Editing CED Setting

'''Carceres et Dracones Setting''' 

[[Carceres_et_Dracones]]

Rough text from Recruitment thread to edit up

== General ==

As far as campaign flavor, I'm envisioning a definite Romano-Byzantine bent: for instance, decurions instead of serjeants, cataphracts instead of knights, etc. However, like any sword & sorcery millieu, my campaign world will certainly crib from a mishmash of sources including Ancient Greece, Ancient Egypt, the Successor States, various Persian dynasties, Eurasian steppe cultures, etc. 

A detailed knowledge of Roman history is *not* required to play in the campaign. Much as "typical" D&D is very loosely based on Western Europe during the Middle Ages, my campaign world will be very loosely based on Rome. The period that I know the most about would be roughly late fourth century CE to roughly late sixth century CE (i.e., Adrianople through Justinian's reconquest of Ostrogothic Italy), so the prime influences aren't going to be from the period that most influences the Hollywood depiction of Rome (Late Republic to Marcus Aurelius).

I think I'll probably stick with demihumans, although I'm envisioning them as dwindling, largely forgotten races found mostly in odd corners of the world, underneath misty hills, etc.

That all sounds great by me & is not too bleak. I honestly have no idea if Roman convicts were branded, but it sounds badass; let's roll with it.

An entire penal legion is fantastic, but I think it works with the campaign very well; an air of doomed struggle is something for which I'm goning. There's vague historical precedent, too; I believe that during the Marcomannic Wars, Marcus Aurelius enlisted gladiators into the army at one point to fill a manpower gap. 

Joining the legions at age 14 is also perfectly legit. I think that the minimum enlistment age was 17, but even during the times when they still paid attention to stuff like that, it wasn't uncommon for boys to join at 14 or even 13 and then serve 20+ years. Moreover, by the time that barbarians were being incorporated into the Roman army in large numbers, I'm sure that niceties like minimum age were completely ignored.

This is also why I like to leave things a bit vague at the inception of a campaign; I feel that a certain vagueness allows players to come up with cool shit like this that I wouldn't've though about on my own. :)


== Map Description ==

The first thing to bear in mind is that the area depicted is not the Imperial core; the Imperial core is south and east of this hexmap. Also, do you see the island in the northwest? And what looks like an island but is the southern part of a penninsula in the north-central? Both of those are under imperial control and imperial control extends north of the map. Imperial control also extends west and southwest of the map slightly, as well as south beyond the bay which you can see on the map; that bay leads into oceanic hexes.

Relations between Empire and Barbarians are definitely hostile overall, but you are correct in assuming that there are multiple barbarian tribes. Some barbarian tribes are on good terms with Empire; many are not. Which tribes are and aren't on good terms is generally a matter of debate and can change; barbarians tend to assume that treaties are signed with an Emperor, not the Empire. Regime change can thus make diplomatic relations dicey.

The barbarian federates settled within the Empire on this hexmap are basically refugees. They've been granted permission to settle within the Empire; in return for the Empire allowing them a "safe" place to settle they get taxed to the gills and are required to provide a certain number of men every year to serve in the Imperial armies. I can't remember where I said it was a trading post, but I must've misspoken; trading certainly does occurr, but it's an actual barbarian settlement, with flocks, herds, crops, houses, smithies, shrines, etc.

The ruined cities may contain undiscovered treasure. They're not likely to contain monsters in the sense of humanoid foes, but may well contain undead or people who wish to live in secrecy such as witches, evil cultists, outlaws, runaway slaves or peasants, etc.

The ruined city in the Northeast was indeed destroyed by barbarians. Whether the barbarians "retook" the area or whether the Empire "strategically abandoned" that area is a matter of perspective. The ruined city in the east (near the foothills of the mountains) was also destroyed by barbarians. A town has now sprung up in the former suburbs of that city.

Two or three generations ago, internal strife within the Empire, along with plagues and economic problems, allowed several barbarian tribes to slip into the province and loot, burn, and enslave. Things are now better and the barbarians can't freely march across the River Frigidus (the frontier river in the northeast), but the province is not what it once was.

The garrisons of frontier troops are indeed there to fight off hostile barbarian tribes. There should also be mobile legions deeper within Imperial territory to respond to barbarian incursions and reinforce the frontier garrisons as needed, but there currently are not. There would also generally be more encampments of barbarians across the River Frigidus, but many Imperial troops and barbarians are currently off to the east fighting in other provinces.

In the Imperial Core, there is also a tendency to avoid stationing too many legions far away from the core; these legions have a tendency to proclaims their generals as Emperors and then march to the Imperial Core to engage in civil strife.

Another thing to bear in mind is that while at one point travel and commerce within the bounds of the Empire was easy, roads were well maintained, bandits were limited in number, and the population was higher, by this point plague, economic crises, civil strife, and barbarian incursions have taken their toll. Even those travelling within the Empire may well be exposed to muddy, impassable roads in places, as well as bandits, bagaudae, rapacious toll-collectors, etc.

Once-prosperous regions have been in some cases depopulated or greatly reduced in station. In some portions of the Empire, there may be de facto pockets of autonomous rule both by isolated semi-civilized peoples or by large landowners. Things within the Imperial Core will be better---they are certainly reputed to be better, anyway.

On the map, do you see the island in the northwest? Things are better there. Civil strife, plagues, and barbarians never took as much of a toll there. That is the province of La-Isla. Although on the periphery of the Empire, its citizens identify strongly with the Empire and the province is highly valued due to the vast forests containing high-quality lumber which is imported south and east. The penninsula that I mentioned, the one in the north-central? The Empire controls some of that penninsula. Things aren't great there, but they're better than in Centralia, the province that takes up much of the map. The Hyperborean Penninsula has two legions (one you can see on the map, and one to the north).

Centralia is a valuable province, but not as valuable as it once was. Things are better in the south and southwest, where you have more cultivated land, access to a civilized ocean, rich wineries, closer proximity to the Core, and more distance between the inhabitants and the barbarian tribes.

Centralia is part of the Empire, so it has lots of advantages, but there are lots of disadvantages. The large cities function as both valuable components of the Empire in some ways and [i[de facto[/i] independent city-states in others. Some areas of the countryside are lawless; there's plenty of room for adventuring. Sea barbarians come raiding down the ocean channels; that's why La-Isla gets a legion. Note that Centralia currently has limited frontier garrisons along the channel.

Along the Frigidus River there are occasional barbarian incursions, although no major ones for the past couple decades. Beyond the Frigidus River (Transfrigidia) things aren't good. You've got a pocket near the Channel that's defended by a Hyperborean Legion and then you've got the pocket near the viable town and the two ruined cities; things are very dicey in that little portion of Imperial-held Transfrigidia.

If a couple rootless barbarian tribes show up along the Frigidian frontier, one big push could cause all of Centralia to faul. Note that this is not a setup for a "save the province!" campaign. This is a sandbox. Players are welcome to go where they want, do what they want, and side with whom they want.

== Attributes ==
* Stat: 3 Penalty: -3
* Stat: 4-5 Penalty: -2
* Stat: 6-8 Penalty: -1
* Stat: 9-12 No Adjustment
* Stat: 13-15 Bonus: +1
* Stat: 16-17 Bonus: +2
* Stat: 18 Bonus: +3

Pretty symmetrical. If your prime requisite (explanation in a minute) is a 3 to 5, you have a -20% penalty to earned XP. If it's 6-8, you have a -10% penalty. Nine to 12, no adjustment. Thirteen to 15, +5% bonus. 16-18: +10 bonus.

The Fighter's prime req is STR; the magic-user's is INT; the cleric's is WIS; the thief's is DEX.

Your statistics as rolled may be adjusted during character creation according to certain rules.

CON and CHA may not be adjusted up or down.
DEX may be raised if it's a prime req, but not lowered.
WIS may be lowered by magic-users, fighters, dwarves, elves, halflings, and thieves in order to raise a prime req.
INT may be lowered by fighters, dwarves, halflings, thieves, and clerics in order to raise a prime req of their class.
STR may be lowered by magic-users in order to raise INT and by clerics in order to raise WIS.

For purposes of statistical adjustment, treat Woodsmen as halflings.

For every 2 points that you lower a stat, you may raise another (valid) stat by 1. For instance, a fighter can lower WIS by 4 to raise STR by 2. You can't mix and match to reach 2; for instance, a fighter can't lower WIS by 1 and INT by 1 to raise STR by 1. However, our theoretical fighter is welcome to lower both stats by 2 (or 4, or 6, etc.) each to raise STR.

No stat may be lowered below 9. No stat may be raised above 18

== Classes ==

Can't get the link below to work with the wiki spam filter. Add http:// to the front and post into browser address bar to view. 

wheel-of-samsara.blogspot.com/2010/09/gedankenexperiment-recasting-bx-demi.html

* The Woodsman Class

The Woodsman class is a human class aimed at emulating outdoorsy, woodwise characters from fantasy fiction who do not use magic spells. Woodsmen might be barbarians, nomads, or savages, or they might be scouts, explorers, hunters, or trappers from more civilized cultures. 

A Woodsman character needs a minimum DEX of 9 & a minimum CON of 9 (this is because the Woodsman is basically a rebuilt, reskinned Halfling and demi-humans have stat minimums).
The Woodsman class uses the Dwarf XP chart and the Fighter saving throws.

The Woodsman uses the Fighter hit chart with ranged weapons and with normal swords. With all other weapons, the Woodsman uses the Cleric hit chart.

When wearing no armor up to leather armor, the Woodsman class has the following advantages:

*Only a 10% chance of being detected when hiding in woods or underbrush
*+1 to hit with ranged attacks

The Woodsman loses these advantages when wearing any armor more encumbring than leather.

The prime requisites of the Woodsman are STR and DEX. When one of these stats is 13+, the Woodsman gains +5% to earned XP. When both of these stats are 13+, the Woodsman gains a +10% to earned XP.

The Woodsman can also do "ranger stuff": the main mechanical effect of this is that parties moving through the wilderness do not need to find a "reliable guide" (see page X56) if accompanied by a Woodsman.

The Woodsman rolls d6 for hit points. However, at first level, the Woodsman rolls 2d6. Thereafter hit dice only increase by one (e.g.. 3d6 at 2nd level, 4d6 at third level). Like the Fighter, the Woodsman reaches name level at 9th level. Similiarly, at 10th level and subsequent levels, the Woodsman no longer gains additional hit dice but does gain 2 additional hit points.


Wow, this woodsman class sounds really intriguing. What cultures in this era would produce people like that?

1.) "Barbarian": I want to flesh things out as the campaign develops, so I don't have a list of cultures in mind. Barbarian characters can be based on real world "barbarians" such as Picts, Sarmatians, Saxons, Huns, Goths, etc., based on fictional barbarians such as Howardian Cimmerians or Howardian Picts, or based on a mishmash of real-world cultures or a mix of real-world barbarians and fantastic barbarians. My campaign millieu is not going to be so closely based on the real world that each historically appropriate barbarian culture will have a direct analogue in the campaign world. If you are inspired by historical "barbarian" cultures, be just that: inspired. Don't feel that you need to strive for historical accuracy, as this is, after all, a D&D game, and not set in an Earth, fantastic or otherwise.

2.) Civilized (scare quotes optional): Explorers and army scouts could well be of the Woodsman class. So could frontier troops trained in fighting barbarians. I am also envisioning the milieu as dystopian enough that large portions of civilized territory will have gone to seed, so peasants, farmers, and hunters may well have had enough opportunity stalking through forests and abandoned farmland to become woodwise.

3.) Civilized/barbarian: Barbarian federates settled in civilized territory, civilized slaves of barbarian masters habituated to savage life, and persons from frontier zones who don't fall neatly into one category or another. Isolated cultures dwelling within the boundaries of civilized lands (similiar to real-world Basques or Isaurians) would also produce large numbers of Woodsmen.


I'm also fine with terrain-specific reskinning of the Woodsman class, so that they get a bonus to hide in deserts or mountains instead of woods, if that fits better with anyone's character concept.
@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 This is also why I like to leave things a bit vague at the inception of a campaign; I feel that a certain vagueness allows players to come up with cool shit like this that I wouldn't've though about on my own. :)
-Are you familiar with the Jacquerie from medieval Europe? Bagaudae were the Late Roman equivalent.
-So, in addition to isolated rejects dwelling in ruined cities, you may well encounter large, hostile, armed bands of peasants and slaves accompanied by criminals, legion-deserters, and disgruntled veterans. The bagaudae will be intent on looting, slaying, and otherwise gaining revenge upon their prime foes, oppressive wealthy rural landowners.
-Having mobile legions in a province tends to keep the bagaudae in check. For this reason, it is generally thought best to shift around the mobile legions from time to time; moving a legion from one province to another distant province means that the legionaries will not feel any sort of ethnic solidarity with rebellious peasants on whom they may be called to act against.
-The wealthy rural landowners can also present problems for the Empire, as they will gather large retinues of men loyal or beholden to them and violently resist tax-collectors. Succesful tax-collectors generally are accompanied by large numbers of armed men, either detached from the legions or mercenaries.
 == Map Description ==