It is now spring in 1755, 6 months since the Indian rebellion and the collapse of the British at Albany. The Indians have overrun the forces of the British, capturing Albany and other key towns all the way South to the heavily settled areas of New York. Rebellious colonials maintain essential control over the major cities of the North – places like Albany and Boston – but their cities are essentially white outposts in the new red expanse. The British government holds a band of cities along the coast, from New York in the North to Richmond and Hampton in Virginia. They also have a sizeable community of Delaware Indians hostage South East of Washington, on the Delaware peninsula. They are moving troops into these cities to reinforce them, and it may be that they are going to be able to maintain some kind of status quo, provided that the French remaining threatening to the North.
Things as they were...
The most likely outcome of the endgame of this war will be that the colonials will establish an independent kingdom in the belt of cities from Albany through Boston to Maine, possibly constituting them as independent city states within a broader series of native American nations. The British will then retain the seaboard and its immediate surrounds, from New York to Hampton, and will repatriate the Delaware tribes they have captured as part of a peace settlement. Any attempt by the Indians to capture New York and Washington will lead to a brutal and devastating series of battles, and the massive loss of forces on both sides. The only way that the Indians will capture these cities easily is if something forces the British to withdraw, and it is looking likely that the only thing which would force this is a collapse of support for the colonial enterprise in England, or a catastrophic loss to the French in Europe forcing a withdrawal of forces from the colonies.
Should the Indians overrun the British territories, the most likely outcome will be the slaughter of British forces and the civilians living there, especially now that the enigmatic Cherokee and Shanwee have moved into the campaign to the South West of Virginia. The colonials of the North Eastern territories will then be able to move into these cities and form them into additional city states, though there is some possibility that the South-Eastern Indian tribes – the Southern Delaware, Shawnee and Cherokee – will want to take over Hampton or Richmond in Virginia as a kind of Indian city-state, and the North-Eastern Indian tribes – the Northern Delaware, Iroquois, Mohawk and Mohican – will want to take over Ohio for the same purpose. This will involve displacement or destruction of white families, and in the latter case possibly some conflict with the French.
The Iroquois, Mohawk and Mohican nations have now captured all the hinterlands North, Northwest and West of Albany and Shenechtady, which has been designated a joint Indian–colonial trading town on the edge of the “independent” city-state of Albany. In recognition of their efforts, the characters have been granted a huge slice of this land to rule as their own kingdom. This land consists of a triangle stretching from Fort William Henry through Sackets Harbour on Lake Ontario to the Canadian border, along this border (essentially the St Lawrence River) as far as the trapping town of Cornwall, then East to Rouses Point (the northernmost tip of non-French land at this time). Everything lying between this boundary and the western bank of the Lakes Champlain, George and Saratoga belongs to the characters.
Map-making in this era is truly Infernal
Negotiations are currently underway with the tribes and colonial towns of this land to arrange their transfer of allegiance to the PCs. This will be the only multi-ethnic land in North America, consisting as it does of mixed Mohawk, Mohican and settler country. It will be the PCs’ responsibility to make this land richer, and to defend it from the French…
The PCs have to decide the answers to the following questions:
- Do they want this land?
- Do they want to see the victory of the Indians and Colonials in the New World?
- If they side with these people, can they think of a way to bring about the peaceful collapse of British forces in New York and Virginia?
- If not, will they aid in a war to destroy them, or press for peace?
- If they take the land, and knowing that they will be able to make money trading with the newly constituted city states, do they care what happens between the Indians and the British?
- Is there anything else they want to do?
Discuss in comments…
September 7, 2009 at 6:54 pm
We should take the land. And rather than deciding on who should persist in the New World, I think we should make sure to get the most out of the British Forces: even if not occupying these lands anymore, I’m sure the Brits will have to do trade with “our” land. We should tax them ’til they bleed — if legal means do not suffice, piracy is the call. And at that point you may starrt seeing my rreal incentive. Arr!
September 7, 2009 at 8:57 pm
That will require that you arrange a trade route through Albany (upriver from New York) or around Newfoundland and through the French-controlled waters of St. Lawrence Sound, a considerably longer and more expensive journey. You of course will have the right of access through St. Lawrence sound (you have a boat, remember). So piracy is a possibility. To arrange a trade route through Albany shouldn’t be too hard but will require a visit. You could stay at your townhouse there…
September 8, 2009 at 1:23 pm
So there was outright war between the British and the Indians who saved there butts from the “wraiths” – even though they were vague allies beforehand ? If they’ve lost everywhere down to New York what is that 50% of their territory ? How severe were the British defeats ? Was this a tactical withdrawal or were the butchered ? You say the Indians could not easily take the remining British holdings so the two forces are presumably well balanced at the moment ?
“Rebellious colonials” is this our colonials or the remnants of Washington’s ? Why do they survive and not the British? Because the Indians are happy to coexist with these non genocidal Colonials ? Because they were fought off (in which case how did they suceed and the British fail?). Or are they merely next ?
What’s happened to the French – were they out of the loop totally – not invaded by wraiths/ protected by Indians. Not attacked by Indians at all afterwards ? So they retain all the holdings they had prior to recent evensts while the British have lost half (or whatever) ? Does that make the British a lot weaker then the French now or as I suggest above, did the British rather withdraw before the Indians and consolidate their forces around New York etc so they are not militarily much weaker than before ?
Answering your q’s
1. ‘natch, though ‘ruling’ with a very light hand, we’re not intrerested in replacing the folk who’ve just been kicked out.
2. I suspect I’ll be a minority in this but as a former army officer I do still retain some loyalty to the crown so as I’ve said before, I would prefer a situation whereby there wasn’t genocide on any side (not even of the French).
3. I’m not sure I even want that ? Do the Indians really want NY ? I quite like situation described in your ‘most likely outcome’ paragraph, but if they have to go, peacfully would certainly be my preferred arrangement.
4. I would not want to aid in direct war against the British unless they started to adopt Washington style genocidal tactics against the Indians/Colonials.
5. Yes, I would still care and would want a peaceful resolution, and would be prepared to work toward achieving it.
6. You haven’t really mentioned the French, but if they’ve been left unscathed by all this I would certainly want them to get a taste of it themselves. Given their unpleasantness with the Indians totem pole (something even the British never did to the Indians) surely the Indians owe them quite a lot of grief ? Again I would prefer to avoid mass slaughter of the French (and certainly of their civilians) but I would seek to arrange a similar rebalancing of their holdings as has been the case for the British. To free any ‘oppresseed’ french colonials and restore any displaced Indians, but leaving the French some costal areas for ongoing trade, like the British.
My preferrred final position would be Indian ruled territory (it was afterall theirs to begin with, though presumably underpopulated ?) but with friendly independant ‘city’ states scattered across the country. Some Colonial, some British and some French. Each territory nominally governs itself and agrees to a common law of the land (Indian based) between the states. Each state is allowed to maintain a proportionate garrison for self defense purposes but major army movements wouold be considered breach of treaty. Each citystate/indian nation agrees mutual defense pacts with the others so everyone is inclined to keep the peace. This does presume the Indians reflect the ‘noble’ in ‘noble savage’ trope rather than the ‘savage’ part and that they can be be trusted to coexist with the British and French as I assume they are happy to (from what you’ve said above) with the colonials.
September 8, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Remember that the Indians were clearly becoming dissatisfied with the British beforehand and the Prophet was manoeuvring towards some kind of confrontation. And the British didn’t save anyone from the Wraiths – you did. I’m sure that with whatever propaganda methods he uses the Prophet has already made everyone think the wraiths were a British defensive move.
It was mostly a tactical withdrawal after initial severe defeats, to the colonials around Albany and Eastwards, and to the Indians in the outlying towns. Note that the British don’t hold much land between their cities, which have become essentially fortresses, but the Indians don’t have a Navy (yet) so the British can easily move troops and goods around by ship, and use ships in military engagements near the sea, which helps to limit the Indians ability to capture the major cities.
So the two forces are essentially well-balanced, but remember Britain is simultaneously fighting a war in Europe against the French, so they are depending on things going well in that campaign in order to hold onto their American cities.
Washington’s colonials have been defeated or subsumed, or eaten by Wraiths. All that remains of the colonials in New England are those who allied with you or who you saved. There is never going to be a white America as it existed in history – at best there will be a series of independent city states which may or may not include those on the Eastern seaboard currently held by the British. White America has fragmented into American City States (from Albany East) and Loyalist Fortresses (loyal to the British – New York etc.)
The French have lost some holdings around their borders in Western America but have taken this Indian rebellion as a chance to concentrate their efforts on the European campaign. The French are essentially at peace with Indians within New France and are happier to deal with them as equals (think Montcalm and Magua in Last of the Mohicans), and also less inclined to under-estimate them, and they understand that no Indian force is going to be heading North because of the tribal rivalries it would provoke. This situation gives them a free hand to regain some balance in a European war that has been going badly for them while their main opponents are distracted by a major rebellion in the Americas.
Regarding your specific points, unless the British come up with a new wonder-weapon they won’t be enacting any major military achievements except retaining their fortresses and suing for peace. Washington style tactics are out of the question except through nefarious magic (which we’ve already seen come into play once, so I wouldn’t rule it out…)
See my notes above about the French in regard to your point 6 – they rule their territory with a lighter hand, and the worst outcome for them unless the Indians invade is that in time New France will become independent of old France – but only if old France is crushed in Europe. Also, the Indians of America invading New France would provoke conflict with the Huron and other French tribes, and the French probably wouldn’t have to go anywhere near the conflict for a number of years…
As for whether the Indians are more “noble” than “savage” … they eat the hearts of their vanquished foes. While they are still beating. They may be honourable in their dealings with those they trust, but whatever settlement you come to is potentially going to have to involve some nasty compromises. e.g. “Indian law” may not suit you – remember the Iroquois women in your first adventure, and the way they dealt with their traitor? It may have seemed chaotic to you but it was the rule of law to them… Think of the entirely “honourable” ending of The Last of the Mohicans for more pointers as to how the land between the city states is likely to be ruled…
September 8, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Fine comrades,
To determine our course we need a better understanding of the lay of the land. We should ponder these issues:
1. Who controls the other colonial cities?
2. Do those other cities have agreements with the natives?
3. How many people live under our control? What is the (rough) population break down within our area of contol? All colonial? Some Indians?
4. Who are our neighbours (which tribes, independence cities and European nations)? Who not adjacent to us could still potentially attack us?
5. How have our relations with the native populace been during the past months?
The vision I believe we should pursue is to unite the colonial cities in America and establish peace and trade with the natives. Whilst doing this we should build a way of life we can all support (except Mr Black). Eventually an opportunity to take over the remaining British and French cities will arise and we should seize the chance to spread the culture we can create. A crucial part of this new way of life will be establishing a cultural exchange with the natives to assimilate the best of their culture and attempt to convince them to follow our new, combined, way of life. Perhaps one day we can even attempt to federate the colonial cities and the Indian nations into one grand nation across the continent.
In the immediate future, the goals that best serve this vision are to:
1. Establish local rule/defence and begin to promote the culture we seek
2. Establish peace and trade treaties with the surrounding powers and trade back to Europe
3. Attempt to form a federation with the other Colonial cities
4. Determine who we should harass to achieve our longer term goals (probably the strongest power in order to maintain the status quo until we can tilt the playing field to our advantage)
Other courses of action that may benefit us are:
1. Re-establishing immigration from Europe
2. Promoting research and trade, and establishing the institutions that support these
3. Assisting in the exploration and establishment of trails for the purposes of trade, exploration and defence of that which we hold dear
To answer your questions raise by our correspondent Faustus:
1. Do they want this land?
Yes. Someone in this work needs to create a just land where all can be free to pursue life liberty and happiness. Our work here will assist in paying for our sins and earn us peace.
2. Do they want to see the victory of the Indians and Colonials in the New World?
I’d prefer an end to the bloodshed. If the Colonials were to join us then we could attempt to mediate a peace with the natives. If the Colonials continue to antagonise the natives then we will not upset our allies by riding to their rescue. We will however be able to take in anyone who will subscribe to our creed.
3. If they side with these people, can they think of a way to bring about the peaceful collapse of British forces in New York and Virginia?
I think that the presence of the British serves our aims in the short term. It should distract the other powers (Indian and French) and given them a reason to speak to us by allowing us to play the part of reasonable partners with all peaceful sides. Once we start to reach out to Europe (immigration and trade), we’re likely to run into British control of the seas. At that point Russell’s planned piracy will become an important point to win further breathing space.
4. If not, will they aid in a war to destroy them, or press for peace?
As much as my mind now turns to peace, I must remain a realist enough to say that continued tension between others and their peace with us serves our people the best. Eventually we may be able to cut the British off from Europe and absorb their people into our new civilisation. Until that time we should allow the present situation to drag on. Our eventual actions are bound to upset the balance in any event.
5. If they take the land, and knowing that they will be able to make money trading with the newly constituted city states, do they care what happens between the Indians and the British?
We need to monitor this situation, but intervening at this stage does not serve our goals of justice and peace.
6. Is there anything else they want to do?
I must re-state to my companions my firm believe that we should seek to learn more of differences and similarities between the native and European magics. Most of all we need to find some way of using these powers without damning our souls to the torment of which Russell was so recently a visitor, or alternatively find a different source of power that will let us oppose magic users effectively. (Father Cantrus is becoming more aware of how often he’s cast Angel of Death and would like to find some way of escaping the fate he fears lies ahead of him. With magic’s price so evident perhaps his good works will need to rely on more mundane actions than magically slaying all who oppose him.)
September 8, 2009 at 11:37 pm
In response to Father Cantrus’ comments and questions, from the beginning…
Regarding the lay of the land:
1. Various colonial strong men control the cities, with their support base thrown into position hastily after the war and of variable strength depending on who got to be in charge first
2. All the cities have agreements with the natives, or they would be done for/still at war; these agreements have been coordinated, discussed with you, and given the imprimatur of the Prophet, and they follow the same basic lines – the colonials didn’t try to kill the Indians and even helped them; the indians don’t want the cities; so they can all live happily ever after provided nothing stupid happens. Everyone is walking on eggshells on both sides
3. In general you don’t have a clear idea of who survived the war and how many – it’s not relevant from the point of view of the Indians because at this stage on the frontier they’re still getting along with a lot of colonials and happy to trade with them, work with them, etc. Probably a lot of people survived after the Prophet brought in his web of protection. Any cities which have been emptied by war, famine or vengeful spirits will have been occupied after by Indians or Undead, but there aren’t many of these. Also, in your lands you know there are 5 major towns, all very small – Fort William Henry, Ticonderoga, Rouse’s Landing, Cornwall and Sackets Harbour. Other settlements exist without names. There are also two tribes – Iroquois to the West and Mohican to the East. Both are now tribes of yours. That’s right, if you agree to this land you also rule an Indian tribe of mixed Mohican/Iroquois background.
4. Your neighbours to your east across Lake Ticonderoga are the Mohican. To the North across St. Lawrence River are Frenchies – trillions of the buggers. And Huron. Did I mention Huron? To the West and South West are Iroquois. To your South and South East are the city states of the new America, floating in a sea of Mohican and Mohawk.
5. Good. Very good, in fact – everyone thinks of you as heroes (except the British and French)
Cantrus’s vision of a multi-ethnic, peaceful, federated Red/White America (red white and blue if you include the Frenchies!) is probably beyond the scope of this campaign but certainly provides a nice vision. In the short term uniting the towns and indians could be done by an Ambassador or representative, rather than you guys – a kind of travelling negotiator who is popular with the Indians and the Colonials, perhaps who understands the English. Someone who can be protected and possibly also has contacts with the French. I can think of someone… can you?
I like Cantrus’s final suggestion a lot! You guys might want to look into that…