And, look at this "news" article from the LG Keoland Web site, HERE.
So, what's going on? Does anyone know?
Essentially it was one of those 'special missions' where tables are tallied together and most likely outcome happens. In this case the results were obviously disfavorable and Skotti was killed. He was not just automatically killed because Triad felt like it.
Same kind was in one Onnwal special mission where an military alliance (well, not quite an alliance yet I think) with Ahlissa was at stake. It was touch and go whether or not Onnwal would accept Ahlissan aid (52 vs 48 % of players I think). If they hadn't, the area of so called 'Free Onnwal' would have shrunken considerable since without Ahlissa, Scarlet Sign would have overrun two major cities.
S.H, Naerie webslave
During an interactive (which is a combination of mini-modules and semi-LARPing that are run as "extras" in the LG campaign at certain conventions), a regional plot line involving the discovery of the three weapons from White Plume Mountain, Wave, Whelm, and Blackrazor, was resolved. That resolution focused on the discovery of the final weapon, Blackrazor. When it was found, it was handed over to Holphin Neheli, nephew of Cedrian Neheli, the Duke of Dorlin. Holphin has been the head of the Knights of the Malagari, a splinter group of the Knights of the Watch, also known as the Darkwatch. When Holphin met King Kimbertos to hand over the sword, he instead attacked and killed him. As a result of the special power of Blackrazor, the soul of King Kimbertos has been destroyed. After that, a mysterious figure believed to be a member of the Silent Ones, a mysterious order based in Keoland that collects magic items, took Holphin away, apparently by teleporting or something similar.
What will happen next will be determined over the next year. It is quite possible that Keoland will be swept by a massive civil war, as various groups settle ancient scores and maneuver to become King. The current prime candidates are, in no specific order, Duke Luschan of Gradsul, head of the Rhola, Duke Cedrian of Dorlin, head of the Neheli, and Baron Markos of Greyhill, brother of Kimbertos and head of the Lizhal.
Thanks for the answers, fellas. Cool stuff.
When did this take place? Was is summer or fall 594 CY?
As I've said on several other threads: Is there any chance of a rough timeline of major occurances across the Flanaess coming out for years 591, 592, 593, 594 etc. anytime?
My eye rolling reaction is connected to events in Tenh and the reported deaths of other nobles such as Prince Corond of Ulek or the mortal wounding of the Theocrat. Based upon my limited knowledge of unfolding LG regional plotlines, LG triads have seemed "plagued" by folks who tend believe that interesting plot development must involve the murder of established leaders. While that is certainly one way, to me it felt contrived.
In this case, however, the plot seems well designed. Just IMO.
As for the mass dying, if you consider the ages of a lot of these rulers, the great majority of rulers of LG regions have been doing so since before 576 CY, it isn't all that unusual. If it weren't from violent causes, with the end of potions of longevity and youth, most of them have one foot in the grave already from old age, and one or two like Prince Corond, are at the extreme top of the age range for their race.
Or being on a Triad just brings out this great old urge to kill! :P
But even if they are, it should always be remembered that good stories arise from conflict, not peace. As I told people who kept insisting at the start of the LG campaign that I wasn't making Keoland Lawful Good enough according to its alignment in the book (in addition to telling them the book gave the alignment as NG that is), a Kingdom where none of the city guards are corrupt, where no bandits roam the highways, where no nobles consider upsetting the established order, and so on is a boring Kingdom. If that means a few names in a book have to kick it in, I don't really see why that is a problem.
When did this take place? Was is summer or fall 594 CY?
As I've said on several other threads: Is there any chance of a rough timeline of major occurances across the Flanaess coming out for years 591, 592, 593, 594 etc. anytime?
I couldn't agree more! Please please please will somebody stitch this stuff together!! I'm still formulating my own gazeteer from all available sources, including LGG and Canonfire. The point of LGG is to keep Greyhawk living and breathing and it does seem odd that there doesn't seem to be this kind of record-keeping going on (except sporadically on some of the websites and in occasional articles in Dungeon). This kind of info is invaluable for us fans who want to keep up with world events.
Who has access to the information? I'd be prepared to do it myself if nobody else was up to the task but I have no clue from where to obtain the necessary information and/or how to reference the modules to the key events.
P.S. A database of the names and occupations of key npcs that have been used in modules would also be really helpful (levels and alignments are useful, but we have to accept that DMs want to keep that info secret sometimes!)
. . .
As for the mass dying, if you consider the ages of a lot of these rulers, the great majority of rulers of LG regions have been doing so since before 576 CY, it isn't all that unusual. If it weren't from violent causes, with the end of potions of longevity and youth, most of them have one foot in the grave already from old age, and one or two like Prince Corond, are at the extreme top of the age range for their race.
. . . it should always be remembered that good stories arise from conflict, not peace. If that means a few names in a book have to kick it in, I don't really see why that is a problem.
Amen. The idea that the same rulers are in place decade after decade, when they have already been ruling for some time, strikes me as dull, to say the least. Some no doubt are targets of the Scarlet Brotherhood, Iuz etc. Unless these are "the gang that couldn't shoot straight," they have to succeed eventually in getting somebody. Besides, IMO, "Skotti" is a sufficiently dumb name that I won't miss hearing it. I keep picturing James Doohan (red shirt and all) sitting on the throne. ::shudder::
GVD
Besides, IMO, "Skotti" is a sufficiently dumb name that I won't miss hearing it. I keep picturing James Doohan (red shirt and all) sitting on the throne.
Which is why I constantly reminded people that the proper way to refer to him is as King Kimbertos.
Kings and such are not referred to or addressed by their last names, but their first names. Even more, if people would read the LGG they would see his full name is Kimbertos Skotti Lizhal, so if they want to be "familiar" they should be referring to him as "Lizhal".
So Kimbertos is dead. The family Skotti of the House of Lizhal survives.
Who says it doesn't? Earlier this fall, Gran March officially annexed 90% of the Duchy of Geoff's reclaimed lands, claiming 'right of conquest' since it was largely their troops that helped reclaim it from the giants. Geoff itself was too weak militarily to rebuff them, and still needed their military assistance, so had no choice in the matter... but in-character, many PCs are quite upset over it.
Stuff like this can happen in LG, but it just requires good work between Triads and players of the various regions.
Who says it doesn't? Earlier this fall, Gran March officially annexed 90% of the Duchy of Geoff's reclaimed lands,.
Since when does Keoland sit idly by while its subject states start annexing each other?
Of course, Geoff's getting used to it by now. When Owen married Skotti's daughter, part of her dowry was a bunch of troops to help us reclaim our land from the Giants. despite the fact that this was bolstered by the Duke's reaffirmation of fealty to the King, those troops were still promptly recalled mere month later, without so much as a a 'sorry.'
At this point, we're getting all-too-familar with the power plays and politics at the expense of our Duchy (or what little is left of it, when the March and the Giants are factored in).
Of course, these things are also all coordinated and handled by the Triads in questions, so there are plotlines and OOC reasons for doing so -- primarily, they make for a good, engaging story -- but it's still fun to have our characters react appropriately, even if we the players know why X happens...
Since when does Keoland sit idly by while its subject states start annexing each other?
A good question, indeed. And an occurence of such great magnitude that I think it would subordinate plotlines and story archs.
But, it's done now. And the chance for assertive action from Keoland is probably long gone, with Kimbertos slain.
I see enemations of the 11 Keys of Empire curling through the western Flanaess.
I raised a nice fuss over the annexation myself. Perhaps when the King returns he will be able to set things straight.
:P
When Owen married Skotti's daughter, part of her dowry was a bunch of troops to help us reclaim our land from the Giants. despite the fact that this was bolstered by the Duke's reaffirmation of fealty to the King, those troops were still promptly recalled mere month later, without so much as a a 'sorry.'
And despite not knowing the details of plotted LG regional arc, I respond by saying that the idea of reclaiming a dowry of granted troops strains my "suspension of disbelief" past the breaking point. I relate my interpretation of this event to the events I mentioned previously, i.e., a set of changes to the campaign that seem influenced more by "crack" than by a steady hand -- change upon change upon change.
While Samwise and others discussed the need for some change to the rulers of kingdoms and whatnot in the Flanaess, such has occurred steadily as different authors detailed Greyhawk for the company that owned the setting's intellectual property. Compare the rulers mentioned in the 1983 boxed set with those in the From the Ashes boxed set and later products.
In contrast to the relatively moderate changes made by Sargent and the GH'98 crew, it seems to me (an outsider to regular LG gameplay) that the various Triads (and the Circle of Six to the extent that it organizes the Triads) are trying to "outdo" each other.
Returning to the point that prompted this post, in medieval societies, it should not be possible to "recall troops" where those soldiers were granted as part of a dowry. In the quasi-medieval societies of the Flanaess, soldiers are not typically part of a standing army and almost never part of a volunteer force. Instead, soldiers are connected to the land-owning nobility. Likely this model should hold true for the societies of the Sheldomar Valley with the Yeomanry the exception that proves the rule. Even the Knights of the Watch and the armies formed by their followers are a force that is tied to the land of the Gran March (and other places where Watchers own holdings).
In other words, any troops granted by the King of Keoland must become attached to land or be the followers of a noble. Investing Owen with the allegiance of soldiers is not something that should be easily reversed -- both for "legal" reasons and for the practical revolt amongst the kingdom's nobility that such an act should cause.
Hope it was coherent. Happy to discuss the subject further.
That sais, even if they were technically part of the dowry (and I may not even be using the term in the technically accurate sense there), I've learned not to put too much stock in Real World historical practices when comparing them to Fantasy World practices.
As to the various Triads trying to 'outdo' each other, I'd have to disagree. While there has no doubt been some capriciousness, none of these things appear to be 'whims;' the current situation with the potential civil war in Keoland following Kimbertos' death was forseen quite some time ago by a handful of people who bothered to investigate some seemingly innocuous things that had been occuring for the last year or two...
As to the various Triads trying to 'outdo' each other, I'd have to disagree. While there has no doubt been some capriciousness, none of these things appear to be 'whims;' the current situation with the potential civil war in Keoland following Kimbertos' death was forseen quite some time ago by a handful of people who bothered to investigate some seemingly innocuous things that had been occuring for the last year or two...
Like noticing just how much the Triad and myself seemed to know about who was a potential sucessor in case Kimbertos died? :P
I really expected that would make it clear to most people that the King's days were numbered, and that he would last only as long as the Circle prohibited his death.
Several of the Triads have shown a considerable degree of aptitude when it comes to foreshadowing. While a lot of that is lost on people who haven't been playing since the campaign started, those who have and took the time to pay attention to everything said and unsaid, in module backgrounds, convention teasers, and general discussion should have a really good idea of a lot of what is coming up.
SteveMND In other words, any troops granted by the King of Keoland must become attached to land or be the followers of a noble. Investing Owen with the allegiance of soldiers is not something that should be easily reversed -- both for "legal" reasons and for the practical revolt amongst the kingdom's nobility that such an act should cause.
Hope it was coherent. Happy to discuss the subject further.
Feudal levies will not be "granted" in perpetuity as they are not serfs or slaves that are "owned" and can be simply given away, never to return to the lands from which they were initially levied. Their service can be "granted" but it will be "granted" with the expectation that they will return to their farms when the campaign season is over with.
Noble levies, as distinct from feudal levies made up of peasants, will not be "granted" in perpetuity for the same reasons. They are not "property" to be given way and they are tied to the land, which would suffer from a lack of administration were such "granting" possible. The service of noble levies might be granted but the nobles too must return to administer their land at some point.
Lesser or landless sons or nobles might be persuaded to go "on crusade" and a king might even attach noble and feudal levies in such case but, again, it would be for the term of the "crusade" and not in perpetuity. The exception might be the landless nobles or sons who might be persuaded to stay in the new land. They would not, however, be "granted" in the sense of their having no choice but to go. They are not property.
IMC
GVD
I focused on the term, dowry, which I understand is a transfer of property from one family to another, spurred by and negotiated in relation to a marriage. Dowries might be made that favor the family of the bride or groom contingent on the culture and historical (economic) circumstances of the families, but dowries involve transfers of property.
With this understanding in mind, it seems impossible* to recover property that was given away as part of a dowry. I use the asterisk to highlight that such property could be recovered, but this would amount to a seizure of someone else's property because the original possessor's right of ownership extinguished when the new person took possession. Blah, blah, blah. Basically I'm thinking about the common law of property that British society developed historically from the middle ages (and which was transplanted to the United States).
I agree with GV Dammerung regarding control of levies, which unless comprised of serfs+ do not constitute property. I use the plus sign to highlight that certain levies from Keoland or the Gran March might indeed be serfs. However, these troops would likely be of low quality and hence not a desirable force to help Grand Duke Owen retake Geoff.
Coming to an end, my second post in this thread marked my belief that we were talking about a transfer of property, which in my mind would be politically impossible for the current king of Keoland to accomplish, since it would destabilize the fundamental feudal laws of the lands of the former empire of Keoland. In other words, seizing property from Grand Duke Owen would likely cause an uproar throughout the lands once owned by the Black Lion Throne. Note I don't preclude this possibility but instead want to highlight that it imports a significant shift back to the old expansionism of the Rhola kings.
Ending, if the king of Keoland did not transfer ownership of some property, then it sounds like no dowry was effected to "convince" Grand Duke Owen to marry the king's daughter. Given the grand duke's poor circumstances, this actually makes more sense: why should the king of Keoland "pay" anyone to marry his daughter. Perhaps instead the King blessed the marriage with a gift of levies -- as part of a larger (likely unwritten and unsealed) agreement for Grand Duke Owen to grant land to young landless Keogish nobles to join the grand duke's attempt to reclaim Geoff?
In this light, however, recalling the levies doesn't make sense since the recall impinges on the young nobles' ability to gain land. If the King wanted Geoff to be reclaimed, then some emergency must have mandated the levies' return, such as an internal rebellion that needed to be put down or perhaps a forged order compelling their return in order to position Gran March to annex Geoff?