I'm working on a new campaign idea and I'm a bit stuck trying to flesh out and identity three cities central to the campaign.
In short, a blue wyrm is plotting to forge its own kingdom from behind the scenes by inciting war between these three independent city states and then positioning a loyal pawn in place to end the wars and unite the cities under the pawn's rule, and the dragon's by extension.
What I'm hoping for is some ideas as to what these three cities may be like to come up with ideas for how the dragon plans to incite these wars. What goods are likely produced, traded, and imported into a region hospitable for a blue dragon. I'm not sure what is generally found in and around the desert regions favored by blue dragons.
I figure each city would have an effective, if not total, monopoly on certain goods or else one would have probably already dominated the others by now. Is this a realistic assumption or am I incorrect in this?
There are plenty of reasons why empires might fragment. Three independent city states can exist without any of them having an important monopoly.
That said, it's a reasonable piece of background. Some likely resources: mineral (metals or salt probably), position (coastal, on a major river, perhaps on a trade route across a desert or up from the underdark), agricultural surplus (all will need to be able to provide their own subsistence or the dominance scenario will occur; citrus fruit, wine, raisins or dates might easily be exported), or technological (fine metalwork or fine pottery or fine horses or whatever).
|
Bread Basket, Foundries, and Trade.
So you want one city whose centered in rich farmland, another city with access to mines, and a port city that gets all the trade.
Basic trinity of keeping a country functional, and with only one part of the triangle each, all the cities are going to want what they other's got. After that it's political bull-headedness all the way and you've got yourself a nice little war.
It's thematic, clean cut and makes sense. Foundry places have rocky soils that aren't good for farming and can be far inland, trade needs a coastal area for shipping that probably doesn't have the right soil or rain conditions, while the farming area does but is further inland.
|
Are you sure you want resources to be the cause of the wars? It's a great reason, but not the only one. Some others include:
1) Religion. City-state A adopts a religion or patron deity distasteful to City-state B.
2) Succession crisis. The King of A dies with no direct heir, and thanks to political marriages, the Queen of B is the niece of the late King of A. The Queen of B thinks she has (or her non-inheriting children have) a better claim to the throne of A than her second-cousin who is otherwise next in line.
3) Self-defense. A might receive (possibly fabricated) evidence that B plans to attack them, so A initiates a pre-emptive strike. Alternatively, some radical group within B actually does attack A, which retaliates upon the entirety of B.
4) Kin defense. A persecutes a group of people with ethnic or religious ties to B; B attacks A in order to protect/liberate their fellows.
And of course wars can be started or justified for multiple reasons. A adopts a patron deity hostile to B and begins persecuting followers of B's patron deity, which gives the Queen of B the pretext she needs to mobilize her people against A and put her second son on the throne he "deserves" (possibly securing not only an additional throne for her family but also a valuable trade route). The more reasons one country has to want to go to war with another, the less likely they are to resolve disputes peacefully.
EDIT: I really like Ms. Pleiades' idea about the triangle and think it's a great base on which to layer some specific political bull-headedness using the above or similar reasons. However I see a bit of a problem in that if this is specifically a desert environment, good farmland will almost certainly be found within a narrow range of a river (see: the Nile in Egypt) and rivers are also major trade routes, so an agricultural power will likely also control trade. It may be possible to have an agricultural power on the river and still have a different power control trade, but that would take a little fiddling. The simplest solution might be to stick a mountainous or otherwise inhospitable region between the Agricultural and Mining powers and have the Trade power control the pass between the two. Coastal shipping (with the Trade region controlling the point at which Agriculture's river reaches the sea) is an option, but that suggests to me that the trade is external rather than between the three city-states - unless there's some obstacle preventing direct trade between the two inland city-states, the latter are likely to want to set up an overland route between themselves in order to bypass the control of the third.
Thanks for the replies everyone!
I really likes the triangle ideas from both Ms. Pleiades and Weirdo. If the port city controls most of the external trade, including levying taxes on goods produced in the other two city states, it would grow to be the largest of the three (which is how I envisioned it being anyway) but the other cities probably still receive enough income through their trade to stay powerful enough to retain their independence.
The smaller two cities of this triangle would also have a vested interest in keeping the other around because while individually they could be taken over, the threat of the other keeps the larger port city from focusing on either of the smaller cities.
The idea is to take the cool rivalry between the three cities, which would never escalate to war within any short period of time, and for the blue dragon BBEG to create more animosity between them and push them to a war that would not happen.
Also, for the more farming related city, perhaps have it situated on a large lake with relatively few or very small outlets that prevent large scale water trading? That lets them irrigate otherwise useless land but prevents them from bypassing the port city for trade.
If the trade city is on the coast, and the farm/mine cities are upriver (ideally up two different forks of the same river) then bypassing the trade city isn't an option, forcing the other two to either deal with the trade city or bypass it via an overland trade route. This would seem to put the trade city in a superior position, but the farm city is self-sufficient and a mine city has the resources to resort to a military solution if pressured too much.
The mining city may or may not have resources for a military solution. Having iron is one thing, but if they don't have the food to feed the army then weapons and armor are useless. However, if they have mines of precious metals, they'd have a resource that everyone wants, such as gold.
This keeps the port city from going after the mine city as they would lose access to the cities gold and iron until they win or capitulate and resume trade.
|
|
Thanks for the replies everyone!
I really likes the triangle ideas from both Ms. Pleiades and Weirdo. If the port city controls most of the external trade, including levying taxes on goods produced in the other two city states, it would grow to be the largest of the three (which is how I envisioned it being anyway) but the other cities probably still receive enough income through their trade to stay powerful enough to retain their independence.
The smaller two cities of this triangle would also have a vested interest in keeping the other around because while individually they could be taken over, the threat of the other keeps the larger port city from focusing on either of the smaller cities.
The idea is to take the cool rivalry between the three cities, which would never escalate to war within any short period of time, and for the blue dragon BBEG to create more animosity between them and push them to a war that would not happen.
Also, for the more farming related city, perhaps have it situated on a large lake with relatively few or very small outlets that prevent large scale water trading? That lets them irrigate otherwise useless land but prevents them from bypassing the port city for trade.
Personally I'm fond of familial scandal in the rulers, and subsequent popular backlash. Normally I have a set up of fiendish enemies, but it can work with dragons as well. With the fiendish BBEG it involves one of the wives bearing a half-fiend or tiefling child. After that rumors light up the city that the rulers are cavorting with demons and devils, and the ruling family is on the defensive. At that point calls for new rulership lead to civil unrest, and somebody on the outside decides it's time to take advantage, painting themselves as unsullied and virtuous against the corrupt and fiend-spewing enemies.
For your situation, either the Blue Dragon has a fiendish servant to sow the wild oats of revolution, or uses powerful magic so that one of the children comes out with a half-dragon template. With the second option, much stays the same, except the accusation is that the city's leaders are accused of cavorting with evil dragons.
I just had a thought of pulling in some intrigue from Dune to start it off.
Make one city already have fallen to the dragon's minions (secretly of course). The ruler in say the farming city is a despot that lives in luxury and squeezes the wealth out of the people, similar to Rabban Harkonnen. He is hated but in total power, and also a puppet of the Blue Dragon BBEG.
Then another puppet of the BBEG comes in, possibly with the help of the PCs, to remove Rabban from power and be seen as a hero to the farming city, the plan that was put in place for Feyd-Rautha on Arrakis.
Eventually Feyd will have to set the PCs up of course to remove them from the public mind as heros as well, possibly framing them as agents of a corrupt rulership in the port city. Feyd pushes the farming city and the mining city together and then takes on the 'corrupt' port city rulers.
With popular support for Feyd, there would be little unrest on his taking power of all three cities. This plan puts a puppet on the throne of this new kingdom and the Blue Dragon BBEG behind the throne and no one knows he's there.
EDIT: Man, this is really helping me work through the problems I had. Thanks everyone.
Dot for inspiration.
Boring7, I think you have a good idea of how the region is forming in my mind as well. However, I'm looking more to have farm city be more supplied with water via a large lake or oasis that is fed by a large underground river. This lake has many small outlets that do not make for easy transportation via boat, and the one outlet that does terminates right where port city is.
Also, the dragon's second loyal servant, we will call him Feyd, that kicks Rabban out of power won't be jacking up food prices. I want him to be loved by the people and seen as a liberator. Rabban was only put in power to make the people love whomever kicks him out.
Seems pretty clear that all the Dragon's plans will come to naught when the half-orc tribe invades riding their purple worms.
Oases are interesting and thematic. They could be the basis for an agricultural settlement, but could also be a trade hub. Having a trade-town Oasis halfway across the desert between two civilisations could be a way to have a non-coastal trade town.
You could even have the Oases as cenotes - surface openings to flooded caves. I recently rewatched the "Planet Earth" documentary, which had a fascinating section on the Yucatan peninsula's caves (search for a YouTube clip, seriously). Adventuring through flooded caves beneath a desert oasis sounds pretty cool.
I'd take a look at a real world analog - Greek City States and why they fought each other in various wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece
The Lelantine war was over fertile farmland. We also have the Messenian wars, the Peloponnesian war, the Corinthian War, etc, etc.
Model your 3 city states after Athens, Sparta and Corinth...
Now that's a cool idea cnetarian. Playing games with the flow of water is an interesting one. Also slightly like the plot of Quantum of Solace, where water supply control is used to leverage a desert nation. But this leads us to another Bond movie trope - the fight atop a giant dam. Play some Shirley Bassey in the background during the fight and you get bonus DM points.
NB - the Romans built giant dams and cisterns to control water, so the tech isn't unrealistic even for dark age nations with minimal magic. The Basilica cistern in Istanbul features in a Bond film too. I fear I may have gone off on a tangent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Boring7, I think you have a good idea of how the region is forming in my mind as well. However, I'm looking more to have farm city be more supplied with water via a large lake or oasis that is fed by a large underground river. This lake has many small outlets that do not make for easy transportation via boat, and the one outlet that does terminates right where port city is.
Also, the dragon's second loyal servant, we will call him Feyd, that kicks Rabban out of power won't be jacking up food prices. I want him to be loved by the people and seen as a liberator. Rabban was only put in power to make the people love whomever kicks him out.
I dig that, but I'm not clear on the timing. He already HAS dictatorial control over one city-state, he needs the other two. Unless Not-Rabban doesn't yet control Farmville, which ash it's own problems. His goal is to have a "good guy" (like Feyd was supposed to pretend to be) roll in and be the good-guy liberator. Good-guy liberators who then go a-conquerin' lost a lot of their luster and shiny patina of goodness.
Unless he who controls the Farms controls the nation naturally. If that's the case Blue Dragon doesn't NEED a war, he just needs Farmville's government to be under his control and seen by interested parties as legitimate.
In my current idea, the Blue Dragon does have effective control of Farm City and has for a decade or less. However, he does not want this Rabban to run the city under his control. Instead, Feyd comes in, ousts Rabban and becomes a popular leader of Farm City.
From there, the Blue Dragon does not plan on conquering the other two. Instead, he uses minions and contacts to make Mine Town think Port Town is planning on war/is ruled by corrupt and murderous despots. Currently, I'm thinking of having the Mine Town leader and spouse assassinated, putting Mine Town on the brink of succession crisis. Instead, Feyd marries one of the potential heirs of Mine Town, both securing a peace between Mine and Farm cities against Port City (fake) aggression and giving the Blue Dragon control of 2 of the cities.
This may seem quite fast, but Feyd is well liked by many people in the area because he sends out a good deal of food to relieve the beginnings of food shortages created by Rabban's despotic rule. Farm City sees him as a liberator and many civilians of the other two cities see him as the man that gave them food that was beginning to get short for everyone but the wealthy and powerful.
After that, the Blue Dragon only has to convince the people of Port Town that he would be a better ruler than the current leaders so Feyd can come in and establish rule over all three cities.
This is where I'm at after all the great ideas Ive read here.
Of course they'll be mad about being framed. All the better to make them do something that they will end up regretting.
Besides, if the people of Port City believe that the leadership is corrupt and would prefer Feyd, then who cares what the leadership says?
|
|
That should work, as long as the dragon is clever about how he goes about framing the leadership of Port Town.
Maybe frame them for the assassination of the Mine Town leaders?
This is more plausible if they have a reason to want the Mine Town leaders gone, so let's say that Port Town has recently raised tariffs on trade passing through their city-state. Mine Town is upset about this. This sort of diplomatic tiff could occur naturally, though the dragon might push it along by having Feyd or some pawn within Mine Town encourage the leaders "not to let Port Town walk all over you." Tie this in with the fake aggression from Port Town and you should have a powder keg.
One of Mine Town's possible heirs is known to be friendlier to Port Town than the current leadership. When the leaders are assassinated, evidence is discovered suggesting the heir has conspired with Port Town in the assassination - the heir gets power and Port Town gets an ally or puppet. This should be enough to get Mine Town up in arms, and Farm Town will also not be pleased since this looks like Port Town might be planning to take over on Farm Town after getting Mine Town under their thumb. Bonus: slandering a competing heir when Feyd moves in.
In order to get Port Town on your side, suggest that Port Town's leaders raised tariffs in order to fund some distasteful project such as necromancy or paying off a fiend. Port Town will probably already not be happy about the the tariffs' immediate effects - reduced trade from Mine Town and possibly other leverage or threats Mine Town has employed as pushed by the dragon - so if they find out that this trouble was caused for corrupt rather than meaningful reasons, they'll be doubly pissed.
Make sure everything holds up to magical investigation, at least up to the point where you want the PCs to get suspicious. Glibness, Undetectable Alignment, Misdirection, Triggered Suggestion, and False Alibi will be useful, and a Wyrm Blue dragon casts as a 15th level sorcerer. Key pawns should be bards, infiltrator inquisitors, or have similar subterfuge skills. Keep in mind that ignorance or misinformation can fool mind reading or lie-detecting magic, so as many people as possible should be misinformed as to the significance of their actions.
I don't suspect that the Blue Dragon will be doing any casting, but I was thinking of building Feyd as a very charismatic class. Bard, sorcerer,possibly inquisitor.
If not him, than the dragon cult will certainly have someone capable of magical influenc.
|
|
Bard would be my first inclination for Feyd, though draconic bloodline sorcerer would be thematically appropriate (whether or not he's actually of the Blue's bloodline).
Inquisitors can be very persuasive but they are not typically charismatic and they miss out on some of the more subtle social manipulation magic. You should have one in on the plot, but it probably shouldn't be Feyd.
Oh, and this might go without saying but if you need someone to make a mistake to leave clues for the PCs, don't make it the dragon's mistake.
My current idea is for the PCs to stumble into the plot by looking into disappearing caravans of food and other goods.
The Blue Dragon wants food to be scarce for a period of time in the other two cities. This raises tensions among the common people, although not enough to start a riot over. Think more WWII rationing than famine. Couple real limitations on food with using expendable criminal contacts to waylay food within Port Town and Mine Town with hired goons to attack and capture some between towns. For the out of town goons, I think gnolls would work particularly well, most likely headed by a small group of dragon cultists.
I'm also possibly adding a second blue dragon, a young relation to the BBEG Blue Dragon. One of those that Dragons Revisited mentions are generally manipulated by older blues and try to prove their worth but are generally just used as fodder. Let the PCs encounter it fairly early and defeat it, hopefully making them think the dragon cult was just a red herring and not simply a small sect of a cult that really serves a much older dragon.
From there, they may begin to find references to the dragon cult in the personal affects of other important characters and members of the cult, such as Rabban. He is a member of the cult, but none too smart, picked for his ruthlessness.
Of course, at some point Feyd and the Blue Dragon will realize that the PCs are starting to get a little too close and will set them up to be at the wrong place at the wrong time and marked as villains themselves. Maybe the cult stages a massacre at an outlying village of Mine Town right before the PCs are supposed to show up there. The PCs arrive, look around, and then agents of Mine Town just happen to show up (tipped off of course), see the carnage and naturally blame the PCs.
This puts them on the run for a bit and trying to prove their innocence, possibly tracking down the real killers in the process and finding more information that leads them further on.
I'm thinking having Feyd be a Demagogue Bard. The Incite Violence and Righteous Cause abilities seem to fit with what I had in mind for him, along with plenty of use of Enchantment and Illusion magic.
Either Demagogue Bard or an Enchantment/Illusion specialist Sorcerer.