A ruling class' reaction to assassination

[Crazy Author]

A character, whose actual specific goals I'm still exploring, definitely thinks he can do a better job of ruling than his parents, and so conspires to have them killed. So far, par story for the course, but I'm having trouble defining what he's hoping to have occur as a result; in particular, he very deliberately conspired to have his father poisoned in such a way that his death was slow and obviously the result of foul play from an interest with significant resources, since the poison couldn't be cured by some fairly powerful spellcasting.

So, my question: How do ruling classes tend to react to an assassination of their highest level of authority? What reactions are most likely, or surprising but exploitable if one has inside information ahead of time? I began with an attempt to research real-world responses to assassination, but all the results were leaning to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and J.F.K., and I began to develop (probably paranoid) concerns of being flagged in some database for my search patterns.

So, I query the minds of the playground: How is the entrenched and otherwise not currently disrupted nobility and government of an established city-state likely to react to an assassination of their highest leader, on either the strategic scale or the tactical?

[Thunderfist12]

Have him blame a rival nation, starting a catastrophic war just to keep his power. If, for example, it were an elf nation, perhaps the blame is placed on a neighboring orc nation. Especially if the poisoning was at a negotiating feast and all at the table were poisoned but the diplomat of said nation.

[SarcasticDom]

If its a feudal nation and his parents had vassals, some lords could make a grab for power themselves or try to break free and go independent, if they get enough support from other nobles.

IRL example: the War of the Roses has its roots in the death of King Edward III and the succession crisis it caused.

[JeenLeen]

I'm assuming magical resurrection of the king is also precluded, either since non-existent in the setting, the poison prevents it, or a resurrected person no longer counts for succession purposes (like in the Girl Genius webcomic).

In 'best case', probably the king dies slowly and the heir becomes the new king. Rumors fly about who did it, probably some blaming the heir and others various factions within and outside the nation, but all in all it causes a little political turmoil but little of consequence.

'Worst case', various factions make a grab for power, possibly while the king is ailing and possibly after his death, many blaming the heir for his demise (whether they believe he's the cause or just because that's a politically strong move). The nation splinters in warring tiny states and chaos ensues. Perhaps another nation invades seeing the chaos and weakness, but only after the nation is so splintered that they won't band together to fight off the foreigners.

Most likely is something like SarcasticDom says. Some lords try to strike off on their own (or just pay lip service, but stop paying taxes), but the majority follow the new heir. The amount may depend on how politically savvy the PC acts: can the heir successfully blame another nation or faction, and can they refute rumors they are the assassin?
---
Was the heir openly displeased with his parents? If yes, that would add more fuel to him plotting their demise. Also, how good was he at covering his tracks--can anything tie him to the poison or does anyone know about it?

Also, how well-liked were the current king and queen? If they were openly hated by the majority, the heir might be seen as a savior even if he is known as the cause. But probably the stigma of killing one's parents would still make it overall bad if he were found out as the cause.

[Crazy Author]

I'm assuming magical resurrection of the king is also precluded, either since non-existent in the setting, the poison prevents it, or a resurrected person no longer counts for succession purposes (like in the Girl Genius webcomic).

Resurrection won't even be attempted; the king is an open and staunch devotee of Asmodeus (pathfinder semi-acceptable deity style, rather than always-opposed 3.x archdevil style), so it's commonly accepted that it's a "done deal" he's in the lower hells upon death unless the clergy of Asmodeus step up to say otherwise and resurrect him.

The amount may depend on how politically savvy the PC acts: can the heir successfully blame another nation or faction, and can they refute rumors they are the assassin?

The heir is actually setting up to be a mixed-feelings BBEG way down the line, so he's an NPC. As far as politics go, he's been a very quick and thorough study of inter-personal relations and political maneuvering since nearly the cradle. Couple that with his free time outside of other pursuits being spent on advanced arcane theory, and he can pretty well refute anything through a variety of tactics.

Was the heir openly displeased with his parents? If yes, that would add more fuel to him plotting their demise. Also, how good was he at covering his tracks--can anything tie him to the poison or does anyone know about it?

The heir is pretty effectively psychopathic. Disagreements with his parents were always held in a calm, reasoned manner, and he never reacts immediately on pure emotion. He's been very effectively presenting one face of a somewhat dispassionate but reasoning ruler-to-be, with the overall success of his future city-state at heart, while hiding his strong sadist impulses from all but two of his closest confidantes. (Even those two are unaware of his desire to speed up the rate of succession.)

As far as links between him and the poison/poisoning: he was considering who to use as a cats-paw and how exactly to do the deed when an interested party of drow who would rather see a chaotic-aligned king than a lawful- one on the throne in the area contacted him. They provided the poison and were responsible for the delivery, through a still-further-removed plot of theirs, and have otherwise had no direct contact with him beyond the initial meeting wherein cooperation was agreed upon.

Also, how well-liked were the current king and queen? If they were openly hated by the majority, the heir might be seen as a savior even if he is known as the cause. But probably the stigma of killing one's parents would still make it overall bad if he were found out as the cause.

The king was loved or tolerated by those who had no problem staying within the strict codes of the law in the area, and showing "proper" obeisance to anyone in society who were their "betters"; they saw booming profits and a comparably easy life in comparison to the maverick personalities and those who had issues bending the knee under any circumstances, let alone many circumstances. Those who disliked him or didn't respect him out of favor, did show respect out of fear. He and the queen came to the throne initially mostly via displays of personal power, ousting the previous corrupt ruler. (They're the two living members of a previous adventuring party) He had not so much a tendency as a guaranteed response of personally executing those he viewed as unable to stick to his Asmodeus-inspired strict vision of the proper hierarchy of superiors/inferiors, specifically if they directly challenged his authority.

The queen (who the heir is going to organize a "disappearance" for), is more complex. She is of fey descent, one generation removed, and carries a confusing array of powerful and subtle charm-type abilities. No one who has had cause to meet her is anything less than indifferent toward her, though they find their feelings confused. She is not shy at all about using her abilities to foster relations, more than once having turned a potentially hostile interaction with the king into a successful trade or diplomacy agreement within minutes of entering the room. Many adore her (either on their own, or not so much), some are merely amicable/indifferent toward her in general, and none can seem to bring themselves to outright dislike her, though they may feel uneasy toward her presence in general.

[Mechalich]

As far as links between him and the poison/poisoning: he was considering who to use as a cats-paw and how exactly to do the deed when an interested party of drow who would rather see a chaotic-aligned king than a lawful- one on the throne in the area contacted him. They provided the poison and were responsible for the delivery, through a still-further-removed plot of theirs, and have otherwise had no direct contact with him beyond the initial meeting wherein cooperation was agreed upon.

This, as described, means that the King was assassinated by drow and the son simply knew about it and didn't do anything and isn't going to take much in the way of retaliatory action if/when it should come to light that the drow are responsible.

So the reaction is going to depend upon how common assassination of high-level figures is in this society - which if there's an openly operating clergy of Asmodeus and the King was openly a follower of Asmodeus is almost certainly in the 'leading cause of death' category. A familiar comparison would be the later Roman Empire, where assassination was quite common and institutions moved on. As long as the heir isn't implicated somehow - and there's no reason he should be in this situation - then he should be fine. However, the reign of an Asmodeus-worshipping despot who murdered his way in instituting a highly regimented tyranny is going to be highly resistant to any major changes to the status quo and any attempt to alter the state significantly, especially in a fashion that threatens the entrenched power of the elite, would set off one hell (in this case potentially literally) of a power struggle. A similar comparison might be the dynastic turnover in autocratic Communist states like the former USSR or North Korea.

[JeenLeen]

Since the king became king by ousting the former leader, and mainly due to personal displays of power, I reckon the heir would need to solidify his role as the new king by also displaying power.

That is, the nobles aren't going to accept him by birthright, since birthright means little one generation away from the guy who killed the last king. However, if he's positioned himself politically and is powerful (both seem to be the case, from what you said), I can see him getting the support of most nobles and thus either squashing those who oppose him or getting them to accept his rule (lest they be squashed.)
If the heir is opposed to Asmodeus (or just the strict Lawful rule), he might do well to not show that too openly at first, lest the clergy oppose him. Solidify his rule with the nobles, then work on the clergy and law changes.

So, it seems like a safe plan. Maybe some uprisings or plots to have the heir assassinated, but you can easily justify that he finds out about them and resolves them. Maybe a public execution or two to show that he isn't playing when folk try to off him.


EDIT: it's a very different scenario, but there's some talk of succession rules in another thread: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...ssion-question You might find it interesting. I think it's probably especially non-applicable since the succession laws in effect likely have little tradition/weight, as this 'dynasty' was just established by the heir's father.

[Vogie]

Another thing to be aware of is the availability of assassination to the world. If you have a world that has a, for example, Assassin's Guild (a la Discworld or Ravnica), or a House of Black & White (a la Game of Thrones), such an assassination of a public and high-ranking figure may be simply less common & expensive, rather than shocking and appalling.

[Crazy Author]

However, the reign of an Asmodeus-worshipping despot who murdered his way in instituting a highly regimented tyranny is going to be highly resistant to any major changes to the status quo and any attempt to alter the state significantly, especially in a fashion that threatens the entrenched power of the elite, would set off one hell (in this case potentially literally) of a power struggle.

Since the king became king by ousting the former leader, and mainly due to personal displays of power, I reckon the heir would need to solidify his role as the new king by also displaying power.

That is, the nobles aren't going to accept him by birthright, since birthright means little one generation away from the guy who killed the last king. However, if he's positioned himself politically and is powerful (both seem to be the case, from what you said), I can see him getting the support of most nobles and thus either squashing those who oppose him or getting them to accept his rule (lest they be squashed.)
If the heir is opposed to Asmodeus (or just the strict Lawful rule), he might do well to not show that too openly at first, lest the clergy oppose him. Solidify his rule with the nobles, then work on the clergy and law changes.

Oh, you. What kind of scheming future BBEG wouldn't have plans for those plans?

Thank you for pointing it out, nonetheless.

Another thing to be aware of is the availability of assassination to the world. If you have a world that has a, for example, Assassin's Guild (a la Discworld or Ravnica), or a House of Black & White (a la Game of Thrones), such an assassination of a public and high-ranking figure may be simply less common & expensive, rather than shocking and appalling.

I have actually shamelessly transplanted the Red Mantis from Pathfinder (judge if you must, but sometimes I get lazy while writing things up), including their restriction of not directly assassinating legitimately ruling monarchs. What "legitimately" consists of has always been left a bit vague in anything I can find; isn't that convenient for me, too? Those in the know know how to contact them as well, and so will have acquired one way or another the information that the poison likely responsible is not something the organization ever uses anyway. It requires far too much expenditure of resources and expertise to create.

Also, this particular society at least mostly keeps their violence to the political maneuvering and "stab you in the face" varieties, for the generally-agreed-upon sake of everyone's sanity on both sides of the law. So, more toward toward "shocking and appalling."

Thank you all, I've gotten some healthy creative juices flowing and some solid lines of approach from all this. I'm not going to declare closed or finished here by any means, I love the input, just wanted to say thank you to each of you who've responded so far.

[King of Nowhere]

Keep in mind that in this world there are divination spells, so it would be difficult to hide one's responsibility. unless you know of some reasons why they would not point to the heir.

If the "divinations" issue is covered, I'd say that the plan is reasonable as long as the heir can believably blame someone else. If an external power assassinates the king, the legitimate heir - one who is seen as intelligent and reasonablle - should have enough support.

[Crazy Author]

Keep in mind that in this world there are divination spells, so it would be difficult to hide one's responsibility. unless you know of some reasons why they would not point to the heir.

If the "divinations" issue is covered, I'd say that the plan is reasonable as long as the heir can believably blame someone else. If an external power assassinates the king, the legitimate heir - one who is seen as intelligent and reasonablle - should have enough support.

I will admit that while planning and plotting I often (read:always ) forget the fact that players can simply ask someone else when there's something they don't know. It's such a failing of mine I've actually considered an alteration to divinations in general in my setting, but putting that up here for consideration takes this off-topic I think.

In this particular instance, the forces of Asmodeus have already begun moving their own pieces in response. The forces in question would prefer their own subtle plans for an appropriate response unfold as they choose, so they might choose to block any other faiths' attempts at divine oversight of the situation, and refuse to provide any to their own clergy.

Edit for additional comment:

I just re-read the posting topics appropriate for this section and realized this might have been more appropriate in roleplaying general, as "doesn't go here" includes:

"Advice on adventures, encounters, plotlines, or DMing issues: These belong in Roleplaying General."

Whoops.

[King of Nowhere]

I will admit that while planning and plotting I often (read:always ) forget the fact that players can simply ask someone else when there's something they don't know. It's such a failing of mine I've actually considered an alteration to divinations in general in my setting, but putting that up here for consideration takes this off-topic I think.

In this particular instance, the forces of Asmodeus have already begun moving their own pieces in response. The forces in question would prefer their own subtle plans for an appropriate response unfold as they choose, so they might choose to block any other faiths' attempts at divine oversight of the situation, and refuse to provide any to their own clergy.

Edit for additional comment:

I just re-read the posting topics appropriate for this section and realized this might have been more appropriate in roleplaying general, as "doesn't go here" includes:

"Advice on adventures, encounters, plotlines, or DMing issues: These belong in Roleplaying General."

Whoops.

if it can help, I handwave most divinations, but I have some general guidelines for doing underhanded stuff without being detected:

1) act through intermediaries. the most common way is to go in a slum disguised and with written instructions, and hire someone to give the instructions and payment to someone else. Whoever does the job does not know who hired him, only that a random poor guy was hired to give him a letter of instructions and payment. even the messenger cannot identify you for all the mind readings of the world. If you want to be extra careful you may also want to pay somebody to rewrite the letter of instructions.

2) act through unimportant people. there are all kinds of gods and planar powers keeping an eye on the world, but they can't look everywhere. while they may look at what the king or high priests are doing, they certainly are not looking at what random poor guy living in a slum is doing. Therefore, even if you contact a deity to ask informations, the deity does not know who paid the guy to give the instructions, because the guy wasn't important enough to keep tabs on (it's a bit of houseruling on the "contact other planes" spell, as the spell only states that planar powers have a random chance to know, while I houserule that they would have no reason to be looking at a specific place and know irrelevant stuff).

Now, I am sure that people who knows how divinations actually work may be able to find ways around that, but it at least covers all the obvious paths, and in my campaign world that is enough to prevent divinations to straight out find you. At least until you do some detective work and come up with more clues.
Of course, when you have a small list of suspects, the obvious answer is to cast zone of truth/detect lies (multiple times, so that you can be reasonably certain they would tank their saves at least once) on all of them, but it is regarded as something of a privacy infringement, and therefore not done without at least some proof of culpability.

So, that could be your explanation for why divinations do not find the culprit. And since this comment is about how you build a world to ensure that you can throw investigation plots at your players withoutb them solving everything with one spell, it can still fit in worldbuilding.