Aquilonia: Rules and laws of the land?

[Banite]

We used to have this argument in dnd all the time, at least cropping up once per campaign. I think in any semi-historical setting the chain of command runs:

King/Emperor --> High Aristocracy/Nobles --> Wealthy commoners --> Commoners --> Slaves/Indentured Folks

Having a codified set of laws is one thing, actually enforcing them and seeings that their carried out in the spirit intended is another matter - I always figured you could get away with abusing the natural rights of those below your station with only a nominal risk of punishment in truth.

Personally, in regards to actual edicts/laws I'll use in game, I'll probably keep them fairly loose and flexible myself - same manner as I did in dnd, just enough meat there for folks with chivalric codes to run into dilemma but by far and large I'll phrase them as being largely benevolent with some quirks (In Aquilonia at least), but also largely ignored with station and class determining the real rights and protection of the "law" folks can expect.

For adventurers, the same practice is true, the effect the law has on you depends entirely on the enforcers power compared to yours; A noble with several retainers is far more likely to try to abuse the rights of some farmer than bullying about some giant barbarian with an axe the size of small man and a murderous glint in his eye.

Of course, keep in mind, unlike (I'm assuming) most everyone else here I've read all of maybe 3 conan books. I just like the ruleset, and some of the thematic elements and it was lower magic than D20 Midnight, so I'm as much guessing from "how I think it would work" as something carefully researched.

 

[Mark Dunder]

King/Emperor --> High Aristocracy/Nobles --> Wealthy commoners --> Commoners --> Slaves/Indentured Folks

That's real good. Even today, wealth and social class figure many times in how crimes are punished.

One thing I overlooked, I don't think anyone has mentioned it yet, is that many adventurers are "just visiting" and would most likely not know the local laws. This being the case, it is probably more realistic not to have a list of laws for the players to have access to. It would give them to much of an edge.

I vote to let them find out the hard way that picking flowers might be a death sentence.

 

[Raven Blackwell]

One thing I overlooked, I don't think anyone has mentioned it yet, is that many adventurers are "just visiting" and would most likely not know the local laws. This being the case, it is probably more realistic not to have a list of laws for the players to have access to. It would give them to much of an edge.

I vote to let them find out the hard way that picking flowers might be a death sentence.

Conan suffers a 'misunderstanding' about the laws of Argos just prior to the events of Howard's Queen of the Black Coast. His code of honour prevents him from ratting on a friend in a court of law. The law has a 'obstruction of justice' clause somewhere and tells him he'll imprisoned until he does. So he just kills the judge, everyone that gets in his way, hijacks a merchant vessel and later signs on with Belit and her murderous crew.

Y'think if Bush was king of Argos he would take advantage of this fact to have labeled Conan a terrorist and declared an pointless war with Shem [Belit is a renegade member of Shem's royality after all just as Bin Laden is related to minor nobility I believe] to expand Argos's territory? 8)

 

[Mark Dunder]

Conan suffers a 'misunderstanding' about the laws of Argos just prior to the events of Howard's Queen of the Black Coast. His code of honour prevents him from ratting on a friend in a court of law. The law has a 'obstruction of justice' clause somewhere and tells him he'll imprisoned until he does. So he just kills the judge, everyone that gets in his way, hijacks a merchant vessel and later signs on with Belit and her murderous crew.

Perfect example.

To answer your question: Yes.
[/quote]