View Single Post
 
Old 09-14-2004, 11:51 PM
RPGnet Reviews
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
RE: Why Didn't Rome "Fall?"

Post originally by Bill at 2004-09-14 22:51:42
Converted from Phorums BB System


Sounds interesting, I will need to hunt it up. In our setting Rome doesn't fall but it does stumble. A period of social disorder lasting about 100 years precedes the time the setting is in. This is due to rogue magi rising up and forming their own kingdoms through out the Empire. A series of weak Emperors allow this state to continue until Tiderius, the current Imperator, takes office. He sets out on a campaign to eliminate the largest of these rogue magi. The year 1461 sees the Empire on shaky legs but moving forward. A lot of potential adventures lie in eliminating the remaining rogue magi.

The social upheaval was not just the actions of the rogue magi, not everyone is able to cast magic and it does not respect class or position. Many magi come from barbarians and plebians. This caused considerable social stress. Even if the Emperors before Tiderius had been strong they would have had difficulty raising the necessary loyal troops to defeat the rogue magi.

Hope that sheds some light on the setting.

Thanks for the comments.

Bill

Innagadda Davida wrote:
-------------------------------
Just for counterpoint: One of the Alternate Earth books from GURPS has a Roman World. They did an interesting twist. Rome fell. Got back up. Fell again after reaching the New World.

Currently the Roman Empire arose out of it's Central American Colony.
Reply With Quote