My PCs are all members of Korvosan noble houses. Some of them care very much for Korvosa and want to be careful to respect the laws of the city. This means that I need to give them at least some vague guidelines. I'd appreciate any feedback.
*Murder is defined as the pre-meditated killing of one person by another. Monsters are not included in the definition of person unless they are on a specific exemption list. If there is doubt, a person is defined as someone who can choose to succumb to a charm person spell. Otyughs are only exempt in the sewers of Old Korvosa.
*The Korvosan guard requires the approval of an arbiter or the property owner before conducting a search of a premise.
*A member of a Great House may personally use non-lethal force (usually a boot, but sometimes a cane, folded parasol, or other light wooden implement) against any beggar, vagrant, or transient he sees. He may not pass this privilege to a bodyguard or associate with him.(Guide to Korvosa, p. 46)
What else needs specifying? Essentially I want to be able to give the players a document that tells them when they're unquestionably within the laws of the city, and when they might want to consider hiring a high-priced lawyer if they get questioned. It will help their role-playing if I can tell them specifically how the city arbiters would expect them to behave in any given situation, particularly if they're looking to set an example for the peasants.
Obviously, typical D&D isn't set up to be compatible with a system of laws. The whole theory behind hack and slash dungeon crawling is that a) the PCs are making the world a better place and b) nobody is going to look too closely at their methods. Since my PCs welcome people to examine their exploits they want to make sure that they're behaving appropriately. I'd like to help them do that.
Since they might be reading this thread (and hopefully contributing) please make sure that any spoilers or actual examples you include are behind spoiler tags.
Thanks!
I guess you need to decide on the big question regarding law in a D&D game: Is law reflective of medieval or renaissance laws or do you want them reflective of modern laws and sensibilities. It is actually a pretty big question... and I don't know that I can answer it for you.
I would suggest that some of the laws above seem at odds or aligned with one or the other of the above. For example, allowing nobles to beat beggars anytime they want depersonalizes and ignores individual rights (except those of the nobles) and infers that the poor are not worthy of human rights. But the fact that the law can not search with out due cause infers that rights of the individual are over the rights of the state.
My suggestion is that in D&D the dichotomy between Lawful and Chaotic should drive this difference. In general Lawful means that the rights of the society as a whole (represented by the government) supercede rights of the individuals. In a Chaotic society, the rights of the individuals supercede the rights of the society.
I would play up that that Korvosa is extreme on the Lawful end of this scale. Individual rights would often be tromped on by the law. This is taking "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" to the extreme. (Guantanomo Bay would be seen as going too light on people). The only exception to this would be for nobles who get somewhat more fair treatment under the law. (Think of the US and our modern type thinking as somewhere in the middle, neutral, and then move the lawful society more from where we are toward the rights of the society as a whole over-riding the rights of the individual).
Of course if you decide you prefer an actual representation of historical law, then I would recommend the renaissance over the medieval period. In the medieval period, for example, you would see trials like burning someones hands and then covering them for three days... if when uncovered it was healed then they were innocent and if not they were guilty. This is the same type of thinking that came up with the trials for witches we are all familiar with (which were not out of line or any crazier than any of their other trials). The renaissance is where modern law started to take shape.
YMMV of course, so take all this as you will. But my suggestion is to decide what you want to get across and then tailor the laws to that.
Sean Mahoney
I would suggest that some of the laws above seem at odds or aligned with one or the other of the above. For example, allowing nobles to beat beggars anytime they want depersonalizes and ignores individual rights (except those of the nobles) and infers that the poor are not worthy of human rights. But the fact that the law can not search with out due cause infers that rights of the individual are over the rights of the state.
What I'd like is to match the law document to what the Guide to Korvosa already says. Since only the law allowing certain nobles to beat beggars is actually from that book then that's what I'd like to use as a model.
I hadn't thought of lawful/chaotic in terms of the good of society versus the good of the individual, but for the purposes of working out Korvosan law I think that it's a good framework.
So we can amend the second law I wrote above as follows:
- * The Korvosan guard requires the approval of an arbiter or the property owner before conducting a search of the residence of a nobleman or a citizen worth at least 5000 gold sails.
Does that sound more in character for the city?
Any comments on the murder law?
I haven't thought of any other topics to be covered in the handout, but maybe what I need to do is go through the next few volumes of the path and see what the PCs are expected to do, then figure out how covered they'll be by the law.
Thanks for the input!
doesn't the players guide have some guidelines as to crimes and their punishments? Might want to use that as a basis on what is considered 'important' to the lawmakers.
Yes, it's on p. 5 and we've referenced it a couple of times in-game. It's why I didn't list punishments for the crimes. The problem comes when we need definitions of what the crimes actually mean.
For example, in the most recent game some PCs killed
So was that murder? They obviously didn't think so, but I can see Zenobia Zenderholm disagreeing.
* The Korvosan guard requires the approval of an arbiter or the property owner before conducting a search of the residence of a nobleman or a citizen worth at least 5000 gold sails.
Does that sound more in character for the city?
It does sound more in line with things and changes things significantly in that a good majority of the population will not meet this criteria.
I am just a little stuck on how the Korvosan guard would be able to make this ascertation in any given situation. They would likely have no idea of someones worth. Hrmm...
I might go with something along the lines that they can search if they have justification, but that justification does not need to be given until a trial. Perhaps even allowing evidence found proving guilt to supercede the need for a reason to have searched (none of this illegal search allows a case to get thrown out over a technicality).
Any comments on the murder law?
Well, a couple of things. Premeditation is EXTREMELY difficult to prove. Maybe we can show evidence of planning, maybe they spoke with someone... who knows. I suppose that magic could change this investigation quite a bit.
Comparing it to my Law/Chaos thoughts above, I would say that the extreme lawful society wouldn't necessarily put a lot of stock in wether or not something was premeditated. The end result would be that someone is dead and that the guilty party is more likely than someone else to kill again if the situation came up and the removal of that person from society makes society safer.
I would also be a little leary on basing laws in game on game rules. For example, under the law as written an Aasimar would not be worthy of coverage (not affected by a charm person). I do understand that you were trying to differentiate the Otyug from coverage of the law (it is an intelligent creature after all, but also a monster). Not sure what a great resolution for this one is...
Sean Mahoney
I haven't thought of any other topics to be covered in the handout, but maybe what I need to do is go through the next few volumes of the path and see what the PCs are expected to do, then figure out how covered they'll be by the law.
I forgot to mention in my last post, that I think this is a phenominal idea... we could spend days and days discussing a total set of laws that never come into play. Good call...
Another thought that might help resolve things would be to have some sort of legal registration that denotes citizinship. If you do not have citizinship then you are not covered by the same set of laws as a non-citizen. This might lead to three tiers of laws:
1) Rights of nobility
2) Rights of Citizens
3) Rights of Everyone else (I suppose this could be broken down further to only include Humans, Dwarves, Elves, Gnomes and Halflings with all other races considered at the level of property... not fair or egalitarian though... problem is this would open the door for legal slavery and I don't know that is a direction worth taking).
A lot of this would not really be an issue in game though if the PCs are working as vessels of the law (working for Kroft) and can show whatever they killed was breaking the law. So after killing a Derro or Otyugh, they have to fill out a report indicating what the reason was for the use of extreme force. As long as that is considered reasonable by their superior (ie. Kroft), then there is no further investigation unless someone with legal standing takes legal action to contest them. For example, if the wizard whose lab the trashed has legal standing for that lab (ie. a legal deed to the land) then he could bring a contest in court to the PCs actions. Another case might be a relative of the Derro opening a contest in court.
Hrmm... I feel like I am just kicking out stream of consciousness thoughts here so I hope you are able to follow me...
Sean Mahoney
I guess you need to decide on the big question regarding law in a D&D game: Is law reflective of medieval or renaissance laws or do you want them reflective of modern laws and sensibilities. It is actually a pretty big question... and I don't know that I can answer it for you.
Sean interpretation is very interesting, I would like to add a few points myself. The law consideration should take into account how modern the civilization is. Trying to explain better, civilization is made not only by technology, but by thoughts, philosophies, feelings and so on. I've read a good amount of golarion materials, and I feel that the overall civilization level seems like the nineteen century, and absolutely not medieval at all. (reneissance can make it too, but the modern concept of laws, government and rights came after the French revolution). in Golarion we lack the industrial revolution, but it seems like some kind of feelings are very modern. And better not forget that Golarion has a very old civilization history, if compared with our world, with advanced empires flurished 10.000 ago, much older than our human civilization.
Just to make an example: In "seven days to the grave (pathfinder 8)" the queen call physicians to help against an epidemic disease. This is not a "medieval" way. In Middle Age epidemy was fought only with prayers and there was no basic hygiene to protect against diseaseEnough ramblings
It does sound more in line with things and changes things significantly in that a good majority of the population will not meet this criteria.
I am just a little stuck on how the Korvosan guard would be able to make this ascertation in any given situation. They would likely have no idea of someones worth. Hrmm...
On the one hand it would give things the feel I'm looking to create, but on the other hand I think that the wishy-washiness of the judgement call is insufficiently codified for the way the city is presented. I like your suggestion better. It would still favour the privileged, since they're more likely to be able to make a guard look bad in court.
Comparing it to my Law/Chaos thoughts above, I would say that the extreme lawful society wouldn't necessarily put a lot of stock in wether or not something was premeditated.
You supported this well, and I'm convinced.
I would also be a little leary on basing laws in game on game rules. For example, under the law as written an Aasimar would not be worthy of coverage (not affected by a charm person).
I definitely don't want laws based on game rules. Something like defining a "person" as equivalent to a creature with the monster type "humanoid" is right out. I was looking for something that people could test in-character without ever resorting to game rules.
I also like that this gives plenty of scope for the plentiful exceptions that we're told exist to Korvosan laws. The fine print would definitely cover aasimars and tieflings and the like. The test would be for such instances as the derro, when they're not a known quantity in the city.
Another thought that might help resolve things would be to have some sort of legal registration that denotes citizinship. If you do not have citizinship then you are not covered by the same set of laws as a non-citizen.
So what qualifies someone as a citizen?
Citizenship would not be mere habitation in a city. The original inhabitants/founders of Korvosa and their descendants would be citizens. The Shoanti would definitely be not.
What other immigrants would be considered citizens would depend on what you - the DM - decides how Korvosa creates new citizens. There is a procedure in place.
- Is it by decree of the King/Queen?
- Is there a set procedure based on various factors that one could apply for Korvosa?
Citizens would have certain rights - maybe a right to appear in court, address the King, or appeal judicial decisions. Non-citizens would be dealt with rather arbitrarily by the Guard.
I would define "person" as anyone of the PHB player character races plus whatever "monster" you want protected. Animals, vermin, and non-intelligent mosters are certainly not a "person." Also, any obviously threatening monster you would never want in your city won't be a person either. In any case, I expect that unless Korvosan law considers something a "person" by default it is not. So Derro are not "persons" and thus not protected by law as a person would be. Whether something like "wererats" are a "persons" by law is something you may need to decide.
Other laws I would use:
- You can't establish a business without permission by the proper guild (and guildmembers don't want competitors). Of course, this is why smuggling exists.
- Sumptuary laws exist. Non-aristocrats can't wear certain things that aristocrats can. Likewise royalty can probably wear certain things the aristocrat can't. You don't want people to think someone is noble when they're not. This was very common in a lot of a societies.
- Protected species. Even if Pseudodragons aren't considered people, they are probably protected by law given their benevolent nature and keeping the imp population down. It's probably illegal to kill them (perhaps even keep them as pets!). They could even be considered to be "property of the king" like the animals on royal hunting grounds.
- Commoners probably cannot use any violence against nobles. Nobles are probably allowed to use non-lethal violence against commoners, and in specific circumstances even lethal violence.
- Obstructing those acting under the King's name (like agents of Field Marshal Kroft) is against the law. When the PCs are acting under her orders, they can probably get away with a lot unless they screw someone important who can use political connections to punish them. Likewise, if the PCs act against members of the Guard and such, the book can be thrown at them unless the Guard is prepared for the political consequences because what they are doing is approved by the higher ups.
Curfews. If you are out past a certain time, you're probably doing something illegal.
There are probably a host of laws concerning magic too. And the major importance of the Cult of Abadar probably means a highly developed property and banking law. I am not sure what kind of laws may be present due to the heritage of Cheliax and the presence of the Cult of Asmodeus.
What other immigrants would be considered citizens would depend on what you - the DM - decides how Korvosa creates new citizens. There is a procedure in place.
Okay, let's say that there is a bunch of bureaucracy involved, and that it's essentially modeled on becoming a Chelish citizen (since that's actually what it was until a century or so ago). Let's further suppose that all Chelish citizens are automatically granted Korvosan citizenship upon application. For the most part though it's a matter of paying the money and filling out the forms and then waiting. There would likely be a loyalty oath involved as well, which would automatically exclude any Shoanti unwilling to foreswear their culture.
You can't establish a business without permission by the proper guild (and guildmembers don't want competitors). Of course, this is why smuggling exists.
I've made a bit of a big deal about there being no guilds allowed in Korvosa, so this won't work. I also allowed the PCs to go ahead and create a business (their host club) rather close to someone they're competing against (the Jade Circle). So I'll take a more free market approach. Maybe you need to wade through a lot of bureaucracy if you're not a citizen and want to start a business, or something.
Sumptuary laws exist. Non-aristocrats can't wear certain things that aristocrats can. Likewise royalty can probably wear certain things the aristocrat can't. You don't want people to think someone is noble when they're not. This was very common in a lot of a societies.
I like this, but I fear I'm too late. If I'd introduced this at the beginning of the campaign then we would have made a big deal of it the whole time. At this point it would feel pretty tacked on (which, to be fair, would be accurate). Nice idea, though!
Protected species. Even if Pseudodragons aren't considered people, they are probably protected by law given their benevolent nature and keeping the imp population down. It's probably illegal to kill them (perhaps even keep them as pets!). They could even be considered to be "property of the king" like the animals on royal hunting grounds.
I like this concept. The King of Spiders received a pseudodragon as a gift, and he keeps it caged pretty openly. He's also careful not to give the guard any pretext they can use to get him into trouble, so there must be some limits on the pseudodragons' rights. Maybe it's illegal to kill them but that's the extent of the law.
I've also stated that otyughs are protected but only so long as they stay in the vaults of Old Korvosa.
Commoners probably cannot use any violence against nobles. Nobles are probably allowed to use non-lethal violence against commoners, and in specific circumstances even lethal violence.
My players are all familiar with the rule in the Guide to Korvosa that says that members of a Great House have a similar privilege. Since four of my six PCs are members of a Great House this distinction has been drilled in. Sucks to be the other two. ;)
Obstructing those acting under the King's name (like agents of Field Marshal Kroft) is against the law. When the PCs are acting under her orders, they can probably get away with a lot unless they screw someone important who can use political connections to punish them. Likewise, if the PCs act against members of the Guard and such, the book can be thrown at them unless the Guard is prepared for the political consequences because what they are doing is approved by the higher ups.
I like this a lot. This covers a multitude of difficulties with D&Dish behaviour in the city. It will make a number of headaches unnecessary.
I think that we can say that property and banking law are fairly well developed, and leave it at that. I don't think that we need to worry too much about Asmodeus either, since Cheliax cut ties with Korvosa at about the time his worship began to spread in the empire.
Thanks again for your help! This is great. I'll try to rough up a document soon covering these issues.
In one of my campaigns, I actually gave my party a handout from a very important NPC. They used it whenever issues came up. The text was something like this:
The (group of characters) are acting under my personal orders in a matter of utmost importance to the Crimson Throne. All personnel, military and civil without distinction of rank, are to assist them in any way they see fit to demand.
Cressida Kroft
Field Marshal of Korvosa
Given the specifics of my campaign, and the NPCs involved, the PCs were reluctant to use it because they know that namedropping of this type was a huge, huge deal. Not quite the same effect here, but it should still give the PCs some pause and hopefully think "this is cool."
Needless to say, when NPCs were handed this notice, they became cooperative real quick.
Bonus points to the first one to state which movie these words came from. :)