Kol
by Ashtagon- Names: Places names in Kol are generally puns. Another issue is the repetition of “Kol” in so many places (King Kol XIV of Kol). .
- I'd suggest renaming the area to Kolland. The king is re-titled as Lord Kol XIV..
- Everything is a pun. Kol-Edge (college), Kol-Slah (coleslaw), Kol-Khat (cold cuts), Kol-Tarkee (cold turkey), Kol-Gate (Colgate). I'm sure Kol-Dahk probably hides a pun too. There's no reason to keep any of this exactly as it is..
- Politics: Kol nominally imitates Thyatis, at least, King Kol XIV thinks so. However, it plays on republicanism, uses terms are are more typical of the French enragés or Soviet communism, uses a title (Doge) seen in renaissance Italy (most notably the Republic of Venice), and gives the king a distinctly Roman-styled birth name. It's hard to make a joke of autocrats-playing-at-republicans when the Thyatians themselves (and their inspiration, the Romans/Byzantines) did exactly that, giving a veneer of democracy to what was mostly autocracy.
- Rather than style themselves after Thyatis, they can style themselves after Darokin, with whom they actually have immediate and continuing contact. Rather than Doge (which is renaissance Italy), or even duke (etymologically related to doge, but a title not extant in Darokin), Kol titles himself as the Magistrate of Kolland (“you may address me as “Lord”). He imagines himself to be a minor official within the Republic of Darokin, governing one of the borderlands regions, just as soon as the republic recognises his emissaries. For their part, Darokin sees the Kolland emissaries as raiding parties. Lord Kol wants Darokin help to bring the other tribes in his land under his control.
King Kol is the 14th king of that name, and kobolds have a lifespan that, while shorter than a human's, is more in the "nasty, brutish and short" depiction of mediaeval Europe rather than being completely different (young adult starts ad 14 1d4 years; mature at 24 years; elder at 45+ years). Assuming each kobold king ruled for an average of 20 years, and that every King was called Kol without exception, that still means the kobold people have been there at least 280 years. On the other hand, Kol I, after leaving Thyatis, might merely have taken over a group of kobolds who were already in the Broken Lands. All we can say for sure if that the current Kol Dynasty is coming up to three centuries old.
The official backstory is that King Kol the First was a court jester at a Thyatian noble's court, and won special favour from his duke, eventually leading to his liberty. This is the sole reason given in gaz10 for the Thyatian cultural influence.
D&D humanoids are supposed to be imitative of human culture. This explains why humanoid cultures adjacent to a human culture will take on the trappings and personality of that culture, and in a storytelling context, can be used to depict the 'less noble' aspects of that human society. From a cultural sensitivity point of view, this technique only works if the human society and the associated humanoid society are presented in the same physical real-world game product, and in-world are in the same place (or immediately adjacent, such that PCs can wander back and forth and interact with both side by side).
(From a Mystara lore point of view, this imitative aspect of humanoid sociology can be explained by the races originally having had the souls of humans when they were first created by the Immortals.)
However, this imitative aspect of humanoid sociology only works if used to explain their current culture. If they could imitate a culture from 200 years ago, why aren't they now imitating the culture they are now adjacent to? No matter how tenuous any continuing contact with the older culture might be, it won't be as solid as any contact they have with their current adjacent human culture. And if the kobolds of 200 years ago could imitate the Thyatian culture, why couldn't the imitated culture from before they were imitating Thyatians stick?
-----
On another note, I have absolutely no qualms about changing bedrock canon details. It is absolutely canon that Red Orcland plays up tropes found in mid-20th century stereotypes of American Indians. And regardless of how acceptable (or not) this might have been in 1988 (34 years ago!), it is something that would absolutely sink any attempt to officially reboot Mystara today if left as it is in a new product. Its also canon that Yellow Orkia is modelled in several ways after Yuan Dynasty China, but again, the cultural sensitivity issues are known.
This is why, in the case of Red Orcland, I want to play up the idea that this tribe of orcs is noted for having red hair, rather than being an American Indian storytelling device.
(Mod Note: We can acknowledge that cultural sensitivity issues exist. Let's not debate whether any given item is a problem though, as that is ultimately for those who are affected by it to determine.)