e. the one named on TravellerMap for the system). The wealth issue is supposed to be based on the number of Trade Codes the World has: i.e. Cr10,000/hex/Trade Code (or Cr5000 straight for worlds with no codes).
 
The wealth issue is supposed to be based on the number of Trade Codes the World has: i.e. Cr10,000/hex/Trade Code (or Cr5000 straight for worlds with no codes).
As you know, I think those figures are ridiculously low in most cases. But on worlds with populations so low that the fief would only have half a dozen tenants, the situation could actually be reversed and the noble hard pressed to extract Cr5000 in rent.

(Worse yet would be the low-population poor, non-industrial, non-agricultural world where he'd be very hard pressed to get his Cr30,000. :devil:)


Hans
 
As you know, I think those figures are ridiculously low in most cases. But on worlds with populations so low that the fief would only have half a dozen tenants, the situation could actually be reversed and the noble hard pressed to extract Cr5000 in rent.

(Worse yet would be the low-population poor, non-industrial, non-agricultural world where he'd be very hard pressed to get his Cr30,000. :devil:)

I agree with you that I think some work needs to be done on the fief incomes. The system was designed to be abstract, I believe, but it is a little too abstract and leads to some anomalous situations like the ones you describe above.

I also think there should be a distinction in income between the "Pre-Xx" vs "Xx" Trade Codes. That way, when a world qualifies for the increased Trade Classification, the Noble's income increases commensurately with the greater trade volume. (And it also gives a tangible reason to try and improve the fief in game-terms). Otherwise, "Pre-Xx" being converted to "Xx" doesn't increase income at all - you simply lose one code and replace it with the other.
 
I agree with you that I think some work needs to be done on the fief incomes. The system was designed to be abstract, I believe, but it is a little too abstract and leads to some anomalous situations like the ones you describe above.
My suggestion would be to start with choosing or rolling for the income the noble is to have and then have a list of ways to get such an income, like 'shares in this or that type of company -- Cr25,000', 'hex on world with Ag classification1 -- Cr100,000, 'hex on world with In classification -- Cr500,000', 'hex on world with Ri and Ag classifications1' -- Cr1,000,000, etc., 'urban holding in big city' -- Cr100,000, 'urban holdings in world capital -- Cr250,000', 'urban holdings in subsector capital -- Cr1,000,000', etc..

(Figures just grabbed out of thin air as sounding reasonable to me).

1 All such fiefs must be on worlds with a minimum population of XXX.

Actually, the rent-paying holdings should be decided by figuring out how much each tenant would be worth on that particular world and then giving the holdings the number of tenants that would give the desired sum. That way you know right away that you can't put the fief on a world with a smaller population, and you might want to think it over before you put the fief on a world where it would constitute the majority of the population. Or not.

Oh, and to whatever income he gets from the holding the Emperor gave him add 'interest on personal lands, possessions, and fortune'. :devil:


Hans
 
I don't see any practical difference from the pre-T5 state of affairs. Anyone whose family has held a domain for five or ten centuries could be expected to be wealthy enough to buy such plots of land on their own. The only difference is that here the plots are on loan from the Emperor (Which means said archduke would have bought up other plots of land that belong to him and not the Emperor).

Said Archduke is under some professional obligation to use the lands he holds from the Emperor for the betterment of the Imperium, even if subtly (like making sure there is actually a shipping agent around when you need one, even if they are a Lowest Common Denominator sort of service). He is under no such obligation to do so with lands held privately, even if they were bought with the profits of his Imperial operations. This is expected, and is a perk of being a High Noble.

Of course, if such privately held land, or worse the Imperial lands under his supervision, get used for anti-Imperial purposes and the Emperor finds out, the next Imperial Audit will not be pleasant.

Oh, and to whatever income he gets from the holding the Emperor gave him add 'interest on personal lands, possessions, and fortune'. :devil:

All of which are variables that contribute to the old and new politics of a planet and region, but which should not be codified beyond the loosest sense. Leave some details to the referees actually running games.
 
Last edited:
All of which are variables that contribute to the old and new politics of a planet and region, but which should not be codified beyond the loosest sense. Leave some details to the referees actually running games.
All details are always left to the referees actually running games. Rules merely provide them with support for developing their settings and settings are merely examples that they can use or ignore as they like. Leaving details to referees is just failing to provide more support. Such lack of detail can be necessary for practical reasons (e.g. limited word count, limited development time) but is never a virtue in itself.


Hans
 
All details are always left to the referees actually running games. Rules merely provide them with support for developing their settings and settings are merely examples that they can use or ignore as they like. Leaving details to referees is just failing to provide more support. Such lack of detail can be necessary for practical reasons (e.g. limited word count, limited development time) but is never a virtue in itself.


Hans

It should come as no surprise to you by now that I disagree with your thesis. Below a certain resolution a Referee wants examples, not a straightjacket.

This may be an area where I am still a bit fuzzy.

My understanding has been that the "Mainworld" hexes are allocated based on the "Where" column of the T5 Land Grants Table (i.e. Same System / Same Subsector / Same Sector) relative to the titled fief-world (with hex-preferences on worlds of Pre-Ag/Ag, Pre-Ri/Ri, Pre-Hi/Hi, and Pre-In/In), and that the non-Mainworld hexes were in the same system relative to any given assigned Mainworld Hex.

Is my understanding incorrect?

My understanding is that both are somewhat flexible, though the T5 rules discuss land grants in whole terrain hexes and matched pairs for simplicity. A brief general rule cannot handle all special cases, after all, and Traveller has a tradition of providing just enough to let a Referee work up a local solution. In most odd cases, you could consider the derived income the defining factor instead of a fixed acreage.
 
Last edited:
It should come as no surprise to you by now that I disagree with your thesis.
It's not a thesis, it's an objective fact. No one forces you (generic you) to use the rules as written. No one forces you to use any aspect of any setting as written. Some people don't realize that, but that's down to them. Hopefully they realize their mistake when it's pointed out to them.

Below a certain resolution a Referee wants examples, not a straightjacket.
There's no straightjacket anyway. No one forces a referee to use anything he doesn't want to use.

Having an example is better than not having any example. If you like it, you've saved some time that can be spent on some other part of the setting. If you don't like it, you can just ignore it and be no worse off than if the example hadn't existd at all.


Hans
 
Back
Top