Comparing Imperial Nobility with medieval/fantasy Nobility

[Rick]

Depends on just how far you want to take it.
There was a 'code of conduct amongst gentlemen' which lasted from the 17th century up to about WW2 in a lot of the British Empire - cheating at cards or finance, womanising or 'ruining a lady', cowardice, swearing and general bad behaviour (acting as a 'cad' or a 'bounder') could result in being cast out of 'polite society' and, in extreme cases, would require the offender to commit suicide (the 'gentlemanly' way out of trouble). This, of course, didn't apply to the 'lower classes' or to a gentleman's dealings with them (although a proper gentleman wasn't supposed to mix with the lower classes socially). It isn't exactly a chivalric code, but it would be an interesting concept to use in the Imperial nobility.

If you want an interesting chivalric code, try using Bushido - very much an idealised code of conduct covering general behaviour and fighting, and again, introduced late on in the Tokugawa period, after the Samurai had stopped widespread fighting amongst themselves and had a vested interest in staying alive as well as keeping the 'lower classes' in their place.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

The Aristocracy don't know what they are missing by not mixing with the lower classes. Case in point:

Some commoners are really talented, such as Taylor Swift

Turns out the two have met before.

 

[dragoner]

That is exactly how it was for hundreds of years until the reformation, then it got worse for common people. A true noble was of noble blood, like cousins getting married.

I think you have to differentiate between Noble and Aristocrat. An Aristocrat is supposedly of Noble Blood, but he can act as cowardly and as craven as he likes, he has lots of body guards, and tries to enjoy his privileges while avoiding a fight whenever he can. A Noble lives to fight. I think a lot of what's called Nobility in the Traveller Universe actually refers to Aristocracy, but I think the true hero is the Noble that lives by a code, which he doesn't make a lot of exceptions for, or give himself an out for.

Well, no, you wanted to compare them to medieval (European) nobility, that you seem to have some fantasy about. It really doesn't make sense to compare the 3I's nobility to them, like I said, the 3I's nobility is more the Dux Bellorum military/duty style of nobility.

 

[Condottiere]

Nobility does mix with commoners; in fact, William, the first of his name, was quite sensitive about this fact.

Marriage was about alliances, lineage, genetic legacy, politics and consolidation of power, wealth and real estate.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

That is exactly how it was for hundreds of years until the reformation, then it got worse for common people. A true noble was of noble blood, like cousins getting married.

I think you have to differentiate between Noble and Aristocrat. An Aristocrat is supposedly of Noble Blood, but he can act as cowardly and as craven as he likes, he has lots of body guards, and tries to enjoy his privileges while avoiding a fight whenever he can. A Noble lives to fight. I think a lot of what's called Nobility in the Traveller Universe actually refers to Aristocracy, but I think the true hero is the Noble that lives by a code, which he doesn't make a lot of exceptions for, or give himself an out for.

Well, no, you wanted to compare them to medieval (European) nobility, that you seem to have some fantasy about. It really doesn't make sense to compare the 3I's nobility to them, like I said, the 3I's nobility is more the Dux Bellorum military/duty style of nobility.

Well which would make a more "interesting" patron for the PCs, a stuffy old aristocrat with a snuff box, or someone who thinks he is more in the mold of Sir Lancelot, even though he probably didn't exist. A brash youth with a title who has little wisdom who has just inherited his office, and wants to go out there and make a name for himself?

 

[Rick]

Well which would make a more "interesting" patron for the PCs, a stuffy old aristocrat with a snuff box, or someone who thinks he is more in the mold of Sir Lancelot, even though he probably didn't exist. A brash youth with a title who has little wisdom who has just inherited his office, and wants to go out there and make a name for himself?

Ah, now I understand - I hadn't quite realised your point there.

You wish to recreate the Charge of the Light Brigade or perhaps Custer's Last Stand? A TPK of epic proportions that will live on in the memories of your unfortunate Rpg friends?

 

[Rick]

Well which would make a more "interesting" patron for the PCs, a stuffy old aristocrat with a snuff box, or someone who thinks he is more in the mold of Sir Lancelot, even though he probably didn't exist. A brash youth with a title who has little wisdom who has just inherited his office, and wants to go out there and make a name for himself?

Ah, now I understand - I hadn't quite realised your point there.

You wish to recreate the Charge of the Light Brigade or perhaps Custer's Last Stand? A TPK of truly epic proportions that will live on in the memories of your unfortunate Rpg friends?

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Well which would make a more "interesting" patron for the PCs, a stuffy old aristocrat with a snuff box, or someone who thinks he is more in the mold of Sir Lancelot, even though he probably didn't exist. A brash youth with a title who has little wisdom who has just inherited his office, and wants to go out there and make a name for himself?

Ah, now I understand - I hadn't quite realised your point there.

You wish to recreate the Charge of the Light Brigade or perhaps Custer's Last Stand? A TPK of truly epic proportions that will live on in the memories of your unfortunate Rpg friends?

Adventure is all about trouble coming the PC's way. But remember this count would also lead the troops into battle from the front, anything else he would consider cowardice. The PCs basically try to guide this guy from making a big mistake, he's apt to charge into battle, and his favorite strategy is the frontal attack, the PCs may have to convince him to do otherwise, that would be the challenge for them!

 

[dragoner]

Well which would make a more "interesting" patron for the PCs, a stuffy old aristocrat with a snuff box, or someone who thinks he is more in the mold of Sir Lancelot, even though he probably didn't exist. A brash youth with a title who has little wisdom who has just inherited his office, and wants to go out there and make a name for himself?

Ah, now I understand - I hadn't quite realised your point there.

You wish to recreate the Charge of the Light Brigade or perhaps Custer's Last Stand? A TPK of epic proportions that will live on in the memories of your unfortunate Rpg friends?

Custer might have been killed in the initial engagement, before the heavy action began; Cardigan, he lived, iirc of course.

 

[dragoner]

Well which would make a more "interesting" patron for the PCs, a stuffy old aristocrat with a snuff box, or someone who thinks he is more in the mold of Sir Lancelot, even though he probably didn't exist. A brash youth with a title who has little wisdom who has just inherited his office, and wants to go out there and make a name for himself?

Neither? I had written an adventure hook called en passant about a noble caught in his own double cross. Machiavelli's the prince is good for ideas.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Well which would make a more "interesting" patron for the PCs, a stuffy old aristocrat with a snuff box, or someone who thinks he is more in the mold of Sir Lancelot, even though he probably didn't exist. A brash youth with a title who has little wisdom who has just inherited his office, and wants to go out there and make a name for himself?

Ah, now I understand - I hadn't quite realised your point there.

You wish to recreate the Charge of the Light Brigade or perhaps Custer's Last Stand? A TPK of epic proportions that will live on in the memories of your unfortunate Rpg friends?

Custer might have been killed in the initial engagement, before the heavy action began; Cardigan, he lived, iirc of course.

Custer was a statistical fluke, there was a whole bunch of others who died in initial engagements, Custer was the one who did not, until the Battle of the Little Big Horn,

 

[Condottiere]

Custer split his force in the face of a superior enemy, due to poor intelligence.

He also didn't bring along his machine guns, which might have put a different complexion on last stand.

 

[AndrewW]

Custer split his force in the face of a superior enemy, due to poor intelligence.

He also didn't bring along his machine guns, which might have put a different complexion on last stand.

And additional forces under Brigadier General George Crook and Colonel John Gibbon that should have been in the area where absent.

 

[dragoner]

Custer split his force in the face of a superior enemy, due to poor intelligence.

US Cavalry is aggressive, the British noticed this during the battle of the bulge. He used a fixing/flanking maneuver that was common, but he died during the initial engagement, thus his troop wasn't ordered to withdraw and instead, fought to their death. It happens, Creighton Abrams being surrounded in the Lorraine, stated: "The poor bastards, they have us surrounded again."

Cardigan was conspicuous for galloping away from the melee ...

Interesting note, Custer's brother in law, or maybe sister, saved his body from disfigurement, as was Sioux tradition, so that his children wouldn't have to live with that spirit, he had a Crow wife, or maybe Shoshone.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Custer was a Civil War hero though, known for charging into battle, he shares some of the credit for freeing the slaves.

 

[Jame Rowe]

Yes. 2 points though:

1. He may have had a particular disease which eroded his self-control and left him vulnerable to the kind of stupidity that led to his particular last stand;

2. He was NOT a Noble. He was a respectably middle-class commoner who made good in the military. And by this time there was no type of nobility in America. Oligarchy, perhaps, but he wouldn't have been part of it.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Yes. 2 points though:

1. He may have had a particular disease which eroded his self-control and left him vulnerable to the kind of stupidity that led to his particular last stand;

2. He was NOT a Noble. He was a respectably middle-class commoner who made good in the military. And by this time there was no type of nobility in America. Oligarchy, perhaps, but he wouldn't have been part of it.

He was an officer in the US Army, and many officers of equivalent rank in the British Army were nobles, I don't see much difference between Custer and them other than they have their nobility bestowed on them by a monarch, or had inherited it from their parents. I'd have to say, Custer acted more Nobly than many actual Nobles, You see Custer stood on his own heroic deeds and bravery and did not live off of the legacy of his parents, not that he didn't have his flaws, but cowardice wasn't one of them.

 

[Jame Rowe]

He was an officer in the US Army, and many officers of equivalent rank in the British Army were nobles, I don't see much difference between Custer and them other than they have their nobility bestowed on them by a monarch, or had inherited it from their parents. I'd have to say, Custer acted more Nobly than many actual Nobles, You see Custer stood on his own heroic deeds and bravery and did not live off of the legacy of his parents, not that he didn't have his flaws, but cowardice wasn't one of them.

He would not have been regarded as an equal by the noble-officers. Many of them would have scoffed at him for NOT being a noble. So yes, there is a difference.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

He was an officer in the US Army, and many officers of equivalent rank in the British Army were nobles, I don't see much difference between Custer and them other than they have their nobility bestowed on them by a monarch, or had inherited it from their parents. I'd have to say, Custer acted more Nobly than many actual Nobles, You see Custer stood on his own heroic deeds and bravery and did not live off of the legacy of his parents, not that he didn't have his flaws, but cowardice wasn't one of them.

He would not have been regarded as an equal by the noble-officers. Many of them would have scoffed at him for NOT being a noble. So yes, there is a difference.

I am sure Custer would scoff at them right back and challenge them to a duel! You see Custer was not British and doesn't care about the British system of Nobility and what they think of him, as far as he is concerned it is all about bravery and performance in battle.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

I remember reading a book about Custer, clearly the author did not like him, he described him as a cold-blooded and merciless killer, and that he was descended from a Hessian mercenary who fought in the American Revolutionary War for the British and then decided to stay afterwards. It was fortunate that he fought on the right side of the Civil War, I don't think he had any strong feeling about slavery one way or another, he just liked to fight, that was his main thing.