Wednesday, April 21, 2021

NPC Concept: "If You Know the King, You Know the Kingdom" - Part 1: The Autocrat

Overview

I absolutely adore politics and a royal aesthetic when it comes to the fantasy genre. I think I make that pretty clear by the types of games I run; right now, two thirds of them are based in politics.

I wanted to start something of a series on the blog here, since I like talking about and exploring different government structures. In the 5e Dungeon Master's Guide, there is a chapter on how to homebrew your own worlds and kingdoms. On page 18, there's a table on which someone could roll a d100 to determine a kingdom's government. 

I've been struggling with my Campaign Concepts lately. I'm in school, and I haven't had as much time to flesh them out as I think I would want to. That gives me more time to focus on something like this, which comes to me much easier.

So, if I can, I want to go through each of these government types and talk about the NPCs that would be associated with them. I also want to discuss their potential as allies, patrons, and villains for your campaigns.

Today, we're going to start with the first type on the table: Autocracy, the leader of which would be the "autocrat." The book defines this type of government as:

"One hereditary ruler wields absolute power. The autocrat either is supported by a well-developed bureaucracy or military, or stands as the only authority in an otherwise anarchic society. The dynastic ruler may be immortal or undead." (pg. 18, Dungeon Master's Guide 5e)


Who Are the Important People?

Even a government with only one ruler has multiple people involved in keeping the country running. Any of these NPCs could be important to your story or players in multiple ways (we'll look at that a little more later.) For now, let's just see who our most important people are with this.

The first and most obvious is the autocrat themself. For this example, I'm going to use a government from earlier in my Tri-Panthonic War campaign: the government of Stovald. This ruler's title, rather than something like "king" or "emperor" was "Paragon." The paragon at the start of this scene of the campaign was Emmanuel. It's important to establish how this leader is treated by their people, especially when they're seen as the only authority within that kingdom. For example, Emmanuel was a tyrant. He demanded respect from his subjects and forbid anyone from speaking ill of him or his regime. The people of Stovald feared him, to an extent, and if they had any misgivings about him, they would harbor them in silence. They say "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and I would not be afraid to explore that with an autocrat. In that way, they can make for excellent villains. However, there are plenty of examples of benevolent absolute rulers throughout history that you can draw upon as well. Ashoka the Great, a former emperor of India, is a perfect example. After a particularly bloody conquest, he swore off violence in favor of compassion and relieving the suffering of the poor. (Britannica, article here)

When talking about autocrats, since they are hereditary, it may also benefit the DM to think about who's inheriting that position. That means that the DM should also consider looking into different succession laws. I kept mine simple. In Stovald, only men can inherit land or titles, and succession passes through the eldest son. Emmanuel was going to be succeeded by his eldest son, Hugo. Hugo wasn't the only child, however, and this holds true in history as well. Most nobility or royalty had at least two children: an heir and a spare. Hugo had two siblings: his brother, Phoebus (the spare), and his sister, Esmerelda. Obviously, Esmerelda couldn't inherit much as the youngest child and also as a daughter, but she ended up being quite important to the plot. These younger children often aren't paid much mind. As a result, they can get up to mischief on behalf of the party, while still holding some political sway (depending on your succession rules and cultural norms, of course.)

Then, we have the advisors. Even absolute rulers rarely rule without help. There has to be some thought behind that "well developed bureaucracy or military" in order to make the kingdom feel real. If the autocrat is militaristic, surround him with generals. If he's scholarly, surround him with scholars. Are these people "yes-men?" Potentially. Compared to some of the other government structures that this table provides, the advisors don't have much of a say in their rulers' decisions. They can sway him, sure, but ultimately, the autocrat's word is law for everyone. He may have nobles or vassals who own land, but it would not be too far out of the realm of possibility for him to dictate how they operate. Even the wealthy, though they might be able to influence him, are firmly under the thumb of an autocrat. Additionally, the autocrat doesn't need their advisors to make a decision. They can think of a new law, write it down, and have it executed in hours without talking to anyone else.


Function / Motivations

With all of these builds that I'll be doing as part of this series, the obvious primary function is to rule. These are governments; their function is to provide law and order. The question you need to ask as the DM is how.

Autocrats can be enemies or allies depending on their motivations. They can also be a multitude of creatures, outside of humanoids. I've played in games that had autocracies ruled by dragons - some kind, some not so kind. The book's description also describes "undead" as being an option for an autocrat. A lich king is a classic D&D BBEG. In those cases, their "well-developed" support comes from sheer might or magical prowess. Not any group of adventurers can brave an adult or ancient dragon or a lich. It provides a great challenge and final boss fight.

A benevolent autocrat can act as the patron of the adventuring party, funding an expedition or granting them a quest. An evil one can be a formidable foe, humanoid or not.

When it comes to the heir to this autocracy, they can work their way into the plot in multiple ways. The most obvious of these ways is in a regime change. The heir could actually be the enemy, plotting to overthrow the compassionate autocrat in the background. If the autocrat is the tyrant, perhaps they're an ally to the party trying to overthrow their parent. Now the party has an acceptable ruler and can prevent something like a civil war among other nobles or generals in the kingdom. Additionally, the heir could also be on the side of their parent. For example, there could be a benevolent prince who aids the party on their endeavors. On the other hand, there could be a conquering princess with her own army, declaring new territory in the name of her parent and kingdom. The heir may also hold a lot of political sway with their parent. If your game is a political one and depending on the direction you take, this can be a game-changer. Kidnapping that conquering princess and demanding that the autocrat draw his forces back? Very possible. Asking the compassionate prince to convince his father to give the party the pay raise they've been waiting for? Also very possible.

Advisors or generals can also serve as mini-bosses or party allies and patrons, depending on the circumstances. Knowing these people and how much influence or power they have can really help the party. With an ally, you know their limits as to how many strings they can pull. With an enemy, you know their strengths and weaknesses. Neither of these should be overlooked. Although the autocrat's word is law, others with power may not be pleased with that law (more ally / enemy potential.) The one drawback to having an ally in this position is that once the autocrat has made their final decision, there really isn't anything the party or their ally can do. If that decision messes with the party's plan, then it's another obstacle for them to overcome.


Why Should I Include This?

Autocracies were not uncommon in the world, by any means. Researching historical cultures with absolute rulers will be a great place for you to start. You can create some really interesting settings when you put your mind to it.

With this concept, the idea is that you get one of two things:

- An ally or patron with the ability to write laws, acquire items, or send aid with a single word. They don't necessarily need the input of their advisors to do so. They can act quickly and have their laws executed almost immediately.

- An enemy with the ability to summon armies and conquer land with a single word. They don't need the input of their advisors to do so. They can act quickly, which challenges your party to do the same thing to try and stop them.

There's potential for more allies and villains within this too, in the ranks of those closest to the autocrat. It allows for an element of political intrigue, which is always something I really enjoy in my games.


What's Coming Next?

Next week, I think I'm going to continue this series in lieu of a campaign concept. Like I said, it's becoming difficult for me to really flesh those out with school and everything.

Next week, we're going to talk about bureaucracies and how they can factor into something like an autocracy, or perhaps another form of fantasy government.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Campaign Concept: United We Stand

What Are We Making? I'm back! I'm out of university (with a bachelor's degree, huzzah!) and I figured it was time to get back in...