I gave a 'wth' look and asked how he figured.
This player said that the Baklunish invaded many of the other empires city states etc... Ket, whatever. I asked him if he was mistaking them for the Ancient Suel.
Anyhow, I don't have as many years with D&D as this player, and although I reaserted that this was MY campaign not TSR's or WotC's, I'd like to know where he pulled this from as I really don't see it in the Gazetteer.
The Gazetteer uses workds like "noble," "honorable," "pieous," & "generous" to describe the Baklunish. And the nations that have a Bakluni Population have a good or lawful good alignment.
Any help with why this guy would think a Baklunish Human walking through the mainlads would be ill-treated?
I think your player is arguing by analogy, comparing the relationship between the Baklunish and Oeridian/Suel civilizations to the relationship between the Muslim and Christian civilizations on Earth. While the Baklunish aren't Muslims and the Sueloerids aren't Christian, the parallel is there. The tension and back-and-forth conquests between Ket and the Sheldomar region are real and can be vicious. How much you want to play up that tension is of course up to you as DM.
Definitely, the Flanaess in general isn't necessarily hostile to Baklunish religion; it's alien to them, but they don't burn monks of Zuoken as witches in most regions. The faiths of Pholtus and St. Cuthbert are very intolerant of other faiths in general - they'll see the followers of Baklunish gods as infidels, but not more so than followers of many of the other Eastern gods.
A Baklunish character will find the Knights of the Watch and those who sympathize with them to be utterly intolerant and openly hostile to them, as their primary reason for being is to oppose the Baklunish. That such an organization exists shows there must be strong anti-Baklunish sentiment elsewhere in the Sheldomar.
Elsewhere, a Baklunish character may encounter little or no hostility, depending on the campaign. The Baklunish seem to do well in Greyhawk, mixing with the other exotic races and peoples who have settled in the Free City.
Ket's alliance with Iuz and its invasion of Bissel during the Greyhawk Wars have had social consequences in that area of the Flanaess.
Natives from Bissel (and, to a lesser degree, Gran March) now hate Kettites with passion. They don't forgive them for the unprovoked attack that diverted much-needed troops from the war against Iuz in Furyondy. Neither do they forgive them for the (short-term) occupation of their country.
Since Kettites are Baklunish, it wouldn't surprise me if some racism towards that ethnic group was on the rise in that area. I seem to recall that was the case especially after Bissel recovered its independence.
Yes, diplomacy tried to smooth that over but it's too recent for it to have worked yet.
The general feeling is still that "Balunish" betrayed the other humans during the Wars by siding with Iuz at the worst possible moment. However, that attitude should be more prevalent in the northwestern Sheldomar Valley region than elsewhere.
Note that I'm not saying Baklunish folks are going to be burnt at the stake or chased systematically out of town by angry natives but they're going to draw a lot of angry glares and it wouldn't surprise me overmuch if they were charged at least twice as much as others when shopping (except in very cosmopolitan cities such as Greyhawk).
Didn't 2e give Baklunish characters a charisma penalty as part of their racial bonuses? If you really want to treat the eastern Flanaess as your baseline and you are determined to incorporate an element of racism, you can always give a circumstance penalty to Diplomacy checks when dealing with easterners and vice versa for easterners in the Baklunish lands.
I've always viewed this as unnecessary. I see no reason why a halfling from Elmshire should be better at ease in the Theocracy than in Ekbir just because the racial make up of the humans is different. My recommendation would be to treat each encounter on its own merits.
Just as the actions of a murderous few have painted many in a bad light in the "real world", so too can the actions of Ket cause their whole ethnic group to suffer from prejudice.
After all, how often do you meet a Baklunish NPC east of Veluna? The answer is: not a lot. They are the one human ethnic group most likely to stay at home (apart from their merchants, of course).
If the only Baklunish you had met till now were "bad guys", wouldn't you become automatically suspicious if you met one? (even though he isn't from the same nation as the former)
I think humans are all too likely to allow their feelings to color their judgment. God knows we have enough examples of that kind of behavior these days...
A medeival society doesn't have a such a highly developed news network so most ignorant peasants in Greyhawk (i.e. with no ranks in Knowledge History :P ) will have nothing to base prejudice on. So my point is, beyond a local level, why would a knight from Ahlissa view someone of Baklunish descent negatively? He might have it in for Suel barbarians who have caused relatives problems with shipping but that is an adjustment based on his own personal experience. Similarly, people wearing red cloaks in Keoland are sometimes subjected to abuse due to paranoia over Scarlet Brotherhood attacks. These are local issues resulting from local events so I think that Gran March and Bissel might well espouse the sentiments that you propose but on a wider basis, most folk would just view Baklini as curious foreigners.
I'm not in favour of singling out 'international' prejudice against the Baklunish when Oeridians in the Bandit Kingdoms or Suel from the Scarlet Brotherhood can just as easily be singled out in exactly the same way for exactly the same reasons. There's just no logic to that kind of overt racism within the bounds of the Flanaess particularly since the official supplements made the point of saying that no such international racial tensions exist.
I think that on a subconcious level the Baklunish are singled out becaise a lot of players fit into the other racial types and its easier for us to view the Baklunish as outsiders partly because of recent real world events. I'm not convinced that the inahbitants of the Flanaess would be possessed of the same attitudes.
And, yes, I'm aware citizens of the Flanaess don't have CNN to inform them of what has been happening elsewhere. But if we're in 591 CY (the last "official" date), that's 6 years beyond the end of the Wars. You can bet there isn't a nation who hasn't heard by then of what happened between Bissel and Ket. Although I agree that commoners & noblemen from nations who didn't suffer from either the Kettite invasion or Iuz probably won't care a lot about it.
Hmm.. I seem to recall that Bissel (after it regained its independence) had exactly that kind of problems due to the Margrave levying more taxes against people of Baklunish descent. Or was it only in the LG campaign?
If you're talking Gran March and Bissel I think prejudice is definitely there not least because the Knights of the Watch are viewed very favourably and they really hate the Baklunish - some of that is bound to rub off on the populace!
Baklunish are making inroads to the east beyond Ket through a trickling migration. Rary brought Paynim cavalry with him, effectively colonizing the Bright Lands over the next several years as the 'occupying' Baklunish would surely mix with local Flan or Suel since there is quite a large gulf between their new home and their old one. Greyhawk City has 'Little Ket' which is a neighborhood of migrants. If Greyhawk City now has one of these migrant neighborhoods its safe to say other major cities along their path east could have 'Little Baklunish' areas too. Maybe not intolerant areas like Bissel but perhaps Dyvers, Willip, Mitrik, Verbobonc?
As to the Ket-Iuz alliance, that still confounds me. Beygraf Zoltan was a worshipper of Al Akbar! It seems incomprehensible Zoltan and Ket would ally with an evil despot much less an evil DEITY despot. That said Ket's actions had to be more economically and culturally motivated and certainly not out of any political or religious alliance with an infidel demigod. Localized factors between Bissel and Ket dating back to the imperialistic days of Keoland (when they occupied Ket) was why Zoltan acted. The LGG says the mullahs of Ket opposed being drawn into the war but their protests fell silent when they took Bissel their old rival. Ket didn't have it out for Veluna or Uleks or Furyondy. They never came to Iuz's aid directly it was all about Bissel for them. Naturally Zoltan was assassinated 4 years later and things have moderated since then. So to sum up. Prejudices are highest in Bissel, stoked on presently by the Knights of the Watch (The LGG hints that they allegedly support rebellion in eastern Ket) but beyond there are Baklunish hated or distrusted more than say Rhennee? Iuzian humans? SB suel? Probably not.
Not due to any organized program but due to vigilant incidents; slurs, insults drunken challenges which if responded too turns into a self-righteous mob fairly quickly.
Granted the Ket/Iuz alliance is odd; On the surface both get something Ket; gets to invade a weakened bissel and Iuz ties down troops that could be sent north.
However I've always wondered due to the opportunist Ket reason, whic is valid, why they felt it was necessary to have an alliance with Iuz as a "casus belli" to invade?
Why not just attack, the diplomatic backlash can not be worse then aligning with Iuz?
What Rip and I did say was that the Baklunish are not particularly ill thought of in other parts of the Flanaess (which you also seem to hold true).
Regarding Paul's point, I think that most folks probably don't know the difference between a Ketite and any other Baklun. Folks far away from Ket are probably going to give any Baklunish folk a wide berth simply due to the general fear/dislike of the unknown/different that permeates the human race.
The Baklunish *may* be a general bogeyman type race in the Flanaess, considering that the Suel and the Oeridians certainly didn't get along with them in the mythical past (ie pre migrations) and that's probably reflected in all manner of tales and legends. However, there is nothing published to that effect, rather the opposite with Baklunish monks wandering around and setting up temples hither and thither.
I do agree that most eastern folk view the Baklunish as exotic and unusual foreigners with strange customs, although I don't think it should automatically follow that this means that they are viewed any more negatively than would other visting foreigners with strong regional accents and unusual regional dress. Little Ket is well established and Sanjaray Moshin has lived in the Domain of GH for decades so Greyhawkers are probably used to such foreigners.
On the Rary Paynim point, I think that the style of dress and attitudes of the Paynims are sufficiently different to those of 'civilised' Bakluni that most folk could tell the difference if they thought about it. Having said that, my own point comes back to bite me on the bum - most peasant folk would have no background knowledge to base the distinction on, so once again it is probably true to say that there will be local pockets where Baklunish people are viewed negatively due to local knowledge or personal experience which has fostered prejudice against everyone of that race.
Mind you, do Rary's Paynims actually cause problems for more than a handful of adventurers and the inhabitants of the Bright Desert? I'm not sure how the Bright Sands plot is developing. I know some desert centaur immigrants settled in the Duchy of Urnst and Rary's men are probably causing trouble for the hill folk of the Abbor-Alz but how far north does his influence extend these days?
Is it coincidence or do the remaining Flan nations seem fated to be wiped out? Sulm, Tenh, Geoff? We've only got Perrenland and the Theocracy left (Oerid/Flan mix), although Geoffites are at least making some gains.
I beg to differ.
As to the Ket-Iuz alliance, that still confounds me. Beygraf Zoltan was a worshipper of Al Akbar! It seems incomprehensible Zoltan and Ket would ally with an evil despot much less an evil DEITY despot. That said Ket's actions had to be more economically and culturally motivated and certainly not out of any political or religious alliance with an infidel demigod. Localized factors between Bissel and Ket dating back to the imperialistic days of Keoland (when they occupied Ket) was why Zoltan acted. The LGG says the mullahs of Ket opposed being drawn into the war but their protests fell silent when they took Bissel their old rival. Ket didn't have it out for Veluna or Uleks or Furyondy. They never came to Iuz's aid directly it was all about Bissel for them. Naturally Zoltan was assassinated 4 years later and things have moderated since then. So to sum up. Prejudices are highest in Bissel, stoked on presently by the Knights of the Watch (The LGG hints that they allegedly support rebellion in eastern Ket) but beyond there are Baklunish hated or distrusted more than say Rhennee? Iuzian humans? SB suel? Probably not.
Maybe Zoltan was duped into an alliance just as the Barbarians were in the Cold North. Just a thought. Also, was the "alliance" ever truely formal and public or was it an assumption by Bissel and it's allies when in fact Ket may have simply been taking advantage of a tactical situation? Maybe they were making a land grab to create a buffer zone in case Iuz turned his attention toward the Baklunish West ala Germany/Russia invading Poland.
In his own heavy-handed fashion, Iuz concluded alliances - all obscenely lopsided in his favor. After the Bandit Kingdoms were cowed into submission, agents traveled to Ket, Tusmit, and Perrenland, urging them to take up the sword. Ket and Tusmit responded favorably while Perrenland offered only mercenaries and a promise of neutrality in the coming years. Other agents penetrated into the Crystalmists, hoping to rouse the creatures there to attack and harry the good lands. When at last spring came, several new armies were on the march.
I'll take that a step further: in Ket and Perrenland's case, treating with the SON of their ancient enemy Iggwilv! Tsk!
I don't think the Old One's ancestry is commonly known. As far as most people know, he's the son of a bandit king.
Well you got a good point there Rip. I suppose Iuz, being god of deceit would likewise keep the truth of his 'mum' mum for political reasons and probably religious too.
Which is why I say "agents traveled to Ket, Tusmit, and Perrenland, urging them to take up the sword. Ket and Tusmit responded favorably" could just as easily mean they were duped into an alliance. "Agents" could just as easily have been shapechangers replacing key diplomats, generals and others to influence Zoltan into attacking Bissel when they were weak, distracted and vulnerable. I seriously doubt that some Iuzian Priest or Diplomat showed up at Court in Ket and said "Please align yourself with Iuz, my Lord on Oerth." If Zoltan was really and truely allied with Iuz he wouldn't have stopped at Bissel would he?
Which is why I say "agents traveled to Ket, Tusmit, and Perrenland, urging them to take up the sword. Ket and Tusmit responded favorably" could just as easily mean they were duped into an alliance. "Agents" could just as easily have been shapechangers replacing key diplomats, generals and others to influence Zoltan into attacking Bissel when they were weak, distracted and vulnerable. I seriously doubt that some Iuzian Priest or Diplomat showed up at Court in Ket and said "Please align yourself with Iuz, my Lord on Oerth." If Zoltan was really and truely allied with Iuz he wouldn't have stopped at Bissel would he?
Yes, he would. You fail to consider the broader picture.
Granted, Bissel had been forced to surrender and Furyondy was in a desperate situation at the same moment, thus finding itself unable to lend help. Not so, however, for the other "neighbours".
Yes, giants coming down from the mountains had overrun Geoff and Sterich, but Keoland's reserves were still largely intact since Skotti had tried to bargain them for dominion over Sterich. And Veluna too was still ready for a fight. Not to mention Gran March that was furious at what happened to Bissel.
Bissel had surrendered to Ket but the natives were far from happy about it (remember the margrave's suicide?). Had Ket's army tried to march on the next nation (either Gran March or Veluna), it would have ended in disaster.
First of all, inhabitants of Bissel would likely have revolted while the bulk of their enemies were away. If they had, Ket's supply lines would have been cut.
Gran March and Veluna are two "zealot" nations. One held by a glorious order of knights and the other backed by the divine power of Rao. Trust me, fighting them would have been tough even for fanatical Kettite warriors. They might have conquered one or the other (not both) but the cost in lives alone would have crushed Ket for decades.
Second, Keoland wouldn't have tolerated enemy forces so close to its NW border. Even if Skotti had had to drag every farmboy to muster levies, he would have done so in order to fight the threat.
Unless Zoltan had been 100% certain that Iuz's forces were coming to his help from the NE, cutting a bloody path through Furyondy, he would never have tried to pull that stunt.
Finally, had he tried to actually join forces with the evil armies of Iuz, I bet the mullahs would have found a way to "remove" Zoltan. It's one thing to lead a war that helps a distant evil demigod. It's quite another to ride side by side with his humanoid armies to lay waste to human nations.
Remember, the key to win is to minimize the risks.
Were I Zoltan, this is what I would have thought:
I take Bissel and fortify my position. I now control the vital traderoute going through Thornward. I lack the troops to push on but, on the other hand, my neighbours are in no position to force me out. And if they want access to goods from the West, they'll have to bargain with me. Since they are in desperate need of money to fight their wars, they'll see the light of reason.
Sure, they'll deal with me today, knowing full well that one day - when they are back at full strength - they'll try to smack me down. However, by then, I'll be ready with fully subdued commoners and well-entrenched troops.
No, I am here to stay, whether they like it or not.
Zoltan's view was a quick campaign to subdue Bissel with a minium of losses, once ocuppied the relief of victory will sweep Ket plus the added wealth and potential pool of converts should mute any dissent from the religious or merchants.
Generally this worked, although the suicide of the margrave destroyed any semblance of a viable puppet government, even so the new Beygraf retained partial control and wealth of strategic Thornward, effectively reducing Bissel to a buffer state.
But my question is:Why not simply sell the opportunistic attack on Bissel as national security (secure Thornward), economic (control Thornward trade), religious grounds or possible bissel threat?
Why was the alliance with Iuz needed at all? (It only alienated the mullahs and merchants)
But my question is:Why not simply sell the opportunistic attack on Bissel as national security (secure Thornward), economic (control Thornward trade), religious grounds or possible bissel threat?
Why was the alliance with Iuz needed at all? (It only alienated the mullahs and merchants)
Eh, because Iuz's diplomatic corps is likely made of CE priests with high Cha and good Bluff/Intimidate skills but few ranks (if any) in Diplomacy.
Sure, they could have sent someone who would have talked with Zoltan in private and "suggested" the attack on Bissel. But that's SB stuff. I see Iuz's minions as more blunt and heavy-handed than that. Not to mention that they are arrogant enough to want people to recognize them as favored servants of you-know-who (in a "I dare you to touch me!" kind of way). At least, in non-Good nations.
Look at Iuz's ambassador in Greyhawk after the peace treaty was signed. He made a point of coming to popular parties just to make people cringe because he knew they wouldn't dare tell him to leave.
Another answer to your question might be "because it put the mind of his officers at ease". If you're going to take on another nation with lots of allies, it helps if you know for certain that those allies are going to be busy dealing with another enemy while you make your move.
I'm scratching my head over, Ket's benefit...mullah and merchants were horrified over the "alliance". I strongly doubt that the military would march shoulder to shoulder with Iuz troops.
What tangible benefit did Ket recieve?
No mention of spells, items or gold given and despite the alliance structure, their has been unprovoked attacks before within GH.
I'm scratching my head over, Ket's benefit...mullah and merchants were horrified over the "alliance". I strongly doubt that the military would march shoulder to shoulder with Iuz troops.
True, but that's the catch. They didn't have to. Ket soldiers and Iuz troops never "linked". They each strove towards their own goal. Those goals just happened to influence each other.
What tangible benefit did Ket recieve?
Zoltan: glory (victory) and a bigger nation to rule
mullahs: new people to convert
merchants: stranglehold on a vital trade route
army: crushing an old enemy
Sounds like an "everyone wins" situation to me... (well, for Ket anyway)
I quite like the moral quandary that emerged from a LG ruler siding with Iuz
Note that Zoltan was LN, according to Reference Card #2 in From the Ashes, which fits with Ket's generally LN-with-evil-tendencies outlook. Ket's True Faith is also a much darker, LN branch of the faith of Al'Akbar than the Exalted Faith practiced in Ekbir and elsewhere.
Ket's alignment seems a bit hazy. The 1983 set said it was LN, N, and LE. From the Ashes said LG, LN, and LE. The Living Greyhawk Gazetteer said LN, N, LE, and CN, with LN dominating.
I'd also like to say that I see the True Faith and Exalted Faith as polytheistic religions that rely on Al'Akbar's writings to interpret how the other Baklunish gods should be worshiped. Al'Akbar remains a demigod despite the faith he founded dominating Baklunish culture "out of respect for the rest of the pantheon." He taught that "true religion must include proper devotion to the gods," plural. Therefore, it's misleading to say that a cleric of the True Faith is a cleric of Al'Akbar - in truth, such a cleric worships all the Baklunish gods together, as Al'Akbar taught, calling on the name of Al'Akbar to intercede with the rest of the gods and relying on their understanding of his teachings, but not worshiping him exclusively by any means.
Note that Zoltan was LN, according to Reference Card #2 in From the Ashes, which fits with Ket's generally LN-with-evil-tendencies outlook. Ket's True Faith is also a much darker, LN branch of the faith of Al'Akbar than the Exalted Faith practiced in Ekbir and elsewhere.
Ket's alignment seems a bit hazy. The 1983 set said it was LN, N, and LE. From the Ashes said LG, LN, and LE. The Living Greyhawk Gazetteer said LN, N, LE, and CN, with LN dominating.
I'd also like to say that I see the True Faith and Exalted Faith as polytheistic religions that rely on Al'Akbar's writings to interpret how the other Baklunish gods should be worshiped. Al'Akbar remains a demigod despite the faith he founded dominating Baklunish culture "out of respect for the rest of the pantheon." He taught that "true religion must include proper devotion to the gods," plural. Therefore, it's misleading to say that a cleric of the True Faith is a cleric of Al'Akbar - in truth, such a cleric worships all the Baklunish gods together, as Al'Akbar taught, calling on the name of Al'Akbar to intercede with the rest of the gods and relying on their understanding of his teachings, but not worshiping him exclusively by any means.
Good points all around, Rip, and I must confess that I did not take the time to sift through the alignment info on Ket presented in the LGG and in various boxed sets before writing my post. I like your interpretation of Al'Albar's role in the Baklunish faith.
While Zoltans' LN and Ket's alignment of LN-with-evil-tendencies outlook does make it easier to rationalize an alliance between Ket and Iuz, I still think it's possible that Zoltan might have felt some pressure to accept the alliance (out of fear), with the hope of appeasing Iuz. Conquering Bissel was just an added bonus, and he might have rationalized to the mullahs that a "distant alliance" with Iuz was well worth the price to keep the demigod at arm's length, and to acquire the politically and economically valuable lands of their historical foes. In the long run, the mullahs ended up rejecting Zoltan's rationalization for the alliance with Iuz (as described in the LGG).
Of course, Zoltan accepting the alliance partially out of fear is not stated in canon anywhere -- I just think it adds a bit to his character. I know that if a being as frightening as Pazuzu (from The Exorcist) came to my home (or sent agents on his behalf) and "suggested" we make an alliance... I would probably cr*p myself, would lose my mind, and would probably end up doing anything he wanted. I see the situation between Iuz and Zoltan in the same kind of light (regardless of Zoltan's alignment). The "deceit" aspect of Iuz's faith could also have come into play -- Iuz's agents might have convinced Zoltan that they had a card they could use against him and which would bring him, his family, and/or his nation in to ruin if he chose to decline their master's invitation. Whether they truly did hold this proverbial card in their hand would, of course, remain a matter of speculation...
I'd also like to say that I see the True Faith and Exalted Faith as polytheistic religions that rely on Al'Akbar's writings to interpret how the other Baklunish gods should be worshiped. Al'Akbar remains a demigod despite the faith he founded dominating Baklunish culture "out of respect for the rest of the pantheon." He taught that "true religion must include proper devotion to the gods," plural. Therefore, it's misleading to say that a cleric of the True Faith is a cleric of Al'Akbar - in truth, such a cleric worships all the Baklunish gods together, as Al'Akbar taught, calling on the name of Al'Akbar to intercede with the rest of the gods and relying on their understanding of his teachings, but not worshiping him exclusively by any means.
The idea you present is not any diffrent than the many factions of any religion weather it be Islam or Christianity. Catholics and evengelicals have, in some cases, widley diffrent views on how thier god should be worshipped and yet still have a common ground in thier basic belifs and rituals.