Why would the local aristrocacy go out adventuring?

[heavyfuel]

I've had this idea in my mind for a while. The details haven't been worked out yet, but the gist of it is that the players (legendary heroes according to the backstories they will create) have gotten their hands in a piece of land and declared themselves lords of the local area.

Now, having players sit around in a castle/keep doing lordish stuff is boring. They are heroes for god's sake! So I want something to motivate them going out and adventuring. But what? What would be enough of an inciting incident to make newly established lords go out and explore dungeons and risk their lives as good old adventurers? Instead of sending out knights or whatever to deal with the problems

I suppose I could link magic items with adventuring (aka, no magic mart), but still. Adventuring just to get better gear is not something I think it would be fun. At all.

This is a brainstorming activity, and everything is fair game. Foreing threats, domestic threats, doomsday, whatever. The only thing I don't want to hear is "they wouldn't lol your idea sucks". I really want to make this work.

For what it's worth, the system is 3.PF, but I'm looking for general advice here.

Thanks!

TLDR: What would be enough of an inciting incident to make newly established lords go out and explore dungeons and risk their lives as good old adventurers? Instead of sending out knights or whatever to deal with the problems

[LoneStarNorth]

You may not need a reason. Maybe they go adventuring because that's what they're naturally inclined to do? They must've become adventurers in the first place for SOME reason. And the thrill-seeking noble is a classic adventurer background.

But if you want a solid reason, maybe the older noble families resent this new blood and are trying to take them down, not in battle but economically. All goods originating from outside the players' domain is marked up four or five hundred percent. The characters have to go adventuring because that's how you get giant piles of money and keep their subjects from starving.

[malachi]

Bored nobles go hunting for foxes and boars and the like for fun and to show off trophies.
Bored, physically/magically powerful nobles go hunting dragons and hags for fun and to show off trophies.

Beyond that, it's not just the vague idea of 'adventuring', but there's a particular thing that's happening that necessitates that the group of physically/magically powerful people go and deal with it, despite the fact that they are nobles, or perhaps the threat concerns them because they're landowners.

Example threats:
* Their land (and strangely, only their land) is withering and dying. Is this caused by rival nobles who are upset at these upstarts, or is it caused by something from their past?
* The land they were given is, oddly enough, the western-most portion of the kingdom, and the only territory directly adjacent to the uncivilized lands of some group of warring tribes. Also, strangely enough, the warring tribes have recently united under a single ruler. And are moving east. Huh, maybe these landowners need to deal with this threat before it destroys their new-found property.
* The territory, unbeknownst to these intrepid heroes of the past, is cursed such that any who are given possession of the land will go mad and kill themselves / each other within a fortnight.
* While playing the game of economics, the nobles notice that all of their trading caravans begin turning up empty without the drivers or guards ever realizing they were being robbed.
* They start trying to 'annex' neighboring territory.

[Lord Torath]

Threats to their new lands. This could be foreign (invading neighbors), domestic (king started mumbling about how you turned into a rat and bit him in a dream), or neutral (a horde of purple worms is plaguing the area).

People of their lands are disappearing mysteriously. These are my people! No one disappears them but me!

Livestock are starting to act possessed. Or the baby goats have been killed and raised as zombies.

Times are hard, and your coffers are running low. Raiding a dungeon or slaying a dragon could provide funds for your new pet project (dredging the port to allow larger boats to dock, building a new crematorium to thwart the local necromancers, adding a new wing to your castle for a larger magical library/laboratory, you get the idea).

Your Significant Other has been poisoned, and the only antidote is a magical artifact bound to the crown of a nearby kingdom that's been lost for 500 years (the crown, not the kingdom - although, keep your options open).

Gold (or iron, copper, adamantium, or baking soda) has been found nearby. You need to annex the land where it's been found, drive out the hazardous fauna, and establish a mine. Then kill anything that comes out as a result of "delving too deep".

Your Sovereign Ruler has need of a particular Mik Gu Fan, and offers rewards (trained Griffon cavalry?) to the group that gets it for him.

You need to determine whether any of the griffon cavalry you've been gifted are actually turncoats/spies intended to report any actions you might take to turn on your suzerian.

You need to overthrow the ruler of a very near land because he included spies in his gift of Griffon Cavalry...

Prophecy: your most learned advisor tells you that the upcoming solar eclipse/planetary conjunction means that the demon army that's been trapped in the magic prison near your lands will be released unless the proper ritual is performed at its gate. Unfortunately, rivals or enemies want it opened...

That's all for now. More later.

[jayem]

I don't think it's relevant here, but you could have 2nd son issues, he won't inherit but has some support to get create his own independence somewhere else...

Odysseus left having made a mutual defence pace before hand, and is called up by a press gang.

Then you have the medieval lords and kings, some of them went across a continent. You have an array of religious and and personal reasons inter-playing, it might be worth having a look and seeing if any stories are adaptable.

On a smaller scale you have the border raiders, it might be worth looking at the Douglas family?

[Max_Killjoy]

It's their role in the quasi-feudal social contract, and if they don't keep the monsters at bay, the peasants and the yeomen will get restless.

[heavyfuel]

Loving a lot of the suggestions so far. Keep them coming!

Also, I've eddited the OP.

Which threats would require direct intervention from the Lords, rather than generic threats to the kingdom, which could be solved by having knights and an army?

Some (most?) of the suggestions can be already be included in this category, but just something to keep in mind.

[Anymage]

Now, having players sit around in a castle/keep doing lordish stuff is boring. They are heroes for god's sake! So I want something to motivate them going out and adventuring. But what? What would be enough of an inciting incident to make newly established lords go out and explore dungeons and risk their lives as good old adventurers? Instead of sending out knights or whatever to deal with the problems

Most of the time, this is good enough. The PCs have a nice place to spend their downtime. Maybe you can ask a bit about what they want to do with their time at the end of an adventure. Let them build stuff up, so that they have a reason to feel ownership over this corner of the world.

It's just that sometimes, big threats rear their heads and underlings just aren't equipped to handle it. An ally's domain is threatened by giants, a rival lord makes some deals with demons in order to beef up his army, or a dragon starts demanding tribute. There's lots of downtime in between, but downtime is easy to skip over. When one of these big events does happen, someone has to take care of it. As badass adventurers, the PCs are the someones most equipped to do something.

Edit to add: What level are your PCs? Character level vs. the level of their underlings matters a lot here, but the upshot should be that they only deal with small local threats in the most abstract way, by sending knights to take care of it.

Think about things that affect a region at least, or things with high CR creatures involved. Religious issues (which may or may not involve actual outsiders affiliated with the relevant gods), raising armies (ideally of some unsavory type, be it fiendish, undead, or whatever nasty mook race is applicable), natural disasters, or just really big monsters shaking things up with their very presence.

[jjordan]

TLDR: What would be enough of an inciting incident to make newly established lords go out and explore dungeons and risk their lives as good old adventurers? Instead of sending out knights or whatever to deal with the problems

Ideology? In the minds of their culture their right to rule is tied to a willingness/ability to personally defend the land. This could be custom or legal writ or both.

Personal vows that require them to face the same dangers as those they lead?

A lack of willing resources? Are the locals that should be dealing with this unwilling to go and ordering them to do so would trigger a civil war? Are the locals incapable of dealing with this? Incompetent? Sick with the plague? Away defending the kingdom elsewhere?

Is the nature of the threat one that demands a specialized response? Sir Rodney and his followers are dab hands at fighting back orcish bands but utter rot when it comes to going down a mine after a bunch of goblins? The return of the Black Hand can only mean someone has unearthed the cursed gauntlet from where the adventurers hid it years ago?

[King of Nowhere]

Bored nobles go hunting for foxes and boars and the like for fun and to show off trophies.
Bored, physically/magically powerful nobles go hunting dragons and hags for fun and to show off trophies.

I'd like to point out there's also a posturing reason behind this. by showing off your strenght you can get better trade deals: "look how strong I am, I killed a dragon. I certainly could lead an army to conquer your land, if we can't reach a satisfying agreement"
Or "look how rich I am, that I am able to afford all that kind of stuff. you can lend me money at low interest, my solvibility is not a problem"

It's their role in the quasi-feudal social contract, and if they don't keep the monsters at bay, the peasants and the yeomen will get restless.

that too. many minor noble families started from a commoner who distinguished him/herself in the military. and the feudal social contract was in the beginning a bit less exploitative than normally assumed and was actually based on the lord protecting the people (which in a violent world like middle age europe was no small thing) in exchange for all the taxes he'd get. An besides providing men, a lord was expected to personally lead the charge against the enemy.
in a fantasy setting, this protection extends to monsters and stuff. in fact, noble families would be most likely to pick up adventuring.

Generally, everything pertaining defending the land is the responsibility of the lord, and if the lord regularly askk someone else to do it, the people (and the king) will start wondering if maybe they should cut the middleman and make lord that someone else.

bandits, monsters, haunted places, invading foreign powers, scheming rival nobles, assassins. all those can be used as plot hooks.

[redwizard007]

Why not use knights? That has always been a valid question with D&D. Well, since 3rd edition anyways. Generally the answer boils down to skill set. Knights can kill stuff and hob knob with the gentry, but they rarely have access to magic and aren't known as skill monkeys. A "traditional" party of adventurers can overcome obstacles that would leave a lone knight scratching his bald spot.(On his head. Get your mind out of the gutter.)

It may be better to think of the martial characters in your group as the knights and the other characters as their retinue. I'm not saying to set up a power dynamic, just to view them that way yourself to get in the right headspace. A nobleman was typically a knight, but unless he was near penniless he would always have his retinue of servants. A wealthy or powerful noble may have a squire or two, a herald, historian, priest, a handful of entertainers... The lonely knight on a quest by himself would not have been a landowner. Probably not even a real knight. So when you want something "that wouldn't be solved by the local knights," I think you mean, "why the PCs specifically?"


The king/duke/overlord that the PCs nominally owe service to needs them to __insert_adventure_hook_here.

Take any reasonable adventure and remove the quest giver. Instead of Baron Somebody posting an ad for adventures, the townspeople begin complaining about _____. Why hire adventureres when you can do the work yourself?

[LordEntrails]

Motivation for the characters to adventure is a responsibility that the players to figure out.

[AMFV]

Presumably because if the lower classes got all that experience and magical items they would usurp them and become the aristocracy.

[Lord Raziere]

What would be enough of an inciting incident to make newly established lords go out and explore dungeons and risk their lives as good old adventurers? Instead of sending out knights or whatever to deal with the problems

Boredom IS the reason.

They're nobles. they got no challenge, no excitement, nothing happening inside of a keep or palace, when your surrounded by all the finery and jewels and good food it all gets samey after a while, and at some point managing the finances and your household gets finished for a while, counting the taxes only takes up so much of your time, I mean one could try artistic pursuits like painting or reading all those books that commoners can't, or learning an instrument, but not everyone is interested in that, sure there is socializing with other nobles and such, but thats more for politics and marriage stuff which are basically the same thing and you need to put on your composed nobility face and lock away your emotions for that, which can get tiring you know?

that and your like, apart of the warrior class of people, even if your not a knight you still have to fight in some way, the concept that aristocracy were above fighting didn't come about until like during victorian times. and you can only get so much experience from just sparring in the courtyard.

eventually a noble has to go out and see the world they live in. its not as if the peasantry will stop working without you around, you can leave them to farm while you go off do thing (I mean heck, the peasantry for some parts of the year are pretty bored as well, since due to seasonal nature of farming, there are long stretches of time where they practice secondary professions as a hobby aside from farming.) the boredom of such life is to the point where people welcomed war as an exciting change of pace.

so yeah, nobles going out on adventures to kill things far away from the place they rule out of boredom is entirely plausible, because they actually did do that and dragged the commoners into it, who were okay with it because hey, they don't have anything to do until fall.

[Keltest]

Why not use knights? That has always been a valid question with D&D. Well, since 3rd edition anyways. Generally the answer boils down to skill set. Knights can kill stuff and hob knob with the gentry, but they rarely have access to magic and aren't known as skill monkeys. A "traditional" party of adventurers can overcome obstacles that would leave a lone knight scratching his bald spot.(On his head. Get your mind out of the gutter.)

It may be better to think of the martial characters in your group as the knights and the other characters as their retinue. I'm not saying to set up a power dynamic, just to view them that way yourself to get in the right headspace. A nobleman was typically a knight, but unless he was near penniless he would always have his retinue of servants. A wealthy or powerful noble may have a squire or two, a herald, historian, priest, a handful of entertainers... The lonely knight on a quest by himself would not have been a landowner. Probably not even a real knight. So when you want something "that wouldn't be solved by the local knights," I think you mean, "why the PCs specifically?"


The king/duke/overlord that the PCs nominally owe service to needs them to __insert_adventure_hook_here.

Take any reasonable adventure and remove the quest giver. Instead of Baron Somebody posting an ad for adventures, the townspeople begin complaining about _____. Why hire adventureres when you can do the work yourself?

I should also point out that depending on their rank and skill set, the aristocracy might well be knights themselves. It looks good on a resume and teaches legitimately useful skills for the battlefield command aspect of their responsibilities. And if not a literal knighthood, then it may be a similar rank from a class appropriate equivalent organization.

[Particle_Man]

1) To impress a woman (adjust genders and orientations as appropriate).

2) To settle a bet as to who is bravest.

3) (good alignment only) To protect innocent people from monsters.

[Max_Killjoy]

For the same reasons real nobles went on hunts (toiched on a bit); because it proves their bravery, strengthens their social bonds and organization, and enures them to the bloodiness of war.

[Kaptin Keen]

Persistent rumors that succesfully facing adversity will eventually make you powerful beyond your wildest dreams. Rich too. Honestly, it should take only so long for people to figure out that all the notable people everywhere have killed their way to succes.

Propably too meta-gamey.

Love of their nation, then? Something treatens their home, and they take a personal hand in fixing that right the frag up.

[Kyberwulf]

Whatever the reason, make sure they have capable people like Ned Stark Zazu, and Alfred the butler to take care of things while there gone. Also don't have to many plot heavy game of thrones back stabbery things going on at home base. People are easier to entice into traveling when they are confident everything at home is handled.

Imagine a disdainful British type butler punching the bridge of nose and saying, "m'lord.. isn't there a dragon or hydra you can slay... somewhere out there." As your players a sword swiping furniture to pieces reenacting past glories.

[Pauly]

Instead of the feudal model, you could also look at the Roman Republic method. Upward mobility is achieved by successfully completing your term in either a civic role or a military role. Failure to complete your duty at the highest level of competence can result in other people getting promoted over you, or even loss of status. There was a reason why Pompey and Crassus put themselves on the front lines despite their immense wealth - because guys like Gaius Marius and Lucius Sulla came from nothing and became the most powerful man in Rome and used their politcal power to devastate their rivals.

In a fantasy world this means
- Failure to go adventure and defend the people from monsters means their lands are given to someone else. They might keep their money but they lose their power base.
- If rivals are more successful at adventuring the rivals can do things like increase taxes on the PCs, or force the PCs to go on missions for the good of the country.
- Rivals could see the PCs as a direct threat and take action against them. It wouldn’t be a direct attack but encouraging monsters to attack the players’ base would be one way to go about it.
- There is the potential for civil war between big factions, with all the politicking, backstabbery and blackmail that entails. This could be with the PCs as major players, kingmakers or pawns of others. Sitting it out will be viewed as treachery by the side that wins.
- If the PCs are ambitious and want to climb the greasy poll, they have to go adventuring.

In a Roman Republic type situation only the elderly get to retire peacefully to the countryside, and even then only if they are powerful enough and well liked enough. Sitting on their laurels means that they will be stripped of their money and power by more ambitious adventurers. Unlike the movie Wargames where the way to win is to never play the game, the only way to win this game is to never stop playing

[NNescio]

Whatever the reason, make sure they have capable people like Ned Stark Zazu, and Alfred the butler to take care of things while there gone. Also don't have to many plot heavy game of thrones back stabbery things going on at home base. People are easier to entice into traveling when they are confident everything at home is handled.

Imagine a disdainful British type butler punching the bridge of nose and saying, "m'lord.. isn't there a dragon or hydra you can slay... somewhere out there." As your players a sword swiping furniture to pieces reenacting past glories.

"My lord, would you perhaps deign to wear the... Attire for this evening's banquet? Or shall I send for the footman to aid you?"

"But Jeeves, it feels so stifling in there! It doesn't feel breezy at all down there, where it's important! And why do I have to wear a sword? I can't even swing one around right, I'll more than likely hit myself instead..."

"Forgive me, my lord, but custom dictates—"

"I don't care, Alfred! At least let me have my component pouch with me! I feel naked without one."

"The Lord High Protector of Eyrie Peak simply does not carry around excrement on his person."

"Lord High Protector... oh, you mean me? But I need the guano, Sebastian, what if something happens in the dining room and I need to fireball someone?"

"The Lord High Protector of Eyrie Peak does not fireball a guest in his banquet hall."

"Gnuts, Geoffrey! At least try to meet me halfway here!"

"If I may be so bold, my lord... may I suggest the Lord High Protector employ one of his esteemed ice statue facsimiles? In the meantime, scouts have reported... sightings of a ruined chapel nearby with arcane writings scrawled on the walls, should my lord deem it a better use of his time."

"Oh goodie, Godfrey! A new spell! See, I know you can make it work! Here, have the Simulacrum! *snap* Tele... oh, where is this chapel again?"

"Captain Hastings would know, my lord. Third division, down the corridor to your right. Take a left turn at the first opportunity and continue on until you reach a door at the end of the hall. Might I suggest bringing a contingent o—"

"Sweet!"

"Sigh, the things I do... Oh. We need a new rug."

[Quertus]

Well, take a page from the Evil Overlord: you don't send the knights to handle a threat that the *first* group of knights didn't return from. Or did return from, as undead. Or only their heads were sent back.

3) (good alignment only) To protect innocent people from monsters.

Evil gets such a bad rap. But tell me, which are you more likely to stop messing with: the good kingdom, or the evil one, who responded to your raiders harassing their innocent people by sending you an ultimatum… written on the skins of your raiders? Who is more intimidating, Robin Hood, or Vlad the Impaler?

As a peasant, would you rather be protected by the leader who will attempt diplomatic sanctions, or the one who slaughtered every last man, woman, and child in the *last* nation to threaten his citizens (and subsequently added them to his undead army)?

[Particle_Man]

On average, evil lords don’t care as much about their innocent citizens getting hurt, so long as enough of their citizens remain to pay taxes, farm, etc. A good lord is more likely to rescue a “superfluous” innocent eighth child of a farmer, for example. Heck a good Noble might even help an innocent from a different land who has nothing to do with their kingdom, just because that person is in trouble.

So whatever the effectiveness of the tactics of each lord once involved, the good lord is more likely to *get* involved when an innocent is harmed by monsters. And this thread was about motivation, after all.

[AMFV]

For the same reasons real nobles went on hunts (toiched on a bit); because it proves their bravery, strengthens their social bonds and organization, and enures them to the bloodiness of war.

It's worth noting that in most cultures, nobles were the primary professional soldier class. So they did war as well as hunting.

[Max_Killjoy]

It's worth noting that in most cultures, nobles were the primary professional soldier class. So they did war as well as hunting.

For sure, and in many cases hunting was part of staying ready for war.

[Willie the Duck]

Now, having players sit around in a castle/keep doing lordish stuff is boring. They are heroes for god's sake!

If Gary had gotten this memo in 1975, 1975-1999 A/D&D might have looked quite a bit different.


One suggestion might be that -- due to the economic setup of the time, nobles of the 'heroes who got their hands in a piece of land and declared themselves lords of the local area' stature might not be self-sustaining. The economic output of their lands might be insufficient to afford them the lifestyle that they are expected to have (and, as others have mentioned, projecting a specific level of wealth and capability might be required to deal with other nobles/stave off invasion/etc.). Thus they need supplemental income, and because of their skillset, dungeon-crawling and the like is a reasonable option.

[zinycor]

Since you are dealing with players here, I would ask them what is it that makes them go adventuring instead of living the way it would be expected from nobles like them.

[AMFV]

For sure, and in many cases hunting was part of staying ready for war.

Very much so, and I suspect the reasons why there were a lot of prohibitions on serfs hunting may have had a lot to do with that particular fact. The thing is that nobles would not want the peasants getting ahold of weapons or magical training or the ability to fight that well, and since the ancient curses in those dungeons will consume the land if somebody doesn't deal with them, that leaves the nobility to do it.

[Quertus]

On average, evil lords don’t care as much about their innocent citizens getting hurt, so long as enough of their citizens remain to pay taxes, farm, etc. A good lord is more likely to rescue a “superfluous” innocent eighth child of a farmer, for example. Heck a good Noble might even help an innocent from a different land who has nothing to do with their kingdom, just because that person is in trouble.

So whatever the effectiveness of the tactics of each lord once involved, the good lord is more likely to *get* involved when an innocent is harmed by monsters. And this thread was about motivation, after all.

As this isn't in the 3e sub-forum, "evil" can mean a great many things. So, yes, not all evil overlords have to enjoy making their enemies suffer, or hearing the tears and lamentations of their women. Not all evil overlords are proactive, crushing all small problems beneath the heel of their custom baby seal leather boots before they can grow up to become big problems.

But declaring that "threatening the citizens" inherently demands more response sooner from good than evil? Not only do I take umbrage on behalf of evil overlords everywhere, but I think that there's a lot of "leaders" who would find your critique to put them in quite a bad light.

EDIT: also, being evil doesn't prevent one from caring.

[Particle_Man]

As this isn't in the 3e sub-forum, "evil" can mean a great many things. So, yes, not all evil overlords have to enjoy making their enemies suffer, or hearing the tears and lamentations of their women. Not all evil overlords are proactive, crushing all small problems beneath the heel of their custom baby seal leather boots before they can grow up to become big problems.

But declaring that "threatening the citizens" inherently demands more response sooner from good than evil? Not only do I take umbrage on behalf of evil overlords everywhere, but I think that there's a lot of "leaders" who would find your critique to put them in quite a bad light.

EDIT: also, being evil doesn't prevent one from caring.

Yeah but I am playing the odds here. I would be willing to bet that a greater percentage of "good" nobles would give a damn about Innocent Farmer's Eighth Son: John Smith (kidnapped by goblins) than the percentage of "evil" nobles would. Not that evil nobles cannot have motives to potect/rescue John Smith. But good nobles can have those motives and the additional motive "because it is the right thing to do!".

And while evil nobles can care somewhat, good nobles tend to care more, and about more people. In particular, the above John Smith. I could see an evil noble caring about their own son, or their own spouse, but I am harder pressed to find deep resevoirs of caring in evil nobles' hearts for eighth's sons of random farmers (especially if the farmer is not even one of "their" farmers, but is a farmer from a different noble's domain).

And even if you find that rare evil noble that cares about everybody to the point of rescuing any innocent in danger from monsters, I would say that would be only one of the ways one could be evil, and not a particularly common way one could be evil at that. Certainly it is believable for an evil noble to say "Who cares about a superfluous brat! I want to stay in my comfy castle and play cards!" and a good noble to say "That poor kid! I swear that I will rescue him!" and if the average person heard both statements and had to guess which noble was evil and which noble was good, I think most people would assign "good" and "evil" to the nobles in a similar manner.