Nobles in My Traveller Universe

[mike wightman]

Perhaps more common in the Core. The easy way expand the early Imperium and integrate pocket empires would have been to make the local rulers Imperial Nobles.

Which is something I have been saying for years.

More effort should have been put into modifying random stuff when designing the core sectors for MT IMHO.

 

[welsh]

If the distance is more than about 15 parsecs, forget "several times a year" and drop it to maybe "once or twice a decade"...

Which is fine. Check out a list of governors of various British colonies in the age of sail and you will find no shortage of titles there. Those folks were far from home. Or consider the Crusades: all those estates kept on ticking while the nobles were off crusading.

A noble's fief rarely has to innovate; it just needs to produce a steady stream of money. So it does not need his direct executive oversight. It just needs competent managers to keep collecting rents, or fees, or running pheasant shoots, or whatever they do.

In my mind, the most senior of nobles actually would spend much of their time at home (or divide their time between home and Capital), because their postings are permanent. (On that note, if you're Lucan ... do you run the Spinward Marches from Regina, way up in the corner, or do you run it from Mora?)

Less senior nobles may be given a post for a period of 2 - 5 years, which may take them far from their home. If posted to some remote subsector in the back of beyond, that noble may not see his fief for years.

The Imperial rules space not planets - apart from the planets they do directly rule?

The Warrant of Restoration holds that the Imperium won't directly govern any world. Of course, the Emperor can override that (he can do anything), and has had 1100-odd years to do so.

In my mind, the Imperium may own worlds, but does not govern them. Instead, it generates revenue from that ownership in the form of rents, royalties, fees, or whatever, and this keeps civil service administration busy.

The Imperium is a bit like an apartment building: some tenants own their apartments, some tenants rent, but everyone pays to maintain the lawn and parking lot. The landlord has rules, but he doesn't actually run anyone's household. And the building manager may have his own apartment, but the landlord doesn't run his household, either.

 

[aramis]

No rule without exception?

Perhaps more common in the Core. The easy way expand the early Imperium and integrate pocket empires would have been to make the local rulers Imperial Nobles.

Not common in the core, either. One of the Archdukes has a whole world fief, plus a 7 world polity which he is the hereditary ruler as well, admitted as a unit. Mentioned in Atlas of the Imperium.

There are a few multi-world governments that are imperial members.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Not common in the core, either. One of the Archdukes has a whole world fief, plus a 7 world polity which he is the hereditary ruler as well, admitted as a unit. Mentioned in Atlas of the Imperium.

There are a few multi-world governments that are imperial members.

I imagine the Imperium much like the Holy Roman Empire or the British Empire. There is not single legal system or constitution for everyone, but different worlds, sectors, domains have different legal practices and different relationships to the Imperium. Most answers to the Imperial bureaucracy, some answers to the Emperor personally. The Vegan Autonomous District is run completely differently to most part of the Imperium, without a single Imperial Noble.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Talk to Jones about the security of the grounds, or the lack thereof...

Ok, let's look at your scenario...

Assuming that there are "fiefs" on that world that are considered the same as embassies, as the soil of the Imperial capital world (as postulated in my first post). Suppose too, that the local government maintains its own extrality guard units surrounding the estates of the nobles. Why does the Imperium offer certain 'rights" but only if you can get to the Nobility to complain of its violations - yet on the other hand, say that the worlds have sovereign rights that the Imperium doesn't violate?

a man about to be executed for spitting on the iconographic representation of the dominant religion's prophet - escapes onto the estates of the Imperial Noble. Now what?

After that, I find out whether he is a native or not.

If he's a Traveller (Imperial Citizen) then tough noogies locals. Here's some goodies, now get off my lawn before people get hurt. But then I charge the Traveller for everything expended to keep the locals happy and not dead.

If he's a native...hmm, first thought is toss his ass back over the fence..and then light the warning lights so everyone knows the power is back on in it. But then I remember I represent the dreams and ideals of trillions of sophonts who need some one with power to stand up for them. So, I might just offer a Term of Enlistment in the Imperial Services, or take him into my personal service and ship his ass to another estate with a note to watch him, he can get kind of ignorant (same note goes with Enlistment). No matter what, find out why he did it, that may very well inform my response. I mean if he did it just because he thought it funny, back over the fence, but say as a protest against an oppressive religious dictatorship, then he gets a pass.

Basically, it depends, but I will try and save their life, that is my first duty.

As to my ATU, still working on it. I know they have a degree of freedom that increases with their titles. For example, one of my Counts decided to take foreign nationals into his direct service when they surrendered to him. Since they claimed ayslum from an enemy state he granted that ayslum in the form of personal service to him.

He also as a Count has the right and duty to administer high as well as low justice.

They are also required to raise units for the defense of the realm, to advance the general TL and government of those worlds they are assigned, private worlds they may own are their own look out.

They collect the taxes, enforce the laws, advance the societies, they plot and scheme, they run business and do big projects.

Some just gad about on their wealth. Depends I suppose...I think one of them might have been a criminal overlord, but what happens across the border should stay there. If it comes across then it may become an issue.

Some of them serve in the Imperial Armed Forces, others the Royals, still others in Ministries or act as explorers and ambassadors.

 

[creativehum]

a man about to be executed for spitting on the iconographic representation of the dominant religion's prophet - escapes onto the estates of the Imperial Noble. Now what?

Forgive me if this is a stupid question... and I'm addressing it to everyone, not just Hal...

Is the expectation that there will be a series of rules that are always followed down the line in all matters?

I ask because it seems to me the circumstances can vary so much. What is the noble's relationship with different groups? What are his agendas? His passions? How long has he been stationed there? Does the man seeking asylum know the noble (why did he go to the estate?) and so on. How anyone in authority handles unique situations and crisis is always up for grabs.

I suppose I come down on the "Men, Not Laws" side of the equation. But it does seem weird to me to come up with test cases without context.

More importantly, because the test cases will be created by the Players and the Referee. The Classic Traveller rules had a reaction role, to see what the predisposition of the NPCs would be when encountering the PCs. It was an acknowledgement that we don't always know how people will react.

I'm re-reading DUNE right now. Duke Leto's attitude about the Fremen is distinct and at odds with both the Baron and the Emperor. He makes choices others in his culture would not.

It seems to me a given noble on a given world might make a host of decisions that in the moment seemed the right or expedient thing to do.

And he would sort out the matter one way or another later, if required. Because that's what people do a lot of the time.

 

[Hal]

Just popping in with a quick observation...


While many of you don't bother with GURPS support books (Not a problem - really!), some of you do look for inspiration in those books. This one by itself wouldn't have much impact, but the wording of the information PLUS the information in T5 regarding fiefs, does make for an interesting fusion:

Page 42 of GURPS TRAVELLER STARPORTS (side bar):

Article VII – Extra-territoriality of Designated Imperial Possessions:
“The governance and operation of starports or other territories ceded to Imperial use is reserved to the Imperium. Movement of material and sentients between such territories and the member world shall be controlled by the member world, subject to Imperial laws governing such movement. Such territory shall be excluded from the jurisdiction of any
member world, and no material or sentient shall enter such territories from any member world without the express consent of the governing Imperial authorities responsible for such territory.”

– the Warrant of Restoration,
001-0000



NOTE: this is not just for the Starport territory, but includes "Other" territories ceded to Imperial use. Since Fiefs are ceded for imperial use, it would appear that such territories are included by the above.

Just saying...

 

[Hal]

Forgive me if this is a stupid question... and I'm addressing it to everyone, not just Hal...

Is the expectation that there will be a series of rules that are always followed down the line in all matters?

I ask because it seems to me the circumstances can vary so much. What is the noble's relationship with different groups? What are his agendas? His passions? How long has he been stationed there? Does the man seeking asylum know the noble (why did he go to the estate?) and so on. How anyone in authority handles unique situations and crisis is always up for grabs.

I suppose I come down on the "Men, Not Laws" side of the equation. But it does seem weird to me to come up with test cases without context.

More importantly, because the test cases will be created by the Players and the Referee. The Classic Traveller rules had a reaction role, to see what the predisposition of the NPCs would be when encountering the PCs. It was an acknowledgement that we don't always know how people will react.

I'm re-reading DUNE right now. Duke Leto's attitude about the Fremen is distinct and at odds with both the Baron and the Emperor. He makes choices others in his culture would not.

It seems to me a given noble on a given world might make a host of decisions that in the moment seemed the right or expedient thing to do.

And he would sort out the matter one way or another later, if required. Because that's what people do a lot of the time.

Quickie Response: Some nations are a government of laws, some nations are a government of men, and some will fall in between those two camps. You miss the point however...

If ALL citizens of the Imperium enjoy the same rights, then the ability to expect that the laws against capricious execution would not be permitted against such citizens. As a consequence of this observation, there are clearly differences between someone born and raised on such a world that executes people for offenses that are not deemed to be offenses, let alone capital offenses on theirs.

In all, how other GM's resolve this issue for their campaign universes comes under the heading "IMTU" largely because the "OTU" has never gone into such details.

Now for the fun part. If a world is deemed to be an Imperial Member World, but is entitled to have its own laws, wage war against other Imperial Member worlds etc - then is such a world capable of having "Sanctuary laws" that forbid the extradition of "Criminals" designated by worlds they deem abusive? In theory, the answer would seem to be yes. If someone says "The Imperial Law requires this" would imply that Imperial Laws can trump local laws. Some might argue that to be a member of the Imperium, it is mandated that member worlds honor each other's extradition requests regardless of their own laws or thoughts on the matter. Ironically enough, that comes under the heading of "IMTU" simply because nothing (to my knowledge) specifies this in the OTU.

In any event - the ONLY way I can rationalize the concept of Imperial Citizens in light of the sovereignty of worlds, is to have what amounts to Imperial Subjects and Imperial Citizens. The only way I can justify the Imperials have an Imperial Culture to grow up within, is to have enclaves where Local Laws do not touch those born in the Enclaves. If you grow up surrounded by a culture, you take on aspects of that culture (aka going native). If you grow up surrounded by a given population that practices a culture, then you grow up with that culture. A Noble kid born on a world with a religious government that practices a VERY high law rating, may very well obey the local laws to avoid creating a diplomatic incident, but he may very well make a point of it to do so away from the authorities of that world much like some openly denigrate people with political beliefs that differ from their own in today's world.

So, it isn't a stupid question in general that you pose, nor is it one that I have a problem with either way. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that a District Attorney in one part of New York State might decide to prosecute a killing as a matter of Homicide, while another DA in another portion of the state might treat it as justifiable homicide (and thereby not prosecute that event at all!). Another (yet a third DA) might prosecute this as a Homicide not because he believes the individual guilty of the crime per se, but because a trial would clear the individual of an future retribution. As such, how do you classify the philosophy behind those individuals and the overall scheme of things?

<shrug> Your mileage may vary.

 

[creativehum]

I'm not sure I missed the point, since I agree with everything you wrote.

Also, the DA might prosecute to advance his own career. He might prosecute because he believes "all people like that" are always guilty, and so on.

I could classify a "philosophy" for each of them... but I think it would be extra work that isn't needed. The descriptions you and I have given for each of them are enough for me to get story/situation material going for an RPG session.

In ANTIGONE, Creon declares that the body of his rebellious nephew will not be given proper burial, but instead thrown off the city walls to be eaten by carrion. Antigone, Creon's niece, declares she will fight Creon for a proper burial for her brother. One is the law, one is family. I'm good with that.

What I'm proposing (not that it is going to appeal to anyone) is that all of life is IMTU. That there is a wriggle room built into the wording of laws in the Imperium, and this wriggle room, built upon lives spread out over such vast differences with slow communication means that (looking at our DA example) each world and noble will often be making decisions on an ad hoc basis, with each "side" in an conflict knowing they are right, and in that conflict, adventure, tension, drama. The PCs, for example, are hired by the noble to get that religious rebel out of the compound without anyone knowing and safely off planet.

I guess I'm saying, the definitions of Imperial policy are in front of us, the definitions are broad in some respects, narrow in others, and have wriggle wriggle room, and that wriggle room should be embraced rather than ironed out so that every situation is handled on a constant and consistent basis.

Each world would have its own expectations, of course, built over decades or centuries of history with the Imperium and whatever nobles they've dealt with. (Some will have a deep-rooted tradition; others will be used to the relationship shifting every time a new noble shows up to represent the the Imperium.) On each world a baseline of expectations is established. And when that baseline gets crossed: Crisis, tension, drama.

I'm no canon-head, so I'm probably speaking out of turn, but after following this thread, that's pretty much where I'm landing.

 

[welsh]

NOTE: this is not just for the Starport territory, but includes "Other" territories ceded to Imperial use. Since Fiefs are ceded for imperial use, it would appear that such territories are included by the above.

Just saying...

In another thread, you referred to this as a "bomb," as if you think it will somehow discombobulate the various models people have proposed here. But I don't think it does.

Everyone I think would agree that territory "ceded for Imperial use" would be extraterritorial. This would include not only starports but also consular offices, offices of various services, Imperial civil service offices, and so on. But it does not necessarily include fiefs. This is your assumption. You seem to view fiefs as the local compounds where nobles live. I on the other hand view them as properties owned by nobles, or managed by nobles on behalf of the Emperor, usually as income-generating properties. I am not very far from Lycanorukke's view:

The land was _owned_ by the ruler but _administered_ by the noble ... It could be literally anything and definetly not one big chunk. A few km^2 of an industrial park here, 1000km^2 area with a mine there, a few hectares of a turnip plantation, etc.

T5 supports this, noting that land grants usually come from worlds suitable for development. It is not in anyone's interest that these properties be extraterritorial, as they need to be fully integrated with the local economy, and those turnips will be farmed using local labour.

The actual estate on which the noble lives will be treated as extraterritorial, in my view, but not because it is ceded for Imperial use. It is extraterritorial because the noble is considered extraterritorial in his person. If he rents a hotel room, the local police have no authority to search it. But I suggest this is often more a matter of convention than a matter of law.

I would distinguish between several different concepts here. There is Imperial privilege, which places nobles themselves above local laws. There is the extrality of territory ceded for Imperial use. And then there is the simple ownership of land by nobles or even the emperor, which need not necessarily render that land extraterritorial any more than a noble's investments are extraterritorial.

In short, this doesn't introduce a new concept, so far as I can see. It all hinges on our varying interpretations of what a fief actually is.

As a consequence of this observation, there are clearly differences between someone born and raised on such a world that executes people for offenses that are not deemed to be offenses, let alone capital offenses on theirs.

I'm puzzled by your concept of citizenship. Citizenship does not grant extraterritorial rights or privileges, yet you seem to be asserting that in the Imperium, it does. That is, you seem to be saying that if I am an Imperial citizen, then I am protected from execution under the laws of Someworld, should I commit a crime there.

This is not how citizenship works in the world we know. When I visit another country, I enjoy only the rights granted by that country, and am fully subject to that country's laws. So, using the normal concept of citizenship, and assuming there are "Imperial citizens" (which IMTU, there are not), an Imperial citizen who commits a capital crime on Someworld gets executed.

If a world is deemed to be an Imperial Member World, but is entitled to have its own laws, wage war against other Imperial Member worlds etc - then is such a world capable of having "Sanctuary laws" that forbid the extradition of "Criminals" designated by worlds they deem abusive?

This doesn't have to be complicated. Under extradition agreements, one Nation A will usually only be able to extradite a person from Nation B if the crime he is wanted for would also be a crime in Nation B. The Traveller Adventure tells us something similar: that the Imperium respects local laws to the extent that it will act to extradite a person to any world where he is wanted, with the proviso that by convention, the Imperium will ignore its obligations if the offence exists only under some weird local law.

IMTU, the Imperium will require any member world to return you to Pysadi for trial if you are wanted for a crime that is an offence under Imperial law, such as murder, and will apply the same rule when you are within Imperial territory i.e., space & extraterritorial possessions. But if world A wants to extradite a person from world B for some weird, purely local offence, then this is a diplomatic matter between worlds and is beneath the Emperor's notice. If you find yourself in Imperial custody, you will be returned to Pysadi for tickling an anole.

If someone says "The Imperial Law requires this" would imply that Imperial Laws can trump local laws ... Ironically enough, that comes under the heading of "IMTU" simply because nothing (to my knowledge) specifies this in the OTU.

The Warrant of Restoration specifies that Imperial law trumps local law. That's the basis of my view of extradition, above.

The only way I can justify the Imperials have an Imperial Culture to grow up within, is to have enclaves where Local Laws do not touch those born in the Enclaves.

I suggest taking a closer look at how our own cultures operate. We have numerous subcultures, which are often foreign to each other. The culture of English private schoolboys is far removed from the Black Country working class, although all are governed by the same laws. Indeed, without wishing to activate Aramis's thread hammer, I'll point out that we have a culture war today: a conflict between cultures with starkly different values, raised in the same nations under the same laws. (And I will not discuss this, other than to observe its existence.)

If you grow up surrounded by a culture, you take on aspects of that culture (aka going native).

Do nobles grow up on whatever backwater world, or are they sent to private schools for years at a time, there to rub shoulders with the children of an ultra-rich interstellar class?

Again, we're dealing with dueling assumptions about how and where nobles live.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Not common in the core, either. One of the Archdukes has a whole world fief, plus a 7 world polity which he is the hereditary ruler as well, admitted as a unit. Mentioned in Atlas of the Imperium.

Aramis,

*** Which one (archduke with a whole world fief, plus a 7-world polity) are you thinking of? ***

I ask for confirmation purposes. I try not to take much for granted as many of us have special insights such as you.

Thank you.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[whulorigan]

League of Antares

Aramis,

*** Which one (archduke with a whole world fief, plus a 7-world polity) are you thinking of? ***

I ask for confirmation purposes. I try not to take much for granted as many of us have special insights such as you.

Thank you.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

The Archduke of Antares also rules over the semi-autonomous League of Antares (though it does not in fact contain the Antares system).

Atlas of the Imperium, p.3:

LA: The League of Antares is a small autonomous region under the direct control of the Archduke of Antares.

 

[kilemall]

The Imperial rules space not planets - apart from the planets they do directly rule?
Some nobles rule planets - very rare in the Spimward Marches for a subsector duke or lesser noble to be the actual ruler of a world.

This is something the authors never really addressed - direct Imperial rule of colony worlds set up by the Imperium, worlds owned by the Imperial nobility, worlds conquered and absorbed into the Imperium years of the 3I and of course the worlds of the original Sylean Federation.

DGP didn't do a good job detailing core sectors IMHO, they didn't have enough worlds ruled directly by the Imperium.

Perhaps as the centuries roll by the original independent charter is amended/setaside for the 'benefits' of fiefdom.

Something similar to the Roman nobles using their privilege to accrue real estate.

 

[welsh]

Perhaps as the centuries roll by the original independent charter is amended/setaside for the 'benefits' of fiefdom.

My take is the Imperium cannot rule planets (the Warrant of Restoration specifies this), but individual nobles can.

The Imperium is the Emperor ... nobles are merely his representatives, a nice little distinction that lets them govern worlds where applicable.

 

[kilemall]

My take is the Imperium cannot rule planets (the Warrant of Restoration specifies this), but individual nobles can.

The Imperium is the Emperor ... nobles are merely his representatives, a nice little distinction that lets them govern worlds where applicable.

Certainly fits the 'government of men' model, and reduces these huge Ministry/Bureaus people love introducing as future metaphors for whatever government.

So perhaps the charter is not amended, but nobles still accrue land and power out of proportion to others? Official enfeoffment after centuries of ownership?

 

[kilemall]

OP, are you wanting to stick to similar memes of the OTU, or possibly go off the reservation?

I was thinking the Legend of the Galactic Heroes space nobles model might be of service.

 

[Hal]

OP, are you wanting to stick to similar memes of the OTU, or possibly go off the reservation?

I was thinking the Legend of the Galactic Heroes space nobles model might be of service.

Sent you a private message only to discover you mailbox is full. Please empty you messages (download a text copy of your messages before clearing them out if you like!)

 

[kilemall]

Sent you a private message only to discover you mailbox is full. Please empty you messages (download a text copy of your messages before clearing them out if you like!)

PMs clear.