| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The Emerald Sage |
Posted - 25 Jan 2015 : 17:56:21
I need information to help define high-born characters who can legitimately carry the title of knight. I understand that there are many holy orders that boast ranks of trained and armed faithfull who go by the name of knight but I am specifically looking to get details on those who are knights by bloodline and inheritance.
While I am aware that much of the duchal lands surrounding Daggerford are managed by nobles who would have sworn fealty to the Duke, making them and their offspring knights in the traditional feudal sense, this doesn't seem to suit many of the powerfull independent city-states of the Realms, like Baldur's Gate for example which relies on the Flaming Fists. So what countries and regions am I looking at and also, if I have to invent noble estates, what lands would suitably host that romantic, knightly tradition. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The Emerald Sage |
Posted - 21 May 2015 : 19:44:07
The western heartlands are big enough for numerous self-made dukes and lords, ruling over their own petty fiefdoms (or even small kingdoms at the DM's discretion), and it's impossible for the Heralds to have documented all the bloodlines claiming nobility in faerun.
The romantic ideal of the knight in faerun is undoubtedly more fantasy than reality, just as it was in medieval europe but the chivalric ideal is maintained through the arts - we probably have the flowery poems and songs of the bards to thank for the number of adventuring companies gallavanting around proclaiming to be the knights of such-and-such, that's a cultural phenomonon.
This thread has really helped me cement my concept of the knight as a character. Within the realpolitik of the realms we have some very specific examples of the knight in practice:
- The Purple Dragon, or his equivalent in Tethyr, Silverymoon or Impiltur. A feudal knight, swearing fealty to a lord.
- The templar, a paladin who serves a specific religious order.
- The knight errant, as described by Ed Greenwood, many adventurers (of perhaps dubious 'noble' lineage), would fit this bracket.
- the classic paladin, a lone wolf similar to the knight errant but operating under an oath of principle.
- the tournament knight: this is just an idea on my part but I'm drawing from the excellent film A Knight's Tale (inspired by Chaucer's short story), and the idea of a jousting 'rock star' traversing the realms earning his crust (or maybe just building his legacy and bedding fair maidens) really appeals to me and it's distinct enough to warrant inclusion. |
| SaMoCon |
Posted - 21 May 2015 : 01:47:35
Well, Emerald Sage, I guess were going to have to agree to disagree on the effectiveness of armored men and mages. You might want to look up Jeriah Chronos, Ioulaum, what Nikerymath did to Jhaamdath, and the Dark Disaster. Just sayin'.
quote:
Originally posted by Bladewind
If you look at the number of troops that defend towns in the Western Heartlands, you see the garrisons are scarily low. most rely on help from other citystates. Secomber (1100 inhabitants) for example relies on a stationed garrison of 30 men from the Lords Alliance, and while some cities boast small standing armies (Iriaebor), most rely on the resources of others. The Flaming Fists 1600 men strong mercenary force is active throughout the whole region. The 200 strong scimitar wielding Hellriders from Elturel ride forth between the riverbanks of the Chiontar and the Winding Water. An unknown number of Zhentilar can ride down from Darkhold to defend (or raze) the countrysides of Iriaebor and Hill's Edge. So any noble raising enough military presence will be a resource the local neigbouring rulers would love to (ab)use (be they from the Zhentarim of the Lords Alliance).
Though I agree with much of your post, this point is a little off the mark. The reason I say that is because of the difference between standing army and militia. An example from "Under Illefarn" & "Hordes of Dragonspear," during the Second Dragonspear War, Daggerford by itself fielded a force of 600 even though it has only 100 in its standing army. The Western Heartlands has no large nations so there are no patrolled borders and no warning that a large group of nasty-minded things are about to land on your doorstep until you can physically see them coming. The people of the Western Heartlands are on their own unlike the citizens of Calimshan, Cormyr, Sembia, and many other nations with manned borders and active law enforcement. The people who live in settlements typically have only each other to rely upon when death comes knocking. About a third or more of the population equips what weaponry and armor they have and form up the ranks of militia to defend their families and homes. Spears, knives, wood axes, farming sickles, bill hooks, hunting bows, metal caps, and leather coats are not military grade arms & armor but they still get the job done in the hands of the militia.
I doubt the Heralds would bother with listing the various militias because, woof, the sheer numbers involved and the likelihood that the members are to die where they are accounted for by their neighbors and/or are counted in the losses of the town through their own census records. But where would the Heralds sit with a bandit lord? For example, Zelarravyan Fangshield from Volo's Guide to the Sword Coast was rich and extravagantly equipped as were his captains which he called the Lord Knights of his "barony." Zelarravyan had been a mercenary soldier operating in Amn with a bloodlust so great that the Amnians collected a "treasury" (left ambiguous in the guide), commissioned him as a baron, and bade him to go settle the Backlands where the village of Yarthrain is on the Winding Water River near the Hill of Lost Souls. If Zelarravyan sent his fee to the Heralds, would he and his retinue of armored fighting men have been added to the roll of nobility? I have my doubts.
Just one other notion I have to write into this scroll. I always thought country nobility were called that because they are typically distant/absent from the ruling courts where the "real" nobility are engaging in intrigues or (more likely) whiling away their idleness with entertainments to keep from becoming bored. Because the country nobility are not constantly at the courts they are: not aware of the latest fashion trends, ignorant of the high-brow diversions, an outsider to the social circles rising & falling within the court, and a safe target for hazing & mocking by the court nobility. The 1996 french film "Ridicule" displays a protagonist country lord going to the court of Louis XVI for the first time and having to learn the ways of the court in order to petition the king. In my way of thinking, country nobles are not necessarily poor and/or lacking in political power but absent from court and lacking social status amongst the court nobility. |
| Bladewind |
Posted - 20 May 2015 : 19:38:02
Actually, the smalltime nobles in the Western Heartlands are actively cataloged by several city based Herald Companies, namely the Ironflower office in Elturel, the Morningstar office in Berdusk, Narlhelm in Baldurs Gate, Oakenstaff in Iriaebor, High Bow in Secomber and Drawn Dagger in Hills Edge (Power of Faerun, pg 106).
The Gauntlet tabarded heralds of those offices are tasked with keeping track of the number of militia of each blazon, be they local militias, mercenary companies or (house) adventuring bands. This is not public knowledge however, so a local ruler need not be warned if the Herald in question does not see the need. Here is where corruption scandals are seeded, as a large local rebellion could be held secret with the help of a few silent Heralds.
Any formal military alliances that need to be dealt with are also handled by the Gauntlets. Any future disputes (such as over inheritance and such) will be dealt with Green Shield tabarded heralds, with the highest court that can be appealed held at the next Shieldmeet.
If you look at the number of troops that defend towns in the Western Heartlands, you see the garrisons are scarily low. most rely on help from other citystates. Secomber (1100 inhabitants) for example relies on a stationed garrison of 30 men from the Lords Alliance, and while some cities boast small standing armies (Iriaebor), most rely on the resources of others. The Flaming Fists 1600 men strong mercenary force is active throughout the whole region. The 200 strong scimitar wielding Hellriders from Elturel ride forth between the riverbanks of the Chiontar and the Winding Water. An unknown number of Zhentilar can ride down from Darkhold to defend (or raze) the countrysides of Iriaebor and Hill's Edge. So any noble raising enough military presence will be a resource the local neigbouring rulers would love to (ab)use (be they from the Zhentarim of the Lords Alliance).
In these conditions, fast and heavy riding cavalry is the preferred type of troop because of the overlapping reach this type of army can provide, riding in for defence of several citystates in times of upheaval. Considering magical means of communication, these armies can respond very quickly to local threats. Larger, protracted battles (such as from orc hordes) are certainly problematic for the Western Heartlands to repel, as evidenced by the many kingdoms that were razed by such in its history. Even battlefield spellpower is often insufficient in cases of monstrous armies gathering in large numbers.
Adventurers are often (unknowningly) promoters of the chivalric ideals as well, albeit in their own fashion. The quest for loot is an inherintly selfish one, but usually along the road to glory deeds of great selflessness are required to reach to the end. Some manage to even get themselves sponsored by a local ruling body to raise hell in territories far beyond their normal reach. Indeed some are even knighted for their efforts, living lives wholly without any chivalric acts in mind, but beeing seen as such anyway (by the right people). They're probably seen as boogey-men in the regions they were active though...
Some adventurers are forged through hardships, and learn to cut into the heart of evil by necessity. A small hamlet in a path of a monstrous horde is doomed, but anybody surviving is going to turn up as a vengeful adventurer.
Some might get the ideals through religious stories (or dreamvisions) dealing with Helm, Ilmater, Torm or Tyr. Torm himself is said to have been born from quite the humble beginnings as a general under a bannerlord of the Border Kingdoms. As a Deity, he is probably well known for his terrible sacrifice in Tantrass, where he absorbed his faithful's souls from over all the city, so he could stop an avatar of Bane. The children he absorbed he resurrected, all showing strange blessings of strength and bravery when maturing. So some chivalric knights are from this generation, destined to be in favor of a chivalric deity.
Torm is also probably a more popular diety in families that have that more independant streak, as his dogma doesn't require alot of infrastructure or bureaucracy, as his faithfuls duties are for his Faith, Family, Masters and the Good of the Realms, only.
EDIT: added a few thoughts.
|
| The Emerald Sage |
Posted - 20 May 2015 : 14:14:47
Yeah, that's the Fate RPG SRD: http://fate-srd.com/
Really wonderful game, got the hardback in the post and loving everything so far. I would encourage anyone on this thread to go through the character creation stage and create a faerunian knight based on the information above. You'll see where I'm coming from. Fate is not class based, so if you decide that your concept is a paladin you have to expand on that with aspects (basically story details with potential mechanical value).
As for the military effectiveness of the knight in the realms, I'm siding with Bladewind - for the reasons given in my posts above I'm not convinced that mages will dominate the battlefield.
Maybe the most salient point here concerning the realms - many of the noble houses are relatively independent of kings and countries. Their nobility is dependent officially on the adjudication of the Heralds but practically on their assets and strength of arms.
Even if a more parochial knights does not bear a coat of arms accredited by the Heralds, there's nothing stopping him and perhaps several other barons in the surrounding countryside pledging mutual aid in defence of their territories and forming a knightly order. Any capable children would be raised as squires to maintain their families' holdings.
A read through of any of the 14th c. sourcebooks and the impression is that any noble knight of faerun is more than likely only a generation or two removed from an adventurer who made it upon plundering some ancient ruin. And then there are nations like Amn and Sembia where tutelage in chivalric ideals is more than likely the result of tradition and status than it is a practical desire to produce knights, so dependent are these regions on mercenaries. The patriars of Baldur's Gate also fall into this category. Although the status of a knight in the Lord's Alliance could be an interesting one. Barons from the lands as far south as boarskyr bridge pledging oaths to the open lord?
In summary, most of the knights encountered in faerun are likely to be members of some holy order - templars if you will.
|
| sleyvas |
Posted - 20 May 2015 : 00:00:00
quote:
Originally posted by SaMoCon
One thing that comes to mind about real world knights that I had forgotten until just now is that they were permitted weapons of war. In fact, most countries of the medieval to renaissance period banned the carrying of weapons or military weaponry by those of low status though the line varied from just the peasants (serfs, servitors, debtors, commoners) up to the high freemen (merchants, artisans, craftsmen). The rise of the rapier was not because it was a superior weapon but that it was lethal to an unarmored opponent but was inadequate versus an armored opponent with a real military weapon, thus being legal for civilians to carry in many nations. Knights were not only an entry position to the gentry or low nobility that were permitted to have the weapons and armor of war but they were also allowed to equip soldiers as their coffers allowed.
Unfortunately, the Forgotten Realms makes virtually no distinction of social classes even though there is flavor text and colorful descriptions to say that there are social classes. The dirtiest peasant can walk into an armor smith's ironworks, drop a bag of gold coins, and walk out with a shiny breastplate on his person without anybody thinking more than "how did he get the money to buy that?" Whereas knights would normally be the best equipped with advanced arms the Forgotten Realms is a free market capitalist system with unrestricted weapon purchases which makes even the United States look like hidebound weapons banners. Since this comment was never implemented into the FR it would be very difficult to do now. Again, this diminishes the military value of the knight.
By this same reason, the social value of the knight is denigrated. The status of the low nobility was built upon the order imposed by the nobles and their designated bully-boys having the only real armaments of warfare. The lower classes fell in line and pledged their loyalty in taxes and services for the protection offered by knights and their men-at-arms. With sanctioning not required to purchase any military equipment the need to offer fealty for protection shifts away from the knight. A peasant earning 1 silver coin a day can purchase a D&D longsword in 5 months and a suit of scale mail in 10 months. A low gentry skilled laborer can purchase both within 2 months.
The D&D combat system also makes the difference between armors slight instead of the RW examples of heavy armor rendering many attacks ineffective until an armored person is pulled down to the ground, the helmet pulled off/opened, and much face stabbing ensues. By contrast, the only difference between leather and plate armors in D&D from 1st ed to 3.x ed is being 30% harder to hit. The D&D system encourages the use of shields as complements to all armors while in the RW the appearance of plate armors made shields obsolete and 2-handed weapons dominated the battlefields. ... But I already made this point. "The nigh invulnerable king of the battlefield in our world that is just a slightly harder to hit mook in the Forgotten Realms."
So it is a one-two punch of the D&D system and the unintended consequences of the FR setting that makes the noble knight a quixotic figure in practice. Worse, pretend knights can pop up anywhere since the equipment has only the barrier of its price. Since magic can make even leather and a shield more protective than metal plate it may be difficult to tell a properly kitted knight at a glance. A noble knight with heroic levels may not even have armor or martial weapons. In the end, orders of knighthoods in the FR are, to me, akin to the invisible bridge in Silverymoon - a neat idea at first blush that becomes unbelievable upon closer scrutiny and is best to just not think about because it is too much of a hassle to try to fix it.
A thought just struck me. We've mostly been talking about human warrior-aristocrats but there are nobility amongst the dwarves and elves. What are their warrior-aristocrats? Are they knights of a different flavor or is the concept completely different?
Yeah, none of this real world flavor would fit the FR. Everyone would be allowed to carry a weapon in a world where orcs roam the countryside and take your children to eat them. Our world is much more tame than this. |
| Bladewind |
Posted - 19 May 2015 : 16:30:05
A further point favoring chivalric ideals prevalent in the human populace of Faerun is the true age of the knightly traditions on Faerun. There are examples of Dragon Lords Nagamat and Bahamut using human armies and equipping human cavalry with arms and armour some 30.000 years before dale reckoning. But realistically, I think barded, warded and armored cavalry might not have come into a war tradition until the early days of the age of humanity (from -3000 to 1000 DR). The required infrastructure to support divine blessings, full plate smithing and strong breeds of horses is nicely stable for human kingdoms in these years, and could be easily sustained near the rising human city states. Also in Faerun some battlefields cleared sufficiently enough of dragons, giants and mages that traditional human warfare might start to resemble medieval combat garnering the rise of knightly orders.
Perhaps knightly tradtitions are older than the human race on Toril, if you include the multiverse and the possibilty of planeswalking knights crusading against evil on other worlds. Some fey knights went on questing treks through the Forests of Toril, besting beasts with cunning and blade alone. The interloper gold elves on Toril used mounted knights along with archers and mages in their armies. Dwarven heroes are sometimes akin to crusaders, leading a group of dwarves into unknown territories to make a new stand or holdfast.
The Heralds Holdfast, a veritable lore mine of heraldic shields, banners and flags, has a chamber dedicated to the coat of arms belonging to the nobilities of ancient houses of Faerun, and has a seperate section each with relics and accoutrements of dwarven, elven, hin (halfling), gnome, centaur, korred (!), giant-kin (from firbolg to verbeeg and ogres) religious groups and clans. Even gnoll, goblin, orc and hobgoblin banners, shields and statues of gods or heroes of the race are displayed in those high domed rooms. Heralds devised the Law of Arms (detailling what a Coat of Arms should be) around the end of the 10th century's Realms, because of common occurence of disputes or mishaps around misrecognised banners.
So with hereditary banners being in use for several thousands of years between humans, and dozens of centuries between races such as dwarves and elves, certain banners might resemble or outright be from old kingdoms or lost minor fiefdoms. Certain symbols of kings or gallant lords of old might still inspire loyalty amongst the people, because of a heroic tale or song or two. The Law of Arms introduced a lot of restrictions, costs and regulations on human coats of arms, and eventually all races flying banners respected their authority. The price to earn a coat of arms depends on the region, with sembians and those in cosmopolitan cities such as Waterdeep paying premium price, especially for the mutliple use of popular heraldric symbols (just to stiffle the explosive growth of heraldric symbols used by all the new wealthy petty nobles in those areas). Lots of races and clans resent the restrictions of the Law of Arms, and corruption scandals are few but not unheard of, but their authority remains respected in nearly all of Faerun. It is even said that children born in the presence of a Herald and named by him or her are destined to great deeds.
So in my view, a country knight is usually a non-noble knight not yet recognised by the Heralds, He has to use a plain colored shield with a single stock symbol. He could rarely be a member of fallen nobility that with the knowledge of a local herald, justly flies the colors of his ancient ancesters. The price of using such a symbol is usually prohibitive, but some highlords might sponsor such actively positive forces in his realm and resanction the nobilty of succesful questing noble sons and daughters through his personal herald. Joining an existing knightly order close to a ruling body greatly enhances the chance a local regent or bishop will make such an offer. Oldblood hereditary lines go through blood, and so does the wealth and respect to join knightly orders and the nobilities.
Lastly, the wealthiest order in the Western Heartlands is probably the Champions Vigilant, and order of helmite paladins leading the Hellriders. Order of the Aster, the crusading order of Lathander/Amaunator, is also quite large in the region with its largest head quarters stationed in Elturel.
|
| SaMoCon |
Posted - 19 May 2015 : 12:35:01
Your right, Emerald Sage, it was a poor choice of words. "The only way for pure fighting men to reach parity with the original purpose of Real World knighthood and hereditary peerage of the gentry or low nobility would be if..." As I mentioned earlier this scroll, RW knights were the apex soldiers - the ultimate weapons of battlefield dominance that decided which side would win. The inclusion of knights into the nobility was a means of securing the loyalty and use of these weapons. And that was just the way things were for hundreds of years. A RW knight is master of all he surveys unless countered by an opposing knight. The Forgotten Realms is completely different. A FR knight is not master of all he surveys regardless of the presence of an opposing knight. Even you point out that the knight requires other spell casters to enchant him with protections and manufacture magical devices to be feasible in the face of magical threats, whether those be spell casters in an opposing army or mystical beasts.
Warrior-aristocrat knights are just heavy cavalry on the FR battlefields. Heavy cavalry still has a purpose and FR knights do represent a powerful force but they do not have the importance of their effect on the battlefield that vaulted RW knights into the position of RW historical power and prestige. I agree that the "templars," or religious warriors like paladins, hew more closely to the effectiveness of RW knights on the battlefield but by their very nature would not behave the same way off the battlefield and have little use for titles, courts, and the rules of peerage. The tendency of templars to act like "knights without borders" would also make them undesirable as potential nobles whom are supposed to be loyal subjects of the ruler & the higher nobles regardless of circumstance.
RW knights did not have magic, instead having to win their battles through strength & skill and were justifiably proud of those abilities... enough so to have tournaments and to determine justice through trials by combat. FR knights need magic - in their arms & armors, on their person, and/or in spell casting companions who watch out for them. Their place on the battlefield would also be different due to the extraordinary and/or supernatural abilities that have a variety of effects at range, perhaps relegating knights to the roles cavalry performed during the renaissance when the dominance of knights was over (mobile reserve, flanker, pursuer/harasser, and reconnaissance) without once ever having achieved the position of RW Dark Ages through Medieval knights (center/main charging force). Lacking the battlefield mastery RW knights required for their social elevation, FR knights need to have other methods to achieve their raised status.
That is why I have been suggesting that there is a cultural difference to how FR knights had to come about and our notions about these knights may differ vastly from any reference we have in history, legend, or media. The reasons for the rest of the nobility's rise have a firm foundation in decentralizing an autocrat's authority while increasing the territory under that authority with the sub-chief's of the autocrat designating their own sub-chiefs, and so on. What solidifies the foundation for knights as being a necessary part of the nobility? Maybe it is as I had suggested that FR knights equip & train troops for which they are leaders (this is a big deal considering most rulers would treat the raising of a military force in their realm without their expressed permission as a prelude to revolution). Maybe knights are spell casters of limited potential picking up sword & shield as soon as they have reached their magical limits (thus marrying spells and armored fighting in the same package). Maybe FR knights are just military veterans recognized for outstanding service and inducted into the FR equivalent of the Veterans of Foreign Wars with only the local lord and population granting respect but no actual title or peerage involved. Maybe... something else. The links to the secular knights I listed seem to indicate that there is no highborn status, just that one was accepted into that particular warband.
As for the Heralds, they don't actually have much to say about the structure of power sharing in a government. The Heralds description of their duties strikes me like they are corporate lawyers. Pretty much, the ruler tells the herald how things work and the herald gets to write it down/spread the word or will discuss with "the client ruler" any conflicts/legal ramifications.
Did the new edition of D&D elevate Siamorphe above demigod because if it didn't then she likely has no more than a "handful of clerics and roughly 300 to 3,000 worshipers that typically prayed to a deity of such power," which is not much to work with. Is the reason you brought up Siamorphe because you are more interested in Waterdhavian and/or Tethyrian knights and we should be focusing there?
By the by, is this the Fate Core you were talking about? |
| The Emerald Sage |
Posted - 18 May 2015 : 16:53:10
Well met SaMoCon, you have probably managed to answer your own query in that third paragraph. The only thing I can perhaps add to that is to mention a couple of factors that could mitigate the influence of the battle-mage: firstly, the role of wards and abjuration magic in the outfitting of armed forces. The chardalyn of the north, for example (although uncommon), can absorb spells releasing them when broken (Riders of Nesmé sensibly outfit their shields with them). Secondly the rarity and cost of such mages, like you said would be prohibitive and would strenghten the case for unscrupolous leaders to ally with goblinkin on the battlefield simply to provide cannonfodder. Also, it's quite likely that mages on opposite sides of the battle would become locked in arcane jousting, probing each others mind with counterspells resulting in perhaps no spells being cast at all.
I started this thread to learn more about the potential culture and family background of knights in the realms. I'll be using the Fate Core rules so the particulars of each class don't interest me beyond what they can bring to the story (Fate revolves around story details defined as 'aspects').
And your last point "The only way for pure fighting men to hold onto the title of knighthood and hereditary peerage of the gentry or low nobility would be if under consent of the king (or what have you)", I would have to disagree with you here. The noble houses as described by Bladewind above would exert some autonomy, expressed in the schooling of their young men as squires with a view to securing the house's position in a changeable world. The Heralds would have final say on issues concerning the worth of any title and their influence is something I would love to here more from among contributors here. Also bear in mind the interests of the Siamorphe and her clerics. Ultimately the collateral of any family will determine it's knightly status, assuming it can maintain such warriors in it's line - property, deeds, land and in the case of the 'country knights' mentioned above, the ability to offer protection to commoners who work the lands around the family castle. |
| SaMoCon |
Posted - 17 May 2015 : 14:38:28
Emerald Sage, I don't know if it is remiss or more shying away from making the Forgotten Realms overly religious. I had mused in other scrolls how light the FR is on the importance of religion and the lackadaisical outlook most people have in the realms about gods and their worship given the proof of those gods and the massive effects they impart on the Realms. There are no religious wars, persecution, and oppression that comes close to matching the Real World horrors in our own past and present. The FR is not written like that because it makes good business sense to downplay the fictional religions and white-wash their effects in products for sale. That decision also means that gaming groups can choose how much of this fictional religion to have in their games instead of forcing it there when one or more players are uncomfortable/irritated with what many people see as a controversial subject. That doesn't mean that writers and sages are prevented from coming up with this information, just that we shouldn't expect canon FR products to appear with this information.
Something else occurs to me when reading through the entire thread again. Why aren't spell casters specifically recruited to fill the role the RW knight fills? Wizards, sorcerers, and clerics provide that "oomph" on the battlefield which would put one side over the other. Unlike weapons and gold coins, the magical power of spellcraft requires training and aptitude. Outfitting a martial force with magical equipment is also in the purview of these casters as well as wondrous effects of a non-martial nature. Spell casters might actually be the lords of the battlefield (at least for human armies) with cavalry, infantry, and archers supporting their endeavors. The side that has the best magical support (divination reconnaissance, illusory misdirection, area punishing evocations, troop enhancing transmutations, conjured shock troops, and all other manners of battlefield control, mind manipulations, and diminishing of enemy capabilities) is the side that carries the day.
There is a certain logic to this notion because there are far fewer spell casters than fighting men in plate armors, the training for spell casters is arduous & expensive, and those of limited potential can dual-class/multi-class into more traditional martial roles when they reach a plateau in their abilities. Unlike a longsword, not anybody can pick up a spellbook and wield magic even at a negative modifier. There is much FR material with nobles of many nations having their get schooled in the ways of magic or sent to the temples to earn divine favor. There is even one group that is a defacto martial order of spell casters commissioned by a nation - the War Wizards of Cormyr.
If you think I'm wrong or way off base consider the following as an all other factors being equal example. Two fighting forces composed entirely of 5th level characters square off on terrain that gives neither side an advantage of position. The Might side has a ratio of 1 knight (fighter), 1 heavy cavalry (warrior), 2 heavy infantry (warriors), 4 light infantry (warriors), and 2 archers (warriors) and the Magic side has a ratio of 1 spell caster (60% cleric, 20% sorcerer, 20% wizard), 1 heavy cavalry (warrior), 2 heavy infantry (warriors), 4 light infantry (warriors), and 2 archers (warriors). Side Might is at a disadvantage because the spell casters of team Magic can lay down punishing spells on any tight formations that allow soldiers to support each other. Knights and heavy cavalry are effective in formation charges but separate they are vulnerable to being overwhelmed by foot soldiers. The arcane spell casters' abilities to accurately lay down long range fireballs, shoot scorching rays, entangle with webs, blind, and enfeeble enemy combatants will tear formations apart while the clerics' prayers, blessings, and curings will keep friendly formations intact and fighting beyond their capabilities while inhibiting their enemies in combat. Barbarians and rangers might be better able to deal with the spell caster threat but neither does well in heavy armor while wielding a lance from horseback. Only the paladin can make the breakout difference but the tenets and restrictions of paladinhood means very few can actually become this version of knight and fewer of those would truck with the noble gentry due to conflicts of ethics and morality. Besides, paladins are spell casters too.
The classic image of the knight really can only be kept by paladins with their superior abilities to rally troops, supernatural talents to resist malicious magics, divine magics & healing, and familiarity with the armaments of war. Emerald Sage, you called it when you said that it was the temples that would have the majority of knightly orders. Knights of Samular, Moon Knights, Knights of Iron, Knights of the Golden Star, Knights of the Merciful Sword, Knights of Holy Judgment, Knights of the Mystic Fire, Knights of the Bleeding Shield, Knights of the Black Gauntlet, Order of the Golden Cup, Order of the Red Falcon, Platinum Cadre, Darksong Knights, Hammers of Grimjaws, Champions Vigilant, Companions of the Noble Heart, and Holy Warriors of Suffering. Though some are foul or self-serving, most of these organizations are protectors of the weak and charitable to the poor. Y'know, the right stuff of knightly legends and stories. Compare those to the secular Thayan Knights, Knights of the Shield, Eagle Knights, Warlock Knights, Knights in Silver, Griffon Knights, Purple Dragon Knights, Knights of the Blue Moon, Knights of Myth Drannor, Knights of the Eternal Dragon, Fellowship of the Forgotten Flower, and Order of the Radiant Heart among others that call themselves knights. Many of these organizations rely upon magics, monstrous creatures, and spell casters to be viable forces while others take the name of knights without actually being knightly orders or even military formations that one would recognize as anything other than "irregular" units.
The only way for pure fighting men to hold onto the title of knighthood and hereditary peerage of the gentry or low nobility would be if under consent of the king (or what have you) they maintained fighting forces available for the nation's military service. For example a knight could represent a trained and ready call-up force of 30 kitted fighting men, or 20 equipped heavy infantry, or 20 outfitted bowmen, or 8 provisioned cavalry. In that way, a nation's orders of knighthood is actually a roll of its army's auxiliary officers and ready reserves. The secular knight would have a place on the battlefield and importance in society not because of single-handed martial prowess but by being a leader of men and having an entourage of bully-boys. Though he still might keep a wizard on retainer.
Anyways, those are my thoughts. |
| The Emerald Sage |
Posted - 16 May 2015 : 23:06:46
Wonderful post Bladewind, captures the essence of what I had imagined knights of the western heartlands could be.
Lets be honest, most of the knightly orders of the realms will be affiliated with the temples in some manner, in fact it's probably been remiss of the source-material authors over the years not to detail how these 'templars' may have advanced and financially empowered their faiths, establishing and aggrandising many temples across the realms. With that being said those individuals would still likely have come from the nobility and been reared with chivalric goals in mind. So, recognising the political aspirations of these families is imperative if we are to bring knighthood to life in Faerun.
This is really important in a region where mercenary armies dominate and it would be worth exploring just how these noble families relate to the military pre-eminence of companies of sell-swords. Baldur's Gate will feature prominently in my campaign and while I love the Flaming Fists and the political intrigue that they provide where do the clans described by BladeWind fit into such a city? The patriars who dwell in sheltered homes in the old city would likely have country villas and manor-keeps away from the Gate. How would a young, questing knight feel about the politics of such a city? |
| Bladewind |
Posted - 16 May 2015 : 14:54:02
Regarding the value of a knight on the regional scale (where monsters and humanoid foes are afoot) they should not be underestimated. A couched lance-thrust from horseback can break or penetrate most defences, be they scales, planes of magical force or layers of armored plates. This is often reinforced mechanicly in most editions of D&D aswell (with dedicated charger or supermount builds capable of accurately doing massive damage with triple or quadruple the damage on a charge). Imagine the possiblities of mounted orders supplied by determined wizards (like the Zhentarim usually are). Include a riding wizard or cleric and a group of buffed, mounted knights with enchanted arms, barding and armour is a formidable force on a large number of battlefields. The novel Dawn of Night by Kemp shows a wealthy sembian riding mercenary force with a varied skillset in believable action.
In the Western Heartlands the environment also favors mounted skirmishes, with lots of rolling low hills near the Winding Riverland and the Chiontar river and the flat grasslands of the Green Fields.
The considerable wealth involved in the arms and armour of a knight are often the first payment of an order, and I think most organisations would want to ensure their investments stay in their control. Clans and families investing in their squired children would feel likewise. Succesful clans that produce the knights of the realms often deck new knights in enchanted gear several generation old. This gives clans with powerful heirlooms and subsequently more succesful knights more political influence, giving rise to a noble class.
|
| Bladewind |
Posted - 16 May 2015 : 13:59:03
For the Western Heartlands in the 14th century realms I'd keep the chivalric ideal alive in the human populace. Tales and songs of armored warriors felling monstrous beasts with lance and sword are timeless tales that can inspire hope, especially for the battered people of the Western Heartlands. Some of the tales of righteous warriors wielding powerfully enchanted arms slaying giants and claiming new kingdoms amongst the monster infested lands are true. But grim stories of atrocities commited to the defenceless by vengeful or unhinged knights are common too.
What I find particularly interesting in the Western Heartlands is the large number of 'dark castles' amongst the various castles that are known. Darkholds shadow falls every morning over the valleys of the Sunset mountains, and its feared and respected armed forces are commanded by Pereghost, a zhentilar knight of Cyric commanded by the cunning wizard Sememmon. Dragonspear Castle was once built to defend the Trade Way, but it has become a playground for dragons and devils since Dearos Dragonspear (a member of the adventurers that looted the abandoned dwarven settlement Kanaglym) vanished through a semi permanent portal into the Nine Hells. It has housed bands of robber knights manipulated by the devils and dragons schemes for awhile. The combined orders of the (soon to be) Lords Alliance cleared it out and built a shrine of Tempus to contain the portal.
So what I tend to see in the Western Heartlands are the activity of both ruinous and valorous orders of knights. With these competing riders shaping the commoners view of the need of knightly orders, I tend to think alot of heartlanders would be wary of anyone claiming to be a knight. Those with enough local lore would be able to ascertain lines of succesion amongst knight orders, and certainly some clans or families would have a reputation of upstanding warriors or brutal oppressors.
Some of those heartlands noble houses could hail from citystates as far as Waterdeep, Amn or Calimshan (along with the flying banners and colors), but I think there could also be some Old Blood houses, claiming to hail from settlements along the riverlands of the Winding Waters or the river Chiontar and outposts in the forest and woodlands of the Western Heartlands. These 'country' knights and knighthoods might not prefer the fashinable baskethilted sabers of the Waterdhavian and Amn knighthoods, instead relying on traditional chivalric arms: crossguarded longswords, couched heavy lances, and javelins. They might also differ in the traditions from what colourful heraldry in the Sword Coast would look like, relying on less obvious items to distinguish affiliation, such as colored cloaks, feathered hats or animalshaped helmets. Secomber is a bustling city from where foreys into the High Moors are based, so I guess a fair share of oldblood knights are active amongst the adventuring companies stationed there. These might have formed into knightly orders of their own, recognisable from their (for example growling bear shaped) helmets. |
| SaMoCon |
Posted - 16 May 2015 : 12:41:50
One thing that comes to mind about real world knights that I had forgotten until just now is that they were permitted weapons of war. In fact, most countries of the medieval to renaissance period banned the carrying of weapons or military weaponry by those of low status though the line varied from just the peasants (serfs, servitors, debtors, commoners) up to the high freemen (merchants, artisans, craftsmen). The rise of the rapier was not because it was a superior weapon but that it was lethal to an unarmored opponent but was inadequate versus an armored opponent with a real military weapon, thus being legal for civilians to carry in many nations. Knights were not only an entry position to the gentry or low nobility that were permitted to have the weapons and armor of war but they were also allowed to equip soldiers as their coffers allowed.
Unfortunately, the Forgotten Realms makes virtually no distinction of social classes even though there is flavor text and colorful descriptions to say that there are social classes. The dirtiest peasant can walk into an armor smith's ironworks, drop a bag of gold coins, and walk out with a shiny breastplate on his person without anybody thinking more than "how did he get the money to buy that?" Whereas knights would normally be the best equipped with advanced arms the Forgotten Realms is a free market capitalist system with unrestricted weapon purchases which makes even the United States look like hidebound weapons banners. Since this comment was never implemented into the FR it would be very difficult to do now. Again, this diminishes the military value of the knight.
By this same reason, the social value of the knight is denigrated. The status of the low nobility was built upon the order imposed by the nobles and their designated bully-boys having the only real armaments of warfare. The lower classes fell in line and pledged their loyalty in taxes and services for the protection offered by knights and their men-at-arms. With sanctioning not required to purchase any military equipment the need to offer fealty for protection shifts away from the knight. A peasant earning 1 silver coin a day can purchase a D&D longsword in 5 months and a suit of scale mail in 10 months. A low gentry skilled laborer can purchase both within 2 months.
The D&D combat system also makes the difference between armors slight instead of the RW examples of heavy armor rendering many attacks ineffective until an armored person is pulled down to the ground, the helmet pulled off/opened, and much face stabbing ensues. By contrast, the only difference between leather and plate armors in D&D from 1st ed to 3.x ed is being 30% harder to hit. The D&D system encourages the use of shields as complements to all armors while in the RW the appearance of plate armors made shields obsolete and 2-handed weapons dominated the battlefields. ... But I already made this point. "The nigh invulnerable king of the battlefield in our world that is just a slightly harder to hit mook in the Forgotten Realms."
So it is a one-two punch of the D&D system and the unintended consequences of the FR setting that makes the noble knight a quixotic figure in practice. Worse, pretend knights can pop up anywhere since the equipment has only the barrier of its price. Since magic can make even leather and a shield more protective than metal plate it may be difficult to tell a properly kitted knight at a glance. A noble knight with heroic levels may not even have armor or martial weapons. In the end, orders of knighthoods in the FR are, to me, akin to the invisible bridge in Silverymoon - a neat idea at first blush that becomes unbelievable upon closer scrutiny and is best to just not think about because it is too much of a hassle to try to fix it.
A thought just struck me. We've mostly been talking about human warrior-aristocrats but there are nobility amongst the dwarves and elves. What are their warrior-aristocrats? Are they knights of a different flavor or is the concept completely different? |
| The Emerald Sage |
Posted - 16 May 2015 : 11:04:37
Thanks for digging that up George, exactly the kind of information I was hoping for.
Worth noting that while Ed states that "Lots of countries in the Realms have knighthoods granted by rulers, and most of these same countries also have hereditary knighthoods", powerful city-states seem to greatly outnumber bona fide kingdoms or countries in the realms, particularly in the western heartlands where my campaign is set. There are however, likely to be many small holdings and castle-towns established by 'made' adventurers whose offspring could easily be reared as knights - a good background for any of my PC 'knights', so just how would these retired adventurers go about legitimising their progeny's noble status? Is it enough to have money and land to ensure the ear of the Heralds? And who are the genuine old-blood nobility of the heartlands? Are they Tethyrian? Do they automatically have some connection with the noble families of Cormyr? |
| combatmedic |
Posted - 16 Feb 2015 : 04:13:07
Thanks for sharing those notes, George.
|
| George Krashos |
Posted - 15 Feb 2015 : 01:38:47
Just came across this from Ed in my notes:
Lots of countries in the Realms have knighthoods granted by rulers, and most of these same countries also have hereditary knighthoods AND courtesy titles for the offspring and siblings of nobles that can be easily be confused with knighthoods (e.g. are styled “sir”). Just as in the “Western” real world. The specifics of how one earns and keeps a knighthood, and what duties are involved, vary from place to place, time to time, and ruler to ruler, but in general “bestowed” knighthoods (in which a commoner is “created” a knight by a ruler, in some sort of ceremony) are rewards for service (usually military), and/or attempts to bind the loyalty of someone charismatic or skilled at arms or both, who resides in the realm (or whom the ruler wants to stick around). Some churches also confer knighthoods. Chivalric behavior is associated with knighthoods in some places (Silverymoon, Cormyr, and to a lesser extent Tethyr and Impiltur, in particular), and public attitudes to knights depend on the personalities of the individual knights, and the duties or constraints placed upon them. In other words, if your local knight butchers anyone who disagrees with him, rapes every female within reach that he happens to like the look of, and seizes all property he can, then the locals may well hate and fear knights in general - - because the ruler is obviously allowing this knight to behave like this, so it follows that ALL knights are allowed to behave like this, and so all knights are a potential danger. Bards and minstrels keep the “general public belief” in chivalry and personal nobility of knightly character stronger than it should probably be (considering that the majority of knighthoods handed out these days seem to be personal rewards for aiding the ruler, that obligate the knight to go on serving - - and more knights may be well-fed, self-serving merchants and investors than daring combatants on any battlefield), and so in well-ruled, ordered lands, knights may be well regarded. Independent “knights errant” will usually cause a wary reaction among locals, however, because they may be seen as ‘free lances’ operating outside of the ruler’s law and authority, who are liable to commandeer food, remounts, bed and board, arms, armour, and even feminine companionship “as a knight” (and turn self-righteously violent if any of these are refused). Note that adventurers are very much seen as this sort of potential danger, unless travelling with a royal charter (in Cormyr), or are members of the Knights In Silver or Argent Legion (in Silverymoon), or accompanied by respected courtiers or clergy.
-- George Krashos |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 31 Jan 2015 : 00:08:26
quote:
Originally posted by SaMoCon
Just throwing this out there, but you might want to consider what gave rise to RW knighthoods and why they were held as the power of the aristocracy. For hundreds of years heavy cavalry was the be all and end all of battlefield combat. Formations of missile and melee troops were often rendered irrelevant by the simple grim reality of whether or not one side had a heavy cavalry force that could withstand the other side's. This was the result of a combination of technologies and improvements in the accoutrements of the kitted heavy cavalryman to create the knight. The headlong charge of knights in close formation was dominant because no known martial prowess could overcome it until properly trained pike formations began to appear in the 14th century. So, for centuries, knights were the source of power and control over swaths of land beyond the immediate reach of the king's sword arm to which the only counter was another knight.
This is not the case with the Realms. Heavy cavalry is still useful but magic has unbalanced the entire equation. Spellcasters are the equivalents of modern day artillery and air-strikes. Griffons are tamed for aerial warfare. Other-planar beings of living fire can lay waste to the battlefield while statues of stone and iron stride about with an irresistible purpose of murder that is invulnerable to the unglamoured crafts of mortals. Frankly, a knight does not project the power necessary without serious magical backing in items and individual spell-slinging. The intimidation factor of an armored man on horseback pales compared to an ogre in full fury, a mildly annoyed dragon, or the fiery hell unleashed by a wizard some call "Tim." At best, an armored knight can keep peasants in line and put down a revolt of the perennially under-equipped serfs.
Where does that leave the knight, the nigh invulnerable king of the battlefield in our world that is just a slightly harder to hit mook in the Forgotten Realms? Religious orders of knighthoods like the Knights of Ilmater have magical and supernatural powers cementing their status and ability to exert real control but the same cannot be said for warrior-aristocrats whose sole claim to battlefield dominance is the wealth to train and maintain the weapons and horses of a mounted knight. It looks more likely that any knighthood, especially that which would be hereditary, would fall into the realm of governance and land management in the form of low nobility (courtiers, bureaucrats, and administrators rather than warriors). This would be what the knights turned into during the Renaissance much like the samurai during the Tokugawa Shogunate.
Now THIS is a good argument for things being different. Granted, you typically won't have but one fireball hurling wizard in a small settlement, and they'll probably have a decent handful of mounted combatants of skill (probably ten to one). I'm betting knighthoods are more common in the realm, but due to some of what you note, they're also probably a lot less powerful/respected. Its probably the ones that go kill that ogre/dragon/demon, etc.... that are treated as "proper" knights. |
| combatmedic |
Posted - 29 Jan 2015 : 16:16:10
quote:
Originally posted by SaMoCon
Just throwing this out there, but you might want to consider what gave rise to RW knighthoods and why they were held as the power of the aristocracy. For hundreds of years heavy cavalry was the be all and end all of battlefield combat. Formations of missile and melee troops were often rendered irrelevant by the simple grim reality of whether or not one side had a heavy cavalry force that could withstand the other side's. This was the result of a combination of technologies and improvements in the accoutrements of the kitted heavy cavalryman to create the knight. The headlong charge of knights in close formation was dominant because no known martial prowess could overcome it until properly trained pike formations began to appear in the 14th century. So, for centuries, knights were the source of power and control over swaths of land beyond the immediate reach of the king's sword arm to which the only counter was another knight.
This is not the case with the Realms. Heavy cavalry is still useful but magic has unbalanced the entire equation. Spellcasters are the equivalents of modern day artillery and air-strikes. Griffons are tamed for aerial warfare. Other-planar beings of living fire can lay waste to the battlefield while statues of stone and iron stride about with an irresistible purpose of murder that is invulnerable to the unglamoured crafts of mortals. Frankly, a knight does not project the power necessary without serious magical backing in items and individual spell-slinging. The intimidation factor of an armored man on horseback pales compared to an ogre in full fury, a mildly annoyed dragon, or the fiery hell unleashed by a wizard some call "Tim." At best, an armored knight can keep peasants in line and put down a revolt of the perennially under-equipped serfs.
Where does that leave the knight, the nigh invulnerable king of the battlefield in our world that is just a slightly harder to hit mook in the Forgotten Realms? Religious orders of knighthoods like the Knights of Ilmater have magical and supernatural powers cementing their status and ability to exert real control but the same cannot be said for warrior-aristocrats whose sole claim to battlefield dominance is the wealth to train and maintain the weapons and horses of a mounted knight. It looks more likely that any knighthood, especially that which would be hereditary, would fall into the realm of governance and land management in the form of low nobility (courtiers, bureaucrats, and administrators rather than warriors). This would be what the knights turned into during the Renaissance much like the samurai during the Tokugawa Shogunate.
ALTERNATE PATH>
Any family filthy rich enough to maintain exotic stuff like a stable of griffons or a bribed dragon (that's going to cost a lot of treasure!) can afford to train its sons and daughters as fighters, mages, and clerics and equip them with some magic items. Heirloom items, too, if the family has produced multiple generations of adventurers.
This can make for a very potent combination. Not just an armored man on horseback, but an armored man and his soldiers backed up by a mage and a cleric. One generation in a large family could form the core of an adventuring party. Add retainers as needed.
I'm not suggesting that exotic flying mounts or large monster allies aren't things you see in the setting. But humans can be very deadly when they level up.
Not every noble has a PC class, natch. But many do. And the advantages they get in training and gear serve them well in the lower levels.
Not every adventurer comes from such a family. Many don't.
But one way nobles are created in D&D is by characters reaching name level and building a stronghold. That may be where a number of noble houses in FR have their origins.
YMMV
|
| SaMoCon |
Posted - 29 Jan 2015 : 11:49:18
Just throwing this out there, but you might want to consider what gave rise to RW knighthoods and why they were held as the power of the aristocracy. For hundreds of years heavy cavalry was the be all and end all of battlefield combat. Formations of missile and melee troops were often rendered irrelevant by the simple grim reality of whether or not one side had a heavy cavalry force that could withstand the other side's. This was the result of a combination of technologies and improvements in the accoutrements of the kitted heavy cavalryman to create the knight. The headlong charge of knights in close formation was dominant because no known martial prowess could overcome it until properly trained pike formations began to appear in the 14th century. So, for centuries, knights were the source of power and control over swaths of land beyond the immediate reach of the king's sword arm to which the only counter was another knight.
This is not the case with the Realms. Heavy cavalry is still useful but magic has unbalanced the entire equation. Spellcasters are the equivalents of modern day artillery and air-strikes. Griffons are tamed for aerial warfare. Other-planar beings of living fire can lay waste to the battlefield while statues of stone and iron stride about with an irresistible purpose of murder that is invulnerable to the unglamoured crafts of mortals. Frankly, a knight does not project the power necessary without serious magical backing in items and individual spell-slinging. The intimidation factor of an armored man on horseback pales compared to an ogre in full fury, a mildly annoyed dragon, or the fiery hell unleashed by a wizard some call "Tim." At best, an armored knight can keep peasants in line and put down a revolt of the perennially under-equipped serfs.
Where does that leave the knight, the nigh invulnerable king of the battlefield in our world that is just a slightly harder to hit mook in the Forgotten Realms? Religious orders of knighthoods like the Knights of Ilmater have magical and supernatural powers cementing their status and ability to exert real control but the same cannot be said for warrior-aristocrats whose sole claim to battlefield dominance is the wealth to train and maintain the weapons and horses of a mounted knight. It looks more likely that any knighthood, especially that which would be hereditary, would fall into the realm of governance and land management in the form of low nobility (courtiers, bureaucrats, and administrators rather than warriors). This would be what the knights turned into during the Renaissance much like the samurai during the Tokugawa Shogunate. |
| combatmedic |
Posted - 29 Jan 2015 : 02:20:57
So where might hereditary knighthoods be found in FR, if Impilitur is out of the running?
Are the Hell Riders of Elturel a hereditary organization, in part?
The background info I dug up on Candlekeep seems to suggest that they could be.
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2564
There's nothing in the excerpt about where Hell Riders come from in social terms, how they are trained, and so on. But so many highly trained, experienced, well-equipped soldiers in a close knit group with men and women riding together sounds a lot like a family business to me. Not that they don't adopt outsiders. But I think the core could be drawn from certain families.
Or not.
DM call.
|
| combatmedic |
Posted - 29 Jan 2015 : 01:46:25
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
There are no hereditary knighthoods in the RW. My Impiltur doesn't have them either.
-- George Krashos
The first part is incorrect unless saying that "knighthood" never existed in Continental Europe. That strikes me as a very odd definition, and not in keeping with ordinary usage and translation conventions. Plenty of German and Austrian knights had hereditary titles. Similar ranks have been used in other parts of Europe.
You might want to check that you're not confusing a knighthood with an existing noble title that is hereditary and runs parallel with that knighthood. I'm not aware of any knighthoods in and of themselves that are hereditary but I'm happy to stand corrected.
But like I said, knighthoods are not hereditary in Impiltur. Of that I am 100% certain!
-- George Krashos
Nope, I'm not confused.
Ritter, Ridder, and Chevalier have all been used hereditary ranks in various parts of Continental Europe. Some few hereditary knighthoods still exist today.
You are probably thinking only of the UK system and its antecedents in the British Isles.
But of course you know about your version of Impilitur. I want to stress that. I'm not arguing about hereditary knights there. If you say they don't exist, they don't exist. So this tidbit of historical information isn't really that important. If Impilitur has no hereditary knights, then that's how it is.
Titles and ranks in FR don't always seem very close to historical European models, anyway, so I'm cautious about making the argument that just because the HRE had hereditary knights, Cormyr or Damara must also.
But I think there's certainly room for hereditary knighthoods someplace in FR, if a DM or designer wants to put them in.
|
| George Krashos |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 22:41:25
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
There are no hereditary knighthoods in the RW. My Impiltur doesn't have them either.
-- George Krashos
The first part is incorrect unless saying that "knighthood" never existed in Continental Europe. That strikes me as a very odd definition, and not in keeping with ordinary usage and translation conventions. Plenty of German and Austrian knights had hereditary titles. Similar ranks have been used in other parts of Europe.
You might want to check that you're not confusing a knighthood with an existing noble title that is hereditary and runs parallel with that knighthood. I'm not aware of any knighthoods in and of themselves that are hereditary but I'm happy to stand corrected.
But like I said, knighthoods are not hereditary in Impiltur. Of that I am 100% certain!
-- George Krashos |
| combatmedic |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 14:56:50
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
There are no hereditary knighthoods in the RW. My Impiltur doesn't have them either.
-- George Krashos
The first part is incorrect unless saying that "knighthood" never existed in Continental Europe. That strikes me as a very odd definition, and not in keeping with ordinary usage and translation conventions. Plenty of German and Austrian knights had hereditary titles. Similar ranks have been used in other parts of Europe.
|
| The Emerald Sage |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 12:08:20
Lots of food for thought.
I am particularly interested in the aesthetic of chivalric knighthood, the romantic, aruthurian ideal that dominated western european culture during the high medieval period (as good a historical reference for much of the Realms as there is) but as I mentioned above, the history of large parts of Faerun does not necessarily suit this culture.
So my campaign will take place in the western heartlands, circa 1367 - where canon delivers an impression of Faerun's own 'Wild West'. Civilisation is rebuilding after the fall of much older empires - as Dungeon Master I feel there is a certain post-apocalyptic vibe that should be palpable here. And many of the settlements are new, having been founded by adventurers. Off the map there are probably many small keeps that have been built on plundered loot, with settlers looking to their 'lord' for protection. Is it feasible that the offspring of said 'lord' could be considered knights, protectors of tiny realms that their forefathers carved out? What would the Heralds say?
The most obvious option is the country surrounding Daggerford, where we have a number of lords with their own hamlets and keeps, (even including one elf, Lord Floshin) but committed to the Duke. What about the other towns to the south along the Chionthar? Could any of them host a similar set-up?
I am tempted to say that the patriarchs of Baldur's Gate, who are rich enough to own large estates in the country, could have a kind of loose vassal relationship with the grand dukes but would that even be necessary considering their reliance on the Flaming Fists? |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 12:04:44
Ahh, well i think Charlemagne is the beginnings of the feudal system so it makes sense that the knighthoods started with him.
In which case it would probably be newly settled land or established kingdoms that start with the hereditary knighthood foundation for nobility.
Damara is still fairly recent at only a few centuries old. Maybe the first nobles were awarded knighthoods for fighting off the Nar and some of those hereditary orders still exist and have not yet become purely ceremonial titles. |
| hashimashadoo |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 11:53:54
I'm definitely talking about knighthoods from before the Tudor period and I think that was what The Emerald Sage was interested in as well. These knights came about during the reign of Charlemagne in the 8th century and were granted 'benefices' of land to both secure and reward service. Charlemagne's grandson Charles then declared such titles hereditary. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 11:21:37
I'm not sure that there were many real world knightings for military service.
The romans used to give away land in return for long service in the military but that was because they were always in financial difficulties. That is probably the basis upon which feudal nobility and knighthoods came to exist.
I can't recall many instances in history of a commoner being granted a knighthood on the battle (there might be a handful stretching across the whole of english history - which is all i know).
I did English history at A level particular from Henry VII to Elizabeth I. And by that time the knighthoods were ceremonial awards given to nobility for various things (usually just to placate nobles or play them off against each other). I remember an Order of the Garter so the knighthood was given to those that had close access to the king - it was a privilege to be so close to the king. Thats why the privvy council was called the privvy council - you had close access to the king while he was on the privvy/toilet and no one else did. Certainly a commoner would never be given such an award no matter what he had done, the nobles would never allow it for one.
A noble would be given a knighthood and lands and money to reward them for anything - taking part in a plot, keeping a secret, being loyal, to annoy another noble, etc. It is unlikely the knighthood would be given for military service because the nobles didnt fight and only acted as generals (way way way behind the battle lines).
Administrators for the king that were not noble (and probably in service to other nobles prior to that) would be granted knighthoods in order to make them noble, but they held a special place in court and were truly gifted individuals like Richard Rich, Cardinal Wolsey, Thomas Cranmer, Thomas Cromwell.
Earlier ages of english history may have been different, certainly the war of the roses was particularly bloody and may have had some real knightly orders (can't think of any though). I tend to think that if ever a knighthood was bestowed upon a commoner they would share the same fate as Joan of Arc for daring to defy the natural order of things.
So from my experience with history if you wanted to be a knight in the real world you had to already be noble. That means all knighthoods are hereditary in a sense (noble titles often passing from father to son and such nobility was required to have the wealth necessary to be the feudal knight) but then not every noble was awarded a knighthood.
|
| hashimashadoo |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 10:17:07
I believe what we're talking about is the medieval feudal knight.
They earned land from the monarch in return for (almost always) martial service and passed the title on to their offspring in exchange for them continuing to defend said land on behalf of the monarch.
Orders of knights tended to be religious and were granted land by the church or sometimes particularly pious monarchs - these are not what we're talking about. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 09:04:59
Knights of the Shield is kind of a hereditary knighthood.
It depends upon what you classify as a "knight". If it is the stereo typical knight in shining armour then any landed gentry could be classified as a knight and therefore anyone of noble birth is a hereditary knight.
If its the belonging to a quasi military order (filled with stereo typical knights) then there is unlikely to be any hereditary positions other than honorary ones.
In the real world the knighthoods for religious orders were non hereditary titles because i believe you gave up your existing titles and in many cases vowed celibacy in order to join the knighthood, after which your lifespan was considerable reduced. After the crusades the knighthoods devolved into honorary orders rather than military ones (the templars being the bankers of their age).
Secular knighthoods have always been honorary titles that provide little real power but plenty of prestige and usually have courtly responsibilities that are not military in nature - but of course any subject of a king can be responsible for gathering levies for an army and knights of the realm would be no different.
Knighthoods that are not tied to a religion or a feudal lord would in the real world be a mercenary company and again these are not hereditary by nature but instead membership is based upon merit.
In the realms you can do what you like. I have a hereditary knighthood about to appear in my version of the Moonshaes - Heralds of the High King. They are the good version of the Knights of the Shield and do include a military arm.
I had a knightly order in Damara that was not strictly hereditary but at least one member was so (any descendant of its founder was always considered a member).
To create a traditional knightly you usually need a monarchy/long established ruler (the king needs organisations to serve him and his heirs, voted politicians are unlikely to think about securing power for the next candidate) although there are exceptions such as the knights in Raven's Bluff.
So Impiltur is a good place, Damara is not bad either, Cormyr, Waterdeep (the lords there are particularly far sighted), Mulhorand. It also helps if there are recent troubles which might require extra military or financial or political muscle and so necessitate the creation of an order of knights to combat the problem.
And Impiltur is definitely one of the most detailed areas of FR. Could do with some more details on little settlements and other less well known locations though. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 28 Jan 2015 : 08:03:13
There are no hereditary knighthoods in the RW. My Impiltur doesn't have them either.
-- George Krashos |
|
|
