How do you portray the Great Kingdom (at its height?) - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

How do you portray the Great Kingdom (at its height?)

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
lincoln_hills
Nov 07, 2005 14:44:52 I never actually make any part of my Greyhawk campaign identical to any real-world cultures, but it's fairly handy to have a reference point. Even when I depart from the RL standard (which is frequent), having an image to start with helps out in conveying the mood.

That said - I've yet to feature the Great Kingdom in my campaigns and I'm fishing for sources. Would you compare it to any particular real-world empire of the past? Rome springs to mind, but only because it was a good example of "falling into decadence" as the GK has done. It always feels slightly Germanic to me: maybe I should use the example of the divisive city-states which once existed in modern Germany instead. Any other notions?
#2
zombiegleemax
Nov 07, 2005 15:20:21 When I DM the Great Kingdom, I set the mood of the later Byzantium. Much of the armed forces are manned by foreigners (humanoids) and it is run by the incompetant, the mad (Ivid) and religious fanatics (Hextor priests, daemonologists, etc.). That includes a great deal of administration, lots of paperwork for anything important and LOTS and lots of backstabbing politics. Latter day Rome is also a good call...it's entirely up to you! :fight!:
#3
ripvanwormer
Nov 07, 2005 18:21:50 The novel The Dragon Waiting by John M. Ford is an excellent story of an alternate 15th century Europe where magic is real, Christianity never really jelled as a major religion, and the Byzantine Empire is a more powerful force than ever, stretching across Eastern Europe and half of France. For the Great Kingdom at its height - and, to some extent, the Flanaess in general - you could have worse inspirations.
#4
OleOneEye
Nov 07, 2005 21:33:44 I've always imagined it like the Holy Roman Empire.
#5
zombiegleemax
Nov 09, 2005 8:59:55 I've thought of it as Carolingan/Germanic/Norman or even a little Hungarian (in the early phases) in culture, with flavours of Byzantium, Imperial Rome and the Holy Roman Empire mixed in for good measure.

The Aerdi when they arrived in Flamni basin were little different in my mind to the Magyars or Bulgars when they first settled in Europe. Slowly they settled and became civilised - just as the Franks and the Normans did. Like the Normans, they had superior arms and military organisation (and perhaps a surplus of younger noble sons to go off and spread the frontiers and claim lands for themselves). Like the Holy Roman Empire, it's early kings were elected - a throwback to tribal days (some of the titles like hetman and szek for example are taken from Polish and Hungarian history, while others like altmiester and herzog, are clearly German).

Like Rome, generals like Azharadian went forth and conquered in the name of the Kingdom (and civilisatation), rather than for their own personal gain. Also like Rome, the system of elected kings gave over to a more dynastic system under Nasran - though liberties and rights of the nobility and the citizenry are guarenteed by the Code of Laws. Like Rome and Byzantium (and every other empire you care to think of), when it stopped expanding, it began to decay from within (the late Rax remind me of the Byzantine emperors that followed Basil Bulgarotonicus up to the ascention of the Comneni*). Unlike Rome and Byzantium, however, though the empire went into decline, it took a long time for a significant concerted move to be made against the ruling house. It wasn't till Ivid and the Turmoil Between the Crowns that that happened (and imperial civil wars tend to be very similar). The intrigues of the Ivids, however, are pure late Byzantine (the Angeli especially).

Culturally though, I'd make the Great Kingdom more High Byzantine/Norman/medieval Frankish-Germanic than Roman. Aerdy never had the idea of citizenship, citizen armies etc that Rome had. Aerdy is more about feudal knights and nobles than legionaries, tribunes and senators.

At the end of the day though, the Aerdi wern't Franks or Normans or Byzantines - they were Aerdi. Historical parallels only get you so far. It's imagination that get's you the rest of the way.

IMO, of course.

P.

* Byzantine history rocks, BTW! John Julius Norwich's "A Short History of Byzantium" is a great introduction as well as a ripping good yarn. :D

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 lincoln_hills Nov 07, 2005 14:44:52	I never actually make any part of my Greyhawk campaign identical to any real-world cultures, but it's fairly handy to have a reference point. Even when I depart from the RL standard (which is frequent), having an image to start with helps out in conveying the mood. That said - I've yet to feature the Great Kingdom in my campaigns and I'm fishing for sources. Would you compare it to any particular real-world empire of the past? Rome springs to mind, but only because it was a good example of "falling into decadence" as the GK has done. It always feels slightly Germanic to me: maybe I should use the example of the divisive city-states which once existed in modern Germany instead. Any other notions?
#2 zombiegleemax Nov 07, 2005 15:20:21	When I DM the Great Kingdom, I set the mood of the later Byzantium. Much of the armed forces are manned by foreigners (humanoids) and it is run by the incompetant, the mad (Ivid) and religious fanatics (Hextor priests, daemonologists, etc.). That includes a great deal of administration, lots of paperwork for anything important and LOTS and lots of backstabbing politics. Latter day Rome is also a good call...it's entirely up to you! :fight!:
#3 ripvanwormer Nov 07, 2005 18:21:50	The novel The Dragon Waiting by John M. Ford is an excellent story of an alternate 15th century Europe where magic is real, Christianity never really jelled as a major religion, and the Byzantine Empire is a more powerful force than ever, stretching across Eastern Europe and half of France. For the Great Kingdom at its height - and, to some extent, the Flanaess in general - you could have worse inspirations.
#4 OleOneEye Nov 07, 2005 21:33:44	I've always imagined it like the Holy Roman Empire.
#5 zombiegleemax Nov 09, 2005 8:59:55	I've thought of it as Carolingan/Germanic/Norman or even a little Hungarian (in the early phases) in culture, with flavours of Byzantium, Imperial Rome and the Holy Roman Empire mixed in for good measure. The Aerdi when they arrived in Flamni basin were little different in my mind to the Magyars or Bulgars when they first settled in Europe. Slowly they settled and became civilised - just as the Franks and the Normans did. Like the Normans, they had superior arms and military organisation (and perhaps a surplus of younger noble sons to go off and spread the frontiers and claim lands for themselves). Like the Holy Roman Empire, it's early kings were elected - a throwback to tribal days (some of the titles like hetman and szek for example are taken from Polish and Hungarian history, while others like altmiester and herzog, are clearly German). Like Rome, generals like Azharadian went forth and conquered in the name of the Kingdom (and civilisatation), rather than for their own personal gain. Also like Rome, the system of elected kings gave over to a more dynastic system under Nasran - though liberties and rights of the nobility and the citizenry are guarenteed by the Code of Laws. Like Rome and Byzantium (and every other empire you care to think of), when it stopped expanding, it began to decay from within (the late Rax remind me of the Byzantine emperors that followed Basil Bulgarotonicus up to the ascention of the Comneni). Unlike Rome and Byzantium, however, though the empire went into decline, it took a long time for a significant concerted move to be made against the ruling house. It wasn't till Ivid and the Turmoil Between the Crowns that that happened (and imperial civil wars tend to be very similar). The intrigues of the Ivids, however, are pure late Byzantine (the Angeli especially). Culturally though, I'd make the Great Kingdom more High Byzantine/Norman/medieval Frankish-Germanic than Roman. Aerdy never had the idea of citizenship, citizen armies etc that Rome had. Aerdy is more about feudal knights and nobles than legionaries, tribunes and senators. At the end of the day though, the Aerdi wern't Franks or Normans or Byzantines - they were Aerdi. Historical parallels only get you so far. It's imagination that get's you the rest of the way. IMO, of course. P. Byzantine history rocks, BTW! John Julius Norwich's "A Short History of Byzantium" is a great introduction as well as a ripping good yarn. :D