Regarding warfare in the Tablelands before the Prism Pentad, Kalindren here makes a critical point:
Though wider latitude may have been generally accepted in the centuries immediately following the Rebellion, considerable limitations must have been in place for the majority of centuries during the Pax Draconis. The destruction of cities post-Cleansing Wars of which we know, such as Giustenal, Yaramuke and Kalidnay must have surely made their absence felt in terms of the Levy. The loss of each city only added to the burden of the others It necessarily must have been either a de facto if not de jure reality that total war was forbidden, or at least might bring upon collective extreme punishment from the other Champions. Any exception to this likely would have had to been sanctioned by the collective sorcerer-kings if not the Dragon himself.
The original boxed set often describes inter-city-state war as reactions to famines, or for a need to increase a slave population. Given their vital interdependence to keep the Prison fueled if nothing else, I doubt very much the SKs would find it appropriate to try to raze an enemy city to the ground and kill its monarch. To pursue such total war policies would place a losing sorcerer-king in an unacceptable position, and the two warring SKs might destroy a whole city in forcing a final outcome. Even for the winner, he would be blamed by his peers for the loss of yet another city, and the addition to both himself and his colleagues the cost of yet more souls added to the yearly levy. Ultimately it would be self-defeating.
I speculate the former Champions did not speak too much together. They were bound together by a mutual past, a mutual fate, a mutual hate. Suspicion, jealousy and profound arrogance must have formed considerable walls between the SKs, and for the Dragon, he must have wearied of the endless task to keep the SKs under the dread of his power in order to keep the city-states submissive enough to keep the Prison fueled every year, and therefore probably had nothing to say to his former colleagues as long as they did not do anything to risk the current peace and order.
Under the Pax Draconis, petty wars to gather slaves and food during famine years would be tolerable. Even wars of grievance, where an SKs was made to taste the anger of his peer with the burning of his fields, the slaughter of his nobles, or even perhaps the looting of his treasury, may have been generally acceptable. But it must have been understood between them that taking a war to an SK’s citadel and threatening a peer directly would have been unacceptable, because it would force a confrontation between the two, and might end in the ruination of a city and the loss of an SKs who could keep a city in order. Likewise it must have been unacceptable to level a city and reduce it to ashes. Any damage done must have been of the sort from which they could recover while still paying the levy, for if the attacker went too far, surely the balance would be paid by his city instead.
It is for these reasons why it is likely sorcerer-kings rarely led their armies personally, for the likelihood of extreme ecological devastation was too high in an already dying world. Their presence on the field would surely elevate any situation usually more than his peers would prefer, and an SK who was too bold might get a visit from the Dragon to warn him to calm down, and try to punish his colleague in another city-state through some other means than total war.
I believe the case of Yaramuke is the only one in which total war was pursued by a single SK against a peer. We suspect it must have been earlier in the Crimson Age, for according to Black Flames the city was destroyed “ages ago.” It may have been earlier enough that the Pax Draconis had not yet fully been understood. Or perhaps we can accept the Lynn Abbey backstory a bit, and speculate that the collective Champions understood Hamanu and Sielba had a more serious pre-existing feud with roots from before the Rebellion, and that peace could only be had by the end of the one or the other.
So in summary, I speculate the Pax Draconis had the following understood but unwritten rules by which the Dragon’s Peace was upheld:
- Total war between the city-states was unacceptable unless sanctioned by the Dragon
- Wars must be limited to one city-state against the other so as to prevent the singular city-state from elevating the conflict into total war
- Wars between the city-states might be fought for food, treasure, slaves, retribution, and other limited motivators. But conquest of a rival city-state’ core lands, or a threat to the SK’s prestige, such as the sacking of his citadel, was unacceptable, much less a threat to his person. Any exception to this must be sanctioned by the Dragon
- Wars and feuds must not result in the death of an SK, not for any reason. An SK is the servant of the Dragon who holds a portion of the responsibility for keeping the levy paid. The murder or assassination of any SK is absolutely impermissible, unless sanctioned by the Dragon. Likewise, the behavior of an SK must not become so egregious or destructive to the common good, or else the Dragon might punish the SK, and even destroy him himself. Therefore it is good policy for an SK to not be overbold, or threaten his peers over much by regularly personally leading his armies, thereby trying the patience of his colleagues.
- When in doubt over the above rules, an SK must consider whether the consequence of his warfare will risk interruption of the Levy payment for either himself or his opponent over both the short and long term, the payment of the Levy being the most important factor the SKs must usually consider . If this is in serious doubt, he should roll back his aggression to a more limited and controlled level, lest he receive an unpleasant visit from the Dragon that puts him back in line.
There are surely many other reasons why most wars between the city-states were limited, with a final triumph or defeat of an SK almost never occurring. But I suspect the Pax Draconis was the pivotal and most real factor the SKs had to face, followed closely by their understanding that unrestrained warfare led by themselves might lead to the ecological collapse of what remained of the living world, and thereby eventually their inability to pay the Levy.
