Worldbuilding: Different Styles of Monarchy in D&D Political Campaigns

Salutations, nerds! I’ve been giving a lot of thought to fantasy governments and how they tend to be portrayed in fifth edition Dungeons & Dragons. Most of the time you’ve got a pretty standard monarchy in D&D set up and that’s all right if you’re playing a kick-in-the-door style game, but sometimes you want more out of a D&D political campaign than that. Today, we’re going to talk about monarchies (by which I mean ‘one ruler’ more so than the specifics given in the Dungeon Master’s Guide) and a bit about feudalism for worldbuilding.

Worldbuilding through a monarchy in D&D

Buckle up, there’s a lot.

The model of succession you see the most often in fantasy is the one where the king rules until he dies and then his oldest son inherits the throne. Sometimes, mention will be made of the princess being allowed to inherit if she doesn’t have any brothers. There isn’t a lot of deviation, but there are quite a few more models.

I’m about to start throwing vocabulary at you. Don’t stress it, there won’t be a test. There’s no reason you need to remember any of these words later, but the concepts they’re attached to might help you the next time you sit down to create a fictional country.

Succession laws

First of all, let’s talk about line of succession.

When the eldest child inherits, that is called “primogeniture” and it’s pretty much the standard as far as fantasy monarchies go. The assumption is the eldest child inherits, and the second is next in line and so on. Because it is so standard and used all the time, there isn’t a whole lot of interesting stuff to say about it. That said, there is a word for it, and now, if you didn’t already know it, you do.

Ultimogeniture

The first snag we hit is “ultimogeniture,” also known as “junior right”’ You’ve probably already guessed, this implies the youngest child inherits. Both in fiction and historically, this doesn’t happen very often. The reason it does usually follows the logic that an older child has had time to establish themselves.

Consider merit as a cultural ideal, or that your monarch was a conqueror who wants the same for their children in the future. Their oldest is expected to ride out and conquer something for themselves, and they get what they earn, or perhaps make a good marriage for themselves instead.

In a situation like this, the youngest child is often tasked with taking care of hearth and home, and tending to their parents in their old age.

One of the major downsides to this is often, especially in a world where primogeniture is considered normal, the eldest child feels slighted. All that time they’ve had to establish themselves and garner their own supporters puts them in a good position to dispose of their younger sibling and often they get away with it because of all of those advantages that made it so the youngest needed to inherit in the first place.

Now, I say ‘major downsides,’ but what I mean is ‘opportunities for plot.’f Especially in a country where the law suddenly changed from primogeniture to ultimogeniture. The villain of the game, or even a player character, could be a displaced eldest child with a lot of salty feelings about this.

Seniority

Another variant to consider is a law of seniority. In this case, when the reigning monarch dies, their next-oldest eligible sibling takes the crown. Mind you, this makes a lot more sense in many ways. In this case, the heir apparent would be an uncle over a son, someone older in the royal line who has had more time to accumulate experience and might rule more wisely.

On the other hand, this can easily become muddled. For instance, once the crown has passed down through all the monarch’s siblings, the youngest could easily decide they want their children to rule and change the laws to something more in line with standard primogeniture.

Alternatively, consider a situation in which two cousins were born on the same day and are next in line for the throne; how do you determine which inherits? There will likely be parties to support each claimant and it will bring about a volatile situation of state.

Divide these parties evenly enough and the current reigning monarch might be hesitant to clarify which potential heir should inherit for fear of slighting the other and their followers. In a situation like this, the PCs could be the cousins (if you are blessed enough to have a group that can clash this way without falling apart; take care it doesn’t get personal!), or members of one particular party trying to thwart the other.

When you’re playing a particularly political campaign, situations like this are pure gold. Remember; conflict is the life blood of the roleplaying.

Tanistry

This one is a Celtic tradition, but it’s a great one. It specifically refers to the practice, among clans, to come together and elect an heir (a tanist) from among those eligible. Historically speaking, this was strictly among the menfolk and only the men got to vote, but you don’t have to play it that way.

Everyone eligible, including sons, uncles (or again I feel the need to point out, daughters and aunts even though that isn’t how it happened historically), and anyone else with potential right to inherit come together in full assembly to vote on who should be the heir.

The really cool thing about tanistry is once they’re chosen, the heir is then the de facto second in command of the king or chieftain. That isn’t always the case with the heir apparent in an ordinary monarchy, but in this case they are considered to have earned it and it’s a proper office with proper responsibilities.

This might be a good solution if you want a little bit of democracy with your monarchy.

Partible inheritance

This is basically where property is apportioned among heirs. Titles and properties are distributed among the children of the monarch. Of course, this applies to lands, but can also apply to the crown as well.

Historically speaking this tended to lead to a breakdown of nations as dividing up the property into smaller states for each child to head works under the assumption all of those children are going to get along well enough to work together and that very seldom works in practice as well as it does in theory.

This could, of course, lead to a plotline in which each PC has inherited a piece of their parents’ land, or a situation in which the PCs are simple adventurers and must navigate through a political mire of slights and rivalries between the heirs that have inherited chunks of their nation under the death of the last monarch.

Gender rules

Let’s not talk around it. History is extremely sexist and in most cases females didn’t stand to inherit much. That said, there are words for the rule of who is eligible to inherit based on what they’ve got in their pants, and this, as well as everything mentioned above, could really stir things up if the law were to suddenly change.

On another note, it also sets a lot of tone for the society you’re playing in and could potentially give some of your PCs something to fight against on a socio-political level. (Note: Make sure they’re all okay with that out of character first, not everyone wants to have to fight against the system to be able to play the game!)

Agnatic succession refers to a system in which only males can inherit. If a king has no sons, his daughters will not inherit and instead the crown will pass to an uncle or nephew.

Agnatic-cognatic succession refers to a system in which females can inherit but only in the absence of a male heir.

Absolute cognatic succession refers to a system in which males and females inherit equally. For most gaming tables, particularly if your PCs have a horse in this race, this is probably the one you want to go with. Conflict may be the life blood of the roleplaying, but when you’re playing a political game the support of those around you is as important as the dice rolling mechanics and it sucks to be the character who has to work twice as hard to get half as much.

Enatic-cognatic succession refers to a system in which males can inherit, but only in the absence of a female heir.

Enatic succession refers to a system in which only females can inherit. If a queen has no daughters, her sons will not inherit and instead the crown will pass to an aunt or daughter.

Titles

I know, this article is starting to get pretty long, but bear with me. I have one more thing I want to chug through and then we’re finished, I promise.

Typically speaking, in an agnatic primogeniture society like fantasy seems to be so fond of, “queen” tends to come with the connotation she is there as an arm decoration and has no real political power. Of course if you are playing in an absolute cognatic kind of society, or heaven forbid a matriarchy, you might want to specify to your players exactly what they’re dealing with.

To that end, a reigning queen is called a queen regnant, and one who holds her position by virtue only of marriage is a queen consort. Similarly, a reigning king would be called a king regnant and one who holds his position by virtue of marriage is a king consort.

That said, there is also a word for a co-ruler by bedright. This law is referred to as “crown matrimonial” and makes the reigning monarch’s spouse an equal ruler in the eyes of the law. Historically speaking, the reigning monarch doesn’t have to give it to their spouse though sometimes there is a parliament that will insist upon it.

Your fantasy world could have that as their default if you so desire, or you could use it as another point of contention. Of course your monarch’s spouse wants to be an equal ruler, who wouldn’t? They have supporters, but they also have people working against them for it. Or if your realm does have the crown matrimonial as a standard law in effect and your monarch is about to marry someone horrible, well. Isn’t that just fuel for some kind of rebellion? Or for some heroes to try to step in and stop it?

Do you run a monarchy in D&D? Some other kind of government? Do your fictional countries vary? Have you done anything particularly interesting with your succession laws in your worldbuilding? Please let me know in the comments below, and as always, stay nerdy!

Perhaps a character in your D&D political campaign is the king, but the kind who still goes adventuring. In the video below Nerdarchists Dave and Ted discuss your adventure-rulership balance.

Like this?

Did you enjoy this post? Nerdarchy’s awesome volunteer staff of writers and editors do their best to create engaging, useful and fun content to share. If you like what you find here on our site, consider patronizing us in a good way through Patreon.

On top of reaching our goal of paying our writers, pledging gets you exclusive monthly content for your D&D game, opportunities to game with Nerdarchy, access to patron-only channels on our Discord and more.

With your generous support we’ll continue to create quality content between our YouTube channel and blog, invest in equipment to increase recording quality, and keep creating original publications and products to enhance your tabletop roleplaying and gaming experience.

Thank you for your consideration and as always, until next time stay nerdy!