Mercenary campaign setting construction

[whisperwind1]

Yesterday I posted a thread on the 3.5 subforum about this issue, and got some pretty awesome responses, but I didn't realize that Worldbuilding had its own subforum. So i'm just reposting some of what I need help with, for the sake of getting the worldbuilders' advice.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...enary-campaign

Its easy enough to say the setting is a fractured collection of nations (a former empire perhaps) or even a single nation in civil war, but how do I capture that sort of factionalism that makes mercenary stories identifiable? I mean how do I make these factions/countries equally appealing to work for, because they're not all going to be morally grey "who cares I just take their coin and don't ask questions" types? If you think about it, every side has an ideology and beliefs that puts them in the right or vilifies a certain rival or enemy (it doesn't flatter them at least). So how do I make the "Evil Empire" or "Barbarian Horde" a no-less legitimate employer for mercenary PCs than the "Holy Kingdom of X"?

Should there be a framework organization? I mean should there be like a mercenary liaisons outfit that gets folks contracts (like an adventurer's guild for sellswords), or is it more sensible to have them just hang out at a tavern and have the emissaries for various employers show up and announce contracts? I'm unclear on how this worked historically, so I was hoping to get something believable (or at least, that plausibly explains why contracts for every major faction find their way to the PCs' ears.)

[Yora]

I think it depends on what type of society you're imagining for your campaign. Mercenaries in 200 BC would be quite different from mercenaries in 1800 AD, especially when it comes to the kind of warfare, conflicting interests of the groups, and general morals of the society.

What kind of setting do you have in mind?

[whisperwind1]

I think it depends on what type of society you're imagining for your campaign. Mercenaries in 200 BC would be quite different from mercenaries in 1800 AD, especially when it comes to the kind of warfare, conflicting interests of the groups, and general morals of the society.

What kind of setting do you have in mind?

Well I figure its a more or less traditional medieval high fantasy setting, though i'm leaning towards a more low-magic world (in the sense that combat wizards exist, but the magic itself is less potently destructive (so probably going to introduce a spell-level cap or use True20)). I'm taking a bit from JRPGs and having anachronistic armor/weapons depending on the nation (barbarians with greataxes versus guys with pikes and square formations), but the technology level is probably early to mid renaissance. Firearms are a thing, but the flintlock, long reload types, and cannons are still in their infancy (still used to complement combat mages). Some nations might use monstrous creatures as war-engines, but battles are still fought with massed infantry, archers and cavalry support.

I'm picturing a politically unstable setting (possibly a former empire or a land with a recently broken hegemony by a particular nation), where there are defined identities for each belligerent side. Its the kind of place where skirmishes and larger engagements are a fairly regular occurrence, and there's deadlocks throughout the land because every side has their own specific advantages (not sure which yet). The idea is that mercenaries such as the PCs are in high demand because of relatively low morale in state troops (because of the stalemates) and a need to have an edge over the competition. I see the setting as having many mercenary companies, who can take contracts more or less freely. I'm just not sure what sort of framework would make such a widespread mercenary community plausible.

[Yora]

Something like the Holy Roman Empire (German Empire) might be a start. Theoretically it is one big Empire, but in practice it's more like several dozen independent countries of various sizes, with three or four pretty big ones, and lots of smaller ones, which constantly have shifting alliances. However, they also know that each of these small countries would not stand any chance if one of the neighboring empire would try to snatch two or three of them for itself, so even lords who had been at war just three or four years ago would unite to repell the foreign invaders. And then go straight back to trying to plot against each other. The three or four big kings and grand dukes would be fighting and plotting about which one of them is going to be the Emperor, while the smaller dukes and margraves are opportunistically trying to get an advantage over their rival neighbors in the situation.

Another interesting idea might be the Northern Kingdoms from the Witcher books. On the one side there are four mid-size Kingdoms that all hate each other (and a handful of free city states) and are all a bit backwards in culture, science, and society; and on the other side there is one big Empire that is more modern and doesn't make any secret that it wants to take over all the kingdoms and free cities and the kings are all more than a bit freaked out what they are going to do against it. Because what good is it to keep out the Empire when your rivals become more powerful then you?

A third idea would be to use the political situation (and nothing else) from the Sengoku Period of Japan. Again, like Germany, it's nominally a single big empire, but all the local lords are very independent. In Japan the Emperor is not chosen as in Germany, and the title always stays with the same imperial family, supposedly for thousands of years. However, the power of the Emperor is rather limited and the person who really runs the Empire is his prime minister (the Shogun). For several generations the Empire was so completely fractured that neither the Emperor nor the Prime Minister had anything to say and all the local lords did simply what they wanted to, but eventually some of them got the idea that they are going to conquer everyone else and then the Emperor would have no other choice to give them the title of prime minister.
The most popular time of that period is at the very end, when there were really only two warlords left and all the other lords were serving either one or the other. Eventually one of them won and that would have been the end of it, but he also died and chose one of his generals as his successor. But his successor was not a noble but a commoner, and the other generals were not really happy about it. Then he also died while his son was only 4 years old, and appointed one of the generals to rule the Empire until his son was old enough to take the power. Of course, as soon as he was dead the other generals immediately started to fight each other as none of them intended to let the child of a commoner become prime minister (the emperor didn't really have a say in this). One of the generals won and defeated all the other generals and became prime minister himself. But again, this wasn't the end of it and some 20 years later some of his rivals started another revolution to put the now grown up son on the prime minister seat (and then of course not letting him rule but controling him to their will). Then that revolution was also crushed and the prime minister also killed the son and his entire family so he wouldn't have to deal with anything like this again. And then it was finally over and there were no more revolutions. Which is why that General is the biggest badass in Japanese history.
Well, at least for the next 250 years or so when the families that had lost the first civil war thought it would be a good idea to give another try at what their ancestors had failed to do. Inbetween you also got the funny situation where the Emperor starts a rebellion against his prime mininster. And of course, the entire time people are switching sides as they see who is currently winning.
This period is actually where the samurai come from. Before the civil war there were the old aristocrats with their personal lands, but when the Empire fell appart they needed lots of soldiers to fight their rivals and turned to mercenaries. These mercenaries quickly became extremely powerful and eventually realized that they shouldn't really be fighting for some noblemen, but could actually try to take over the country themselves. There was some major reorganization of the Empire later on and while the old aristocrats still existed, the former mercenaries were the ones that really ran and controlled the country from that point on.

[whisperwind1]

This period is actually where the samurai come from. Before the civil war there were the old aristocrats with their personal lands, but when the Empire fell appart they needed lots of soldiers to fight their rivals and turned to mercenaries. These mercenaries quickly became extremely powerful and eventually realized that they shouldn't really be fighting for some noblemen, but could actually try to take over the country themselves. There was some major reorganization of the Empire later on and while the old aristocrats still existed, the former mercenaries were the ones that really ran and controlled the country from that point on.

Speaking as someone who loves Samurai Warriors and Nobunaga's Ambition, I wholeheartedly agree that the Sengoku Period is super awesome (Mitsunari had no idea what he was doing, all hail Ieyasu!). The idea of super-imposing the political situation onto a fantasy world is interesting, i'll admit, but i've already used it in another setting (its the dwarven nation in that setting).

I do like the idea of the Holy Roman Empire Though, but I might put a fantasy spin on it, like for example it was a Lawful Good kingdom with the patronage of an archangel or something, that dominated its neighbours and imposed a confederation or something. They then lose the favor of their divine patron, who bails, and everyone else takes it as license to rise up and stake their own claims to continental dominance.

Also i'm looking for a way to make each nation appealing for mercenaries. Like I want them to be more or less fantasy staples (the oppressive empire, a monstrous horde etc...) but that are still eager to get mercenaries on their payroll to help them fight their wars. Like how do I make even a theoretically chaotic evil nation every bit as valid to work for as a lawful good one? Should i just wave alignment altogether?

[TheYell]

One way it happens is, the Evil Empire and the Holy Empire of X are fighting in another area, where nobody is strong enough, and there is no strong native government. So you move through the map trying to compel surrenders of local towns and castles so you can get paid to move deeper. And they want you to attack other towns and castles, and then that castle may surrender to prevent you taking anything from it or destroying it, so you have an angry local ally who will try to invite the other side to attack you.

So maybe back home the Evil Empire burns rebels to the ground, but here, they can't afford to besiege a castle for six months while the Holy Empire can attack them. And maybe the Holy Empire doesn't lie, except it refuses to burn Shelbyville after it surrenders even though it promised to support Springfield in their war. They both end up hiring mercenaries to attack each other or dominate areas off to the side. Maybe the Empire is going to try a siege and it needs a diversion in front of the enemy. Or maybe raiders out of Shelbyville are stealing food even though it surrendered, and somebody has to go camp out there and make them behave.

[weaseldust]

Renaissance Italy sounds like a possible source of inspiration too. Small, squabbling nations, shifting alliances and famous mercenaries.

How to make an evil paymaster as attractive as a good one? Well, they could just pay more. Or, fighting for them might help accomplish other goals (e.g. sack a particular city to steal a magic artifact). It might be the PCs are stranded on another continent and the evil nation is the only one with ocean-going boats. It might be they are 1000 miles from home and need to fight their way back, so the morals of their allies on the way don't matter so much. The evil nation could be a mostly lawful good organisation with the occasional evil leader, so your PCs could at least be sympathetic to that side of the conflict. Maybe they have their own, non-evil candidate for the throne, but they need to win the war before they launch a coup.

There could be a personal rival in the good nation who the PCs want to be defeated in battle by the evil nation, or an evil general in the good nation who could take over if not brought down. The PCs could be falsely accused of treason in a good nation and only be able to find work with the evil one. The PCs could aim to steal technology from the evil nation by working in its armies. The PCs could work for a non-evil mad wizard who wants to test his inventions in battle but can only find patronage with the evil nation. The evil nation could be fighting an even more evil one. The PCs might need to plan and construct defenses against the more evil invader, but the local non-evil barbarians refuse to leave the land where the forts/wall/magic barrier has to go and have to be cleared out.

You could also make sure the evil nation wasn't looking to gain a great deal from the campaign or wasn't threatening innocent lives. It could just be a glorified cattle raid, or an attempt to destroy a super-weapon threatening the evil nation, or to rescue a captured general. As opposed to burning down villages or taking the capital of the good nation and overthrowing its government.

[whisperwind1]

Hi guys, just an update on the progress of my setting.

I've decided that the continent hosts 13 nations, each very unique in their cultures and identities (I used the Kobold Guide to Worldbuilding's advice on how to construct nations). As for the political situation, i've moved past the more simplistic "stereotyped fantasy nations fight each other" to " Powerful nation that achieved primacy through seizure of the continent's historic and religious capital goes belly up. Successor state has to fight a schism state, and everyone else jumps on the opportunity to become the new top dog."

A bit of historical context. The continent's nations don't like empires and imperialistic expansionism. This is because in antiquity, the continent was ruled by an empire, that while civilizing the various populations, was oppressive and racist towards non-humans. They were defeated, but centuries later, their descendants returned, having formed a new state on the eastern continent. The resulting war and devastation resulted in their defeat yet again, but the people of the continent have been distrustful of large empires ever since.

So the current war is less about creating a unified continental power, and more about airing out past grievances between the various nations. That said, every ruler sees the chaos and wants to restore some amount of order, which under the circumstances, might only be achieved by beating everyone else down and getting them to talk. Like I said, there's history and individual visions enough that diplomacy is not feasible right now.

The tensions come primarily from territorial, ideological and religious differences. An example: There are two major religions on the Continent, and they don't get along, despite existing side-by-side in most of the nations. The first is a Gaia-style All-Mother, who is worshipped as several separate aspects (each considered a goddess in their own right by the faithful), that vary from nation to nation. The second is a spiritual, cyclical philosophy that believes that all things are eternal, and that nothing is lost, only transformed. The religion is benign, but does not recognize any other faith, and considers them all to be false. Their missionaries are active, and this has caused strife between them and the Church of the All-Mother, who has (unofficially or otherwise) favored actions that discriminate or outright attack worshipers.

There's also internal strife, because the fallen super-nation worships the All-Mother, but seized and sacked the faith's holiest city during the wars that created it (the reasons were not so black and white, and in many respects, they had no choice). Several other nations hold a grudge over this, and are attempting to liberate this religious capitol.

I haven't finished creating all the nations yet (so far i'm at 5 out of 13), and I haven't yet figured out how mercenaries have evolved on the continent as a concept or institution (if at all). If you guys have any input or questions, i'd love to hear them!