Forum

Arrigo - yup.

But if the 'canon' leaves it at 'Northern Fleet is tussling with RN', it becomes up to the players to decide who wins in their game world.
What happened to the Northern Banner fleet or the RN is, at least within the context of the initial game release, immaterial. So why have any mention of it?
Taking out any mention removes a point of contention raised by some of us, and doesn't ruin it for anyone else.
Seems like an easy and painless fix.

Qboid - slightly less current politics please.

From the King Charles perspective. I'd rather see some sort of coup by dissafected troops and politicians with Charles as the figurehead. He could then - possibly - use forces loyal to the idea of a monarchy as opposed to yet more politicians to take some form of limited power. We would then see England split by another civil war. Giving lots of good opportunities for roleplaying.

That could potentially work, although in an extremely limited sense. That said, there's not enough people and personnel available that are fit for the task at hand, so one wonders how much of an impact this small group could have in wider terms. If for some strange reason the surviving, and greater, mass of the surviving political and civil emergency system throws its weight behind the cause, then it might work. Otherwise, as I've pointed out before, Charles and his followers could potentially be arrested and even shot under emergency powers. I don't think it would even get to the point of a civil war as such - there's simply not enough people or materiel for that to work - but possibly it could mean that the area around Reading is one hot spot of conflict in the UK. Potentially, if there was some future 4E sourcebook for the UK, this hotspot could be one of many. Perhaps there are groups who are aligned with this 'cause' elsewhere in the UK, but that would probably boil down to how far away they are from SE England and how many people actually have some means of hearing about what has happened in Reading. 'Protect and Survive' etc advised people to have radios handy, but one wonders how many still work or have batteries by 2000.

Well,

pardon me of being thick... but of all the gibberish in the UK Setting, I found no issue with Charles, if his mother has indeed die, being proclaimed King. Technically the PM and the rest of the Cabinet are royal ministers... Said that there will be a PM in charge.

As for another VBCW... I never bought it. I know plenty of mini gamers who like the setting but is not for me, and not even that realistic. I also find a certain fascination with coups... there must be coups everywhere in this timeline. But one funny thing about coups... the majority fails. You need to muster significant support for a coup, and the locals need to support you, at least at start, or you need to have a powerful backer (like the Red Army in early post war Europe).

There must also be a reason for a coup. And frankly, the chap who had to take charge of UK in that setting... well I am not going to envy him...

I also find a certain fascination with coups... there must be coups everywhere in this timeline. But one funny thing about coups... the majority fails. You need to muster significant support for a coup, and the locals need to support you, at least at start, or you need to have a powerful backer (like the Red Army in early post war Europe).

That's actually one of the problems I, too, have here.

In my view (also being a historian) history is whole lot more about complex processes and chains of interlocking causes and effects, rather than a succession of cataclysmic breakwater events, with Big Leaders making Big Decisions.
Certainly that aspect does exist as well, to a degree — but even the Maximiliens, Vladimirs, Maos, Ches, Fidels, Ruhollahs, etc of history are to a great degree slaves to and bound by the contexts they find themselves in. They are, each of them, an Effect following some series of Causes that preceded them.

Suspending history on a chain of successful coups is ... well, romantic in a certain sense I suppose, but not very ... historical.

pardon me of being thick... but of all the gibberish in the UK Setting, I found no issue with Charles, if his mother has indeed die, being proclaimed King. Technically the PM and the rest of the Cabinet are royal ministers... Said that there will be a PM in charge.

But RAW in the Alpha, things come across more as 'Charles takes command'. Where the PM is is a different question, as he or she would be elsewhere. Being an elected official, like other MPs, the notion of handing power over to Charles would be.... fiddly, and on all sort of legal and historical levels. It effectively negates their role in terms of decision- and policy-making - not to mention the result of the last democratic election. What effectively happens is that you have an extremely costly war protecting UK democracy from the threat of communism, only to then simply hand over power to despotism as soon as most of the shooting stops. Seems a tad unlikely. So as it stands in the Alpha, Charles and some others somehow or other think that they're in charge of what's left of the UK. I've already questioned the veracity of that happening.

But RAW in the Alpha, things come across more as 'Charles takes command'.

But do they, though?

What it literally says is "But what of the government? The Queen is dead but long live King Charles III. Hidden in the bunker called Region Six, near Reading, the King and his ministers control the Thames Valley west of the ruin that was London."

It only says that Charles has succeeded his mother. "His ministers" would to me very much suggest there also being a PM.

pardon me of being thick... but of all the gibberish in the UK Setting, I found no issue with Charles, if his mother has indeed die, being proclaimed King. Technically the PM and the rest of the Cabinet are royal ministers... Said that there will be a PM in charge.

But RAW in the Alpha, things come across more as 'Charles takes command'. Where the PM is is a different question, as he or she would be elsewhere. Being an elected official, like other MPs, the notion of handing power over to Charles would be.... fiddly, and on all sort of legal and historical levels. It effectively negates their role in terms of decision- and policy-making - not to mention the result of the last democratic election. What effectively happens is that you have an extremely costly war protecting UK democracy from the threat of communism, only to then simply hand over power to despotism as soon as most of the shooting stops. Seems a tad unlikely. So as it stands in the Alpha, Charles and some others somehow or other think that they're in charge of what's left of the UK. I've already questioned the veracity of that happening.

I understand, and I also find unbelievable Charles doing more than figurehead. My very very limited knowledge of the royal family (based on just one chat with Charles brother in law ) it that the family abides the rules. Also to put the whole thing back on its feet you need the civil service or, more accurately its remnants, and these will ask for civilian 'elected' leadershipi firs,t at a distant second probably for military chain of command if the situation warrants. My impression was that for some strange reason the writer just used Charles to indicate the central government... (and that show the little extent of research... I am afraid of). But I see a sort of blank approach in the setting were strongmen are put in charge here and there... probably to create a more 'mad maxesque' apocalyptical setting.

What it literally says is "But what of the government? The Queen is dead but long live King Charles III. Hidden in the bunker called Region Six, near Reading, the King and his ministers control the Thames Valley west of the ruin that was London."

It only says that Charles has succeeded his mother. "His ministers" would to me very much suggest there also being a PM.

That was my interpretation as well, that the Ministers referred to were Government Ministers (and so by extension Members of Parliament). So His Majesty's Government is in Reading and functioning as it should (or at least as best as it can under the circumstances), presumably with some sort of armed forces following their orders (otherwise they wouldn't be able to "control" anything), whether that's pre War police or Territorials or such like. I didn't really find anything questionable about any of that. I think it's the sort of thing that could be expanded on later, either by individual GM's or in official follow on material.

Wasn't a member of the Royal Family going 'rogue' and declaring himself King part of the 2013 backstory?