PC Nobles.

[rancke]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
I was curious how other GMs handle Noble PCs in their campaign. Something about a Count or a Duke running about on a Tramp Freighter getting into typical Traveller adventure (My Lord, wouldst thou please pass me thine frag grenade?) just seems wrong.

I created an extended social scale with Imperial nobles starting at SOC 22 (baron). SOC 11-21 became various levels of planetary nobility.

One advantage of this approach is that a PC that gets a SOC of 15 during character generation is merely the equivalent of an English earl (still useful, of course) not an Imperial duke.


Hans

 

[hirch duckfinder]

i don't like noble pcs . its the social deference thats the problem . makes it that bit harder for npcs to be rude / unhelpful / not give away clues too soon .

 

[aramis]

Personally, I LIKE the dicotomy of a serving baron deferring socially to an honor count...

However, that count better not get in said baron's way, for the honor count has a voice in the moot, but the landed baron is Lord of his demense, and interference will eb dealt with lcoally by huscarles, and later by the moot... where the baron has a vote!

Hans' methodology never worked for me... it implies that non-imperial titles matter a whit off their homeworld... IMTU, they don't. Well, almost don't. Some worlds nobles are treated as imperial knights and/or barons.

 

[Elliot]

I would propose removing the easy route to nobility in some career options in CT/MT (notably navy characters). The strange result that occurs is that it is easier for a Navy Soc-10 to become a Duke on mustering out than for a Noble character Knight. Its an inconsistency that really needs to be excised by way of house rule!

 

[aramis]

Elliot:
That Career knight, in gaining in rank, is ALWAYS LANDED. He may have seconded operations to his senschale, or next of kin, or heir apparent, but he's (unless he failed reenlistment) still a serving noble.

All career nobles (IE, Prior history in Noble Career) IMTU have a feif, even if it's just an apartment complex in downtown regni...

When asked "What did you do, Your Excellency?" "I was the Baron and Imperial governor of Regni highport." is likely to get quite a bit of respect... especially if he's still the baron.

Those serving nobles are allowed huscarles. Honor nobles aren't. Those serving nobles rule heir demese "In the Emeror's Name and Voice", ie, if you aren't their chain-of-fealty superior, they can ignore you completely.

 

[Elliot]

I believe that similar things happened in history - the word parvenu was invented for the matter.

Websters Dictionary defines it as this:

\Par"ve*nu`\, n. [F., prop. p. p. of parvenir to attain to, to succeed, to rise to high station, L. pervenire to come to; per through + venire to come. See Par, prep., and Come.] An upstart; a man newly risen into notice.

A historian has recently calculated that most nobles who fought for the king in the English Civil War had their titles dating back to James I (i.e. early 17th Century) and most who fought for Parliament had their titles dating back to the 15th century Wars of the Roses.

The conclusion he draws from this is (1) that Parliament could present itself as legitimate by the ancient honour of the 'old' nobles and (2) that the Parliamentarian nobility were making clear that they were rather sick of the upstarts who had flocked around the king. Likewise, to fight for the King gave the upstarts legitimacy they did not necessarily have in courtly society.

Its important to note that medieval and early modern rebellions were aimed not at removing the king but the 'King's evil counsel' - so it was in some respects civil war is expressed as a conflict between nobles.

I would hope the LKW addresses this kind of issue in his new book.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Hans' methodology never worked for me... it implies that non-imperial titles matter a whit off their homeworld...

Other way around, actually. It is based on the assumption that local titles matter on their homeworld. The canonical system divides the non-noble citizens of a world into ten different levels and lump all local nobles into two.
If the canonical system had been SOC 1 = lower class, SOC 2 = middle class, SOC 3 = upper class, SOC 4-8 = Imperial nobility, then the argument that local nobility doesn't really matter would have merit. But a system in which the difference between lower lower and middler lower class apparently matter tremendously?


Hans

 

[aramis]

Many worlds in the Imperium wouldn't have local nobility, Hans.

In fact, I suspect a great many worlds don't allow local citizens to use Imperial Honor Titles locally...

For a major world, IF it is run by a Titled Nobleman, no matter his local title, he's still, at best, an imperial count. And, off world, should he try using siad local title rather than the imperial County title, I suspect he'd be run off at best, executed at worst... world dependant.

Local titles are just that: LOCAL. I wouldn't be surprised if, in fact, the Imperium prohibited off-world use of local titles, nor that some of those soc 10's are in fact, local nobles who don't have an imperial patent.

YMMV. In fact, hans, I know it does...

The canonical system uses 18 steps, and specifically avoids mention of local nobility... ranging from 0-17

CT and MT both clearly show that PC soc starts between 0 and 12, and that ONLY rolled soc is inherited... so PC's are not going to be viscounts, marquis, nor dukes by birth.

Both also allow soc 10 characers to enter the noble career.
Soc 10 characters are not imperial nobility. They hold no title nor patent. (I suspect that the non-heir issue wind up at soc 10...)

 

[mike wightman]

Question.
A client planet of the Imperium petitions for full membership of the Imperium.
Are local officials granted Imperial titles or are offworld "nobles" appointed to oversee Imperial interests?

 

[Straybow]

Many worlds in the Imperium wouldn't have local nobility, Hans.

In fact, I suspect a great many worlds don't allow local citizens to use Imperial Honor Titles locally...

No way! The loosest possible relations between Imperium and member planets would be similar to the Commonwealth. No Commonwealth nation or dominion could forbid use of titles granted by the Crown. Whether individual citizens in those countries would give a flip (or even react negatively) is another matter.

"La-dee-da! We have a real, live Baron in our midst. Would 'Melord' care to wait in line with the rest of the punters?"

 

[flykiller]

A client planet of the Imperium petitions for full membership of the Imperium.
Are local officials granted Imperial titles or are offworld "nobles" appointed to oversee Imperial interests?

imtu if the applying world already has a starport then usually the existing port administration simply steps into the role of local nobility. if a non-starfaring world puts forth a non-controversial candidate then the sector duke will accept this, else the sector duke will send a pre-existing noble.

 

[alanb]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Question.
A client planet of the Imperium petitions for full membership of the Imperium.
Are local officials granted Imperial titles or are offworld "nobles" appointed to oversee Imperial interests?

IMTU, usually local leaders get the fancy hats. It's part of the bribe offered for them leading their world into the Imperium.

Otherwise, no nobles are appointed. I don't use nobles as bureaucrats, or make their presence compulsory.

Where nobles are absent, major government functionaries are treated as having comparable status.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Many worlds in the Imperium wouldn't have local nobility.

Many will not have a hereditary nobility. ALL will have leaders. America doesn't have a nobility, but the Kenedys and the Rockefellers are treated with far greater deference than the Smiths and the Joneses.
According to the official Traveller social ladder, there's no social difference between the President of America, the Queen of England, and the mayor of Cleveland. I happen to think that that is a flaw in the system.


Hans

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by alanb:
Where nobles are absent, major government functionaries are treated as having comparable status.

Exactly!


Hans

 

[Evo Plurion]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
Something about a Count or a Duke running about on a Tramp Freighter getting into typical Traveller adventure (My Lord, wouldst thou please pass me thine frag grenade?) just seems wrong.

You know, I've seen this topic for a while now and have never had a look at it, until now. Bhoins, that is one of the funniest things I've read in a very long time.

 

[aramis]

I've hand entire crews of nobles run tramps. No problem. Once they decided to make it public, they got a modifier to high passengers... and since their rep was good, a positive modifiier, but a much higher chance of intrigues & passengers being targets.

Thy also gave special percs to noble passeners. But, since one PC (THe ship owner) was a duke, and he'd rolled extraship results and had rolled enough soc bonuses to be a SS20, I decided he was a landed duke, and his "lands" were his ship and his orbital slip at regina.... a 100KTd floating dock (75 KTd bay). He later reduced the bay size, by adding construction facilities into it, and taking noble's orders for custom ships on "questionable" payback regimes... he even financed a few.

Hans and I have been arguing the nature of Nobility in the 3i for 8+ years now... and neither of us have moved a whit in our stance.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Hans and I have been arguing the nature of Nobility in the 3i for 8+ years now... and neither of us have moved a whit in our stance.

Fortunately GT:Nobles is on its way.


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

Won't that just stir up another "is GURPS Traveller canon" argument again?

 

[Wayne]

Aramis, I like your idea on the noble crew, and your idea for the use of the extra (SS 15+) results. This is something I will use the next time I have a High SS pc in my group.

Sigg Oddra, the "is GURPS Traveller canon" argument is a moot point to me. I use GURPS as much as I use CT, (some)TNE, T4, and T20. I use them all as sorce material and play MT (with the erata corrected). MTU has devergeged so much from the OTU as to make it all sorce material.

MTU is, at present in JP space, around 1145 Im and Virus has not been released (yet). As I like what is happening in the 1248 playtest, Virus may yet happen and MTU will match-up some what with the 1248 timeline.

 

[aramis]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Won't that just stir up another "is GURPS Traveller canon" argument again?

Yup, sure will.

GT Nobles won't do anything for me, as I do not, and until there are no other traveller rules in publication, will not, consider GT to be traveller. T20 is only real traveller in terms of the background...

But CT, MT, TNE, and T4 are "Fully Authoritative", both rules and filler being canon... which creates a few odd conundra... like the role of the nobility in the Regency... if they are being disenfranchised, then who is running their estates now?

If they do use the starports as feifs, who got them after the Norrisian Democracy reforms? The IISS? The Navy? The Local World? Megacorps?