Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Yamo 10-05-03, 02:10 PM	In the real world, nations go to war all the time for a wide variety of reasons besides one being "good" and the other "evil". This is even true in most game settings (Greyhawk, Planescape, Birthright, etc). In Forgotten Realms, though, war seems to be strictly Evil Guys (Zhents, Red Wizards, orcs, Unther, etc) versus Good Guys (Cormyr, Dalelands, Mulhorand, etc). Why do we never see things like Cormyr deciding to conquer Sembia for its mineral resources, ports and farmland or Shadowdale going to war with Archendale over past insults or philosophical differences? It seems like stuff like this would make the Realms a more "real"-seeming place, where morality wasn't always so black and white. Why has there never been an effort to encourage this sort of thing, with the Good Guy kingdoms being so darn stable and upright over the years, only coming into conflict with parties so obviously Evil that they put comic book supervillians to shame? Where's the moral dilemma for PCs in that? Isn't that the sort of thing that drama is all about?
Faraer 10-05-03, 02:48 PM	First, the idea that the Realms should mirror our world, or that good vs evil is something to be ashamed of, or that drama is 'all about' moral ambiguity, are quite wrong. The original intent of the published Realms was to present faultlines of conflict, and plentiful history, and clack and adventure hooks of brewing discord, but not an ongoing timeline of 'current' events that you watch like TV. That was, and is, properly the domain of the DM. The timeline from 1358 to 1373 is a mess of novel and game-product events written to sell books and excite buyers in the short term more than to present a coherent world. I'm not much interested in that timeline, or in discussing it. When you say 'there never been an effort to encourage this sort of thing', that's clearly wrong too. Cormyr and Sembia have a slow-burning opposition that rarely turns to outright war, but is played out chess-like over decades (the way major conflict in the Realms most often works). But they've warred in the past, and could plausibly war in your campaign. Cormyr threatens to absorb the Dales in guise of protecting them -- I forget which of Ed's novels has the scene of Shaerl Amcathra meeting with a Cormyte representative. The recent wars in Cormyr are about good and evil, but they're also about the kingdom's revenant past. Few Realms governments are good-aligned, though their citizens and defenders often are, and their conflicts with orc hordes are defenses of civilization, and even mercantile interests, as much as weal. There barely are any 'good guy' kingdoms, still less stable ones. Aglarond, ruled by a mad obsessive quasi-psychopath, isn't. Cormyr's tribulations and near-falls are well documented; the Dales were united only briefly; Waterdeep has had its time of no lords, successful assassinations against lords, plagues and much else down the years; Luruar's survival is year to year and to be determined by your PCs. The city-states of the Western Heartlands seek supremacy through pricing, intrigue, and daggers in the night. Lashan's attempt to conquer the Dales, in which Dalefolk fought Dalefolk, recalled the great days of Aencar even though Lashan was an evil usurper. The clash between the rising merchant classes and the agricultural and druidic traditionalists isn't good vs evil either, nor is the animosity between mages and ordinary folk, or elves and settling humans, or Tethyr's civil war, or Khelben's recent machinations, or... Realms sourcebooks and novels are so full of this stuff it's hard to see how you can have missed it. I suspect part is that the current books aren't clear enough that the foregrounded elements -- events, characters, settlements -- aren't a catalogue of what is in the Realms but examples of what might be in your campaign. If you'd just said '3E supplements don't concentrate on political complexity and subtlety', you'd have been right.
avian tiefling 10-05-03, 03:54 PM	There have also been several evil-evil conflicts. many of these are started by the Cult of the Dragon. The book "Temple Hill" depicts a war between the Dragonworshoppers and a beholder cult. but then, evil organizations are pretty much at war with anyone thats not one of them. the barbarian tribes of the Northmen could qualify as "good," they're just a little dilusional, but they do occasionally raid outpost towns and settlements, as in "Icewind Dale" by R. A. Salvatore. they don't really have a government though, but it could work for the purposes of a campaign. maybe. :mage: anyways....... ::walks off::
Alac Luin 10-05-03, 06:55 PM	I think Faraer said it very well. Not that I could add anything to his explination, but I’m going to throw out some of my own ideas. Small list of some political conflicts…. Cormyr – Dalelands Sembea – Dalelands Cormyr – Sembia Sembia – Hillsfar Hillsfar – Dalelands Hillsfar –Zhentail Keep Zhentil Keep – Dalelands Zhentil Keep – well, just about anyone Amn - Tethyr Amn – City states of sword coast and Westerhartlands Luskan – Neverwinter Luskan – well, just about anyone Mulhorand – Unther On the good vs. evil governments, some distinctions are made for us, the players, so we know what side to take without much thought. Some other conflicts are, well, a little harder to think who is good or bad. We also don’t see all the political conflicts that exist, trade conflicts exist in such numerous amounts that we could fill volumes trying to list them, just like in RL.
Richard Lee Byers 10-05-03, 07:39 PM	It makes a certain amount of sense to me that lands under constant threat of attack by honest-to-God monsters (which describes the situation of a number of locales around the Realms) might be somewhat leery of waging war on their civilized neighbors, economic rivalries and such notwithstanding. What if you squander military resources you're going to need for self-defense when the orcs or whatever launch their next incursion? What if you need an ally when the orcs come again? I'm not suggesting that the comparatively "good" lands of Faerûn would never resort to armed conflict to settle their differences. I think they certainly would. But there's a rationale for believing that it might plausibly happen less often than in medieval Europe.
Telagaunt 10-05-03, 10:00 PM	And lets not forget Shade. I mean hey, they may be evil, but all they want is a little chunk of Faerun and re-establish their ancestor's empire :D But seriously, in one of the RotA books, maybe it was The Siege? They had a big discussion, one of the Chosen I believe had a council meeting with reps from places like the Dalelands. And there was quite a bit of arguing and disagreeing. Aside from the fact the Dalelands reps were being used by phaerimm, they did outline some mentionings of past feuding.
TheBlackBart 10-05-03, 10:12 PM	Unther, evil? I don't see it like that! In the Unther-Mulhorand conflict, I'm all for Unther! Unther's people was under the tyrannical grip of the crazed god Gilgeam for more than a thousand years. A group of wizards planned a rebellion. Thet met little success, but luck finally smiled at them during the Time of Troubles, as Tiamat killed Gilgeam. Wich leaved leaved primarily chaotic (chaotic, not evil, chaotic) population of Unther rulerless for the first time in ages. And these holier-than-thou (primarily lawful, not good) Mulhorandi led by a boy decide to grab the opportunity to invade their land. I mean, hey, who are the good guys here? Certainly not the Mulhorandi! But not the Untheric either, many of them are evil. There you have your shades-of-grey conflict. And that's not all! Make your own shades-of-grey conflict. If a group of heroic warriors from the Silver Marches drives a group of orcs from their citadel -a group of orcs who didn't do anything wrong yet!- are they still good guys?
Yamo 10-05-03, 10:40 PM	Unther, evil? I mainly meant Gilgeam, but you are right about the current situation. Ditto for the orcs. Thanks.
avian tiefling 10-05-03, 10:52 PM	i fully agree with the concept of the aformentioned "shades of gray" idea. have a group of paladins start some sort of righteous crusade, raiding peaceful colonies of creatures such as orcs, goblins, giants, ogres, etc... Giants can often be reasonable enough to form such communities, try using a Frost Giant community, they're the most intelligent type. There are places, such as Sigil and Skullport, where such races can live in relative peace. of course, in both those instances, there is an all-powerful ruling party (like the Lady of Pain and the Skulls) that strictly enforces the laws with severe punishments. anyway, think on it. you could also use some sort of case in which the ruler of some goodly nation is possessed by an advisor or something to lead the normally peaceful country to war. (like in The Two Towers or Echoes of the Fourth Magic or some other book/movie/game i can't remember at the moment. hope it helps.
ENHenry 10-06-03, 11:56 AM	Originally posted by Richard Lee Byers It makes a certain amount of sense to me that lands under constant threat of attack by honest-to-God monsters (which describes the situation of a number of locales around the Realms) might be somewhat leery of waging war on their civilized neighbors, economic rivalries and such notwithstanding. Richard makes a great point here; Earth history is filled with Nation vs. Nation because the enemy is US. Faerun's nations are slightly less volatile because there really ARE boogeymen in the mountains and under the city. A Beholder or a Zombie really DOESN'T have a similar way of life, really doesn't have any connection points to see eye-to-eye with (oun not intended), and simply put, WANTS YOU DEAD, or at least enslaved. Why Fight with Sembia over territory, when a :):):):)ing nation of half-undead spellcasters to your north are sucking up your towns like a vacuum cleaner? Sembia at least has the same types of concerns Cormyr does - stable partners for trade, food, and peace. What will be amusing to me is if Cormyr and Sembia ally with Zhentil Keep against the City of Shade. Politics make not only strange bedfellows, they make downright hilarious ones!
Morka 10-06-03, 02:04 PM	Originally posted by avian tiefling i fully agree with the concept of the aformentioned "shades of gray" idea. have a group of paladins start some sort of righteous crusade, raiding peaceful colonies of creatures such as orcs, goblins, giants, ogres, etc... Giants can often be reasonable enough to form such communities, try using a Frost Giant community, they're the most intelligent type. There are places, such as Sigil and Skullport, where such races can live in relative peace. of course, in both those instances, there is an all-powerful ruling party (like the Lady of Pain and the Skulls) that strictly enforces the laws with severe punishments. hope it helps. Use a tribe with many humanoïd lead by some priest of Meriadar. They are peaceful, they are industrious, they go school, but they are goblinoïds and gnolls. Your typical paladin as INT as dump stat, no? Hard for him to make the difference! You could also create a law-chaos conflict. Use a city lead by Helm-Siamorphe worshippers. Now there is followers of Selune or Sharess in the neighborhood, probably good lycanthropes, who are scaring the nobles... Substract a bit of intelligence and you have a good conflict, without any evil guy!
TheBlackBart 10-06-03, 05:50 PM	Use a tribe with many humanoïd lead by some priest of Meriadar. They are peaceful, they are industrious, they go school, but they are goblinoïds and gnolls. Your typical paladin as INT as dump stat, no? Hard for him to make the difference! Yes, but a paladin has detect evil, and anyway, if he would attact an "innocent" goblinoid or gnoll settlement, he would lose his paladin abilities. In my mind, it's best to keep paladins for adventures of good vs. evil rather than shades of grey.
Lashan 10-06-03, 07:04 PM	Yulash is in ruins since Zhentil Keep and Hillsar battled over it. Archendale did wipe out Ssrendale over petty issues. Zhentil Keep conquered Tehsendale for natural resources and trade issues. Cormyr did annex Tilverton without really asking the citizens there. Zhentil Keep and Mulmaster have been fighting for years. Zhentil Keep has tried numerous times to conquer Phlan and other Moonsea city-states. Chondath and about everyone else in the Vilhon Reach have fought numerous wars. Sembia fought the elves of Cormanthor many times. Harrowdale fought the elves of Cormanthor. There was another kingdome around Cormyr that Cormyr defeated in it's younger days. Chessenta and Chondath are always awash in civil war. Unther vs Mulhorand I'm sure I am forgetting much more.
Kuje31 10-06-03, 07:26 PM	Also add in Calimshan who has fought Amn and Tethyr on and off for centuries. Calimshan would love to take back thier lands that are now Tethyr and Amn.
avian tiefling 10-07-03, 07:06 PM	Speaking of Calimshan, you could have something with a Calimport guild war. That would also give the possibility of including lycanthropes (most likely wererats). THat also leaves room for "dungeon crawls" through the sewers. perhaps you could have the party be hired by one of several guilds, the choice of which might be based on the party's general alignment (ie, an evil party might be hired by a thieves guild to retrieve something from the sewers in exchange for some powerful item or large sum of gold, or a good party would take on the quest to aid what they think is a worthy cause.) i could go on and on making an entire campaign based on that idea. E-mail me if you want more info. aviantiefling@hotmail.com
avian tiefling 10-09-03, 09:03 PM	Originally posted by Lashan Sembia fought the elves of Cormanthor many times. Harrowdale fought the elves of Cormanthor. it seems that many races/organizations want all elves on the face of toril dead. particularly Luskan and just about everyone else in the northlands.
Sheriff Yoda 10-20-03, 07:37 PM	Another thing is Harrowdale replacing Scarsdale as THE port of call in the Dales. Surely the Scarsdalefolk aren't happy about that, and Scarsdale has a history of starting trouble.
Gadodel 10-21-03, 06:17 AM	I think that the plethora and myriad political paradigms makes the Realms a "war friendly" setting... "war friendly"? Did I just invent an oxymoron?
ruleslawyer 10-21-03, 10:55 AM	It is also worth noting that even if a more "black and white" characterization of political conflict were to be the case in the Realms, such a characterization would make more sense from a D&D perspective than would a "real-world" set of competitive/adverse political relations. Where alignment is a tangible force, it is going to have a strong effect on how governments function both domestically and as regards public policy. In addition, D&D morality tends to mimic modern humanist ethics and ideals rather than the sorts of premodern moralit(ies) which enshrined rampant mercantilism, fascism, racism, class divisions, and religious intolerance as necessary facets. Moreover, systems of resource allocation, spreading information, and facilitating political dialogue, as well as religious tolerance, in the Realms are much more akin to ours than to those of an age in which warfare might have been more common. All of the above mean that active diplomacy, subterfuge, and shared pursuit of political goals are more likely in FR than in real-world premodern societies. In fact, it strikes me as quite odd that other game worlds contain as much open warfare as they do. GH tends to use its "comic-book" type villains as an excuse to start open wars; the wars at issue inevitability involve Iuz, the Horned Society, the Pomarj, and the Bandit Kingdoms, all of which are much more "comic-book" evil than, say, Zhentil Keep, Mulmaster, Luskan, or Unther. PS is a weird example, since there ISN'T much warfare going on in the Outlands; in any case, PS tends to err on the wrong side regarding subjective morality, IMHO (there are too many celestials running around the setting who'd barely qualify as LN in my book, which seems inconsistent with the idea that celestials should be MORE "good" than even the saintliest mortal). In any case, heed Faraer. The Realms have lots of political conflicts, many of which don't have a clear good side. Lashan's attempted Dalelands conquest was stopped in part by Zhentil Keep and Hillsfar, both of whom did so for their political gain. Azoun IV may have been a just and righteous ruler, but it's clear that not all his predecessors were so. Sembia and Amn have a long history of meddling with smaller realms for mercantile gain, but aren't such bad places to live or thrive. Maalthiir is a scheming, grasping, racist powermonger who happens to serve a vital function opposing Zhentil Keep. The Lords of Waterdeep, otherwise reasonable and benevolent rulers, countenance the existence of Skullport below the city's streets. The Realms isn't so cut-and-dried.
Niftyone 10-21-03, 11:46 AM	Another perfect example is Amn almost invading Tethyr over the loss of two cities defecting over being cut out of trade with Maztica. Exactly, a war over the money. I'm pretty sure that Amn and Tethyr would be at war right now if it weren't for the whole ogre mage invasion that seems to be more pressing to Amn. But once (or if) that gets cleaned up, who knows what's next in that area. And who knows, Calimsham might swoop in and scoop both of them up if they wear eachother out too much.