TEXT: We See It DIfferently
  Bringing Factions into Conflict
  By Keith Ammann
  
  Copyright © 2020 Keith Ammann
  Cover illustration by Jen C. Marshall
  Watercolor stain by Jared Ondricek
  
  3
  d&d, however, was (and is) a roleplaying game, and 
  players began to use alignment as a guide to individual 
  philosophy, morality, and behavior. By the second edition, 
  this was explicitly codified in the Players’ Handbook. The 
  literal meaning of alignment—how one aligned oneself in 
  the epic battles of yore—disappeared from the game.
  While adhering to previous editions’ usage of 
  “alignment,” fifth edition d&d brings back the original 
  concept of alignment in the form of factions. Now, however, 
  factions are not simple diametric oppositions. They’re 
  messy.
  On the Sword Coast of Faerûn, fifth edition d&d’s 
  default setting, five factions predominate:
  •	 The	Lords’ Alliance is a league of city-states committed 
  to mutual protection and prosperity.
  •	 The	Order of the Gauntlet is a fellowship of individuals 
  committed to actively rooting out evil influence 
  everywhere.
  •	 The	Harpers are a secret society of lorekeepers and 
  spies, using their accumulated knowledge to undermine 
  tyrants.
  •	 The	Emerald Enclave is a circle of protectors of wild 
  lands and creatures and defenders of the natural order.
  •	 The	Zhentarim is an organized crime syndicate, 
  opportunistically pursuing wealth and power and 
  corrupting local authorities where it can.
  None of these factions corresponds neatly to a single 
  alignment. However, the interests of the Lords’ Alliance 
  are generally served by lawful good, lawful neutral, and 
  lawful evil characters; those of the Order of the Gauntlet, 
  by the lawful good, neutral good, and chaotic good; those 
  of the Harpers, by the neutral good, chaotic good, and 
  chaotic neutral; those of the Emerald Enclave, by the 
  neutral, neutral good, chaotic neutral, and chaotic good; 
  and those of the Zhentarim, by the lawful evil, neutral evil, 
  and chaotic evil.
  But Who’S rIght?
  Much of the appeal of d&d is rooted in the power of player 
  choice—the impact that player characters’ decisions can 
  have on present and future events in the game world. For 
  this reason, dungeon Masters like to present their players 
  with dilemmas that their pcs must work through. do 
  they destroy the dragon eggs or bring them back to be 
  domesticated and trained as mounts? do they pursue the 
  fleeing villain or rescue the captives who are in imminent 
  danger?
  Factions provide another way to incorporate moral 
  conflict into a d&d campaign. In doing so, however, it’s 
  important that a dm present a real dilemma, one in which 
  pcs might legitimately argue about which side has the right 
  idea. Always presenting the Order of the Gauntlet as the 
  obvious “good guys” and the Zhentarim as the obvious 
  “bad guys” is lazy and uninteresting.
  While monstrosities seek food and territory, giants 
  compete for status, dragons pursue power and treasure, 
  and aberrations are after who knows what, conflicts with 
  humanoid antagonists typically revolve around the things 
  we don’t discuss at the dinner table: religion and politics. 
  Factions represent the players in these conflicts.
  WhIch SIDe Are you on?
  In Chainmail, the tabletop wargame from which dungeons 
  & dragons sprang, “alignment” meant something different 
  from what it means now: It referred to which side a 
  character or creature took in the eternal struggles between 
  law and chaos, good and evil. Lawful good characters 
  fought against chaos on the side of law, with lawful evil 
  beings at their side—but in a battle of good vs. evil, they 
  fought against evil in alliance with the chaotic good. A 
  neutral good character would take the side of good against 
  evil, but sit out a fight between law and chaos.
  “I imagine that you have been asked to 
  investigate some sort of threat to the 
  throne. You are a young knight with purpose, 
  a stranger here, recruited from out of town. 
  And from a noble family, by your manner? 
  Then it’s reasonable to surmise that perhaps 
  the Lords’ Alliance has put you up to this 
  task, is that so? You must understand, Sir 
  Paris, that the Lords’ Alliance is concerned, 
  first and foremost, with the protection and 
  preservation of the Lords’ Alliance. It is 
  not a charitable organization. It is not an 
  association of heroes and benefactors. It is a 
  security agency. And it is only as good as its 
  members.
  “When Lord Pelindar lived and ruled, he 
  was a member of the Lords’ Alliance in good 
  standing. He did what he could to support his 
  fellow nobles against threats to their cities. 
  Often, when the threat to the land was grave, 
  he contributed not only his resources but his 
  own sword arm. He was a paragon among his 
  peers. Not many of them can claim honestly to 
  have lived up to his example.
  “You take your word seriously. It binds you 
  to a duty that you have assumed. You also take 
  your virtue seriously. It tells you that there 
  are people here in need of benevolence that 
  is not forthcoming. Are you beginning to 
  understand, Sir Paris?”
  —Lord Chancellor Wishard Lowell of Leilon,  
  member of the Order of the Gauntlet
  
  4
  Motivated reasoning is powerful. All people (at least, 
  those who aren’t sociopaths) are inclined to see themselves 
  as good and right and to see their own interests and values 
  as most important. In contemporary society, for instance, 
  one person might prioritize kindness and fairness, while 
  another might prioritize group loyalty and deference 
  to authority. Most people will see all of these virtues as 
  important to some degree, but each will lean toward the 
  ones that reinforce their particular view of the world.
  A good faction conflict is one in which a member of one 
  faction can articulate a view of the situation and present it 
  persuasively, while a member of the opposing faction can 
  articulate a different view of the situation and also present 
  it persuasively—making even pcs who are affiliated with 
  one of those factions second-guess their own views, if only 
  for a moment.
  the Struggle IS reAl
  For players to see both sides of a conflict, each side must 
  be sympathetic. A faction-affiliated npc with a likable 
  personality can generate sympathy, but a stronger hook 
  is showing players that the faction is facing a genuine 
  struggle. Each faction’s struggle is tied closely to its 
  worldview—it’s the faction’s primary reason for existing. 
  Lesser conflicts, such as squabbles over petty personal 
  interests, aren’t compelling enough to build adventures 
  around, especially at intermediate to high levels of play.
  lords’ Alliance: order
  The Lords’ Alliance exists to create order out of disorder. 
  Without firm leadership, dependable alliances, and a 
  trustworthy legal system, society collapses into violence, 
  treachery, and poverty. When the Lords’ Alliance is 
  involved in a conflict, there must be legitimate reasons 
  to believe that taking the other side will result in civil 
  disorder, damage to institutions, or other unpredictable, 
  potentially harmful consequences.
  order of the gauntlet: righteousness
  The Order of the Gauntlet exists to defend the innocent 
  against corruption, brutality, and injustice. Given the 
  opportunity, evildoers will abuse whomever they can get 
  away with abusing, without limit or compunction. When 
  the Order of the Gauntlet is involved in a conflict, there 
  must be legitimate reasons to believe that taking the other 
  side will result in direct, measurable, physical harm to 
  victims who have no other way to defend themselves.
  harpers: freethought
  The Harpers exist to empower individuals through 
  knowledge. When people are kept ignorant or are not 
  allowed to exercise freedom of conscience, they can be 
  subjugated by tyrants in both body and mind. When 
  the Harpers are involved in a conflict, there must be 
  legitimate reasons to believe that important, potentially 
  beneficial information, and/or ideas are being suppressed 
  in the name of orthodoxy or tradition—or out of simple 
  despotism.
  emerald enclave: nature
  The Emerald Enclave exists to protect the natural world 
  and its processes of growth and change from destructive 
  outside influences. When people are disconnected from 
  nature, they extract its resources, destroy creatures’ 
  dwelling places, and disrupt the balance between predators 
  and prey without thought or restraint. When the Emerald 
  Enclave is involved in a conflict, there must be legitimate 
  reasons to believe either that the threat to nature is an 
  existential one—a place or species is facing possible 
  destruction or extinction—or that the threat may not 
  remain contained, and is a harbinger of much worse to 
  come.
  Zhentarim: Self-Interest
  The Zhentarim exists to enrich and empower its members. 
  People need what they need and want what they want, 
  and if they’re denied legitimate means of gaining what 
  they need and want, they’ll pursue their goals through 
  illegitimate means instead. The Zhentarim, like the Mafia, 
  engages in many activities with no redeeming social 
  purpose—but when the Zhentarim is involved in a plot-
  centric factional conflict, it must be doing some actual 
  good in the course of its lawbreaking. More specifically, it 
  must be opposing some other, possibly worse harm.
  ten conflIctS
  lords’ Alliance vs. order of the gauntlet
  Lords’ Alliance view: Rule of law vs. vigilantism
  Order of the Gauntlet view: Justice vs. blind loyalty
  A conflict between the Lords’ Alliance and the Order 
  of the Gauntlet will generally involve a ruler, official, 
  or institution engaging in unfair practices in order to 
  defend the existing social order, opposed by an individual 
  or group defying the lawful authorities in defense of 
  those getting the short end of the stick. For instance, the 
  Lords’ Alliance may be defending an unjust ruler against 
  a more virtuous rival’s claim to the throne, while the 
  Order of the Gauntlet may be supporting the rival—but 
  in so doing, undermining rules of succession that have 
  heretofore kept even less savory contenders from pursuing 
  the throne themselves. Or the Order of the Gauntlet may 
  have evidence that a diplomat in a major city is a rakshasa 
  and wish to destroy it before its schemes can take root, 
  while that diplomat is facilitating negotiations between 
  two warring Lords’ Alliance city-states which would allow 
  them to cease hostilities and resume profitable trade.
  
  5
  lords’ Alliance vs. harpers
  Lords’ Alliance view: Stability vs. rebellion
  Harpers’ view: Liberty vs. tyranny
  A conflict between the Lords’ Alliance and the Harpers 
  will generally involve a ruler, official, or institution 
  attempting to prevent the discovery of scandalous 
  secret information that could lead to riots, disruption 
  of commerce, or the breaking of an alliance, while the 
  Harpers seek to uncover the information in the public 
  interest. For instance, the Lords’ Alliance may be 
  suppressing the knowledge of a growing threat beneath a 
  city’s streets, caused by the recklessness of an influential 
  court mage from an aristocratic family, while the Harpers 
  may be trying to discern the origin of the threat, both in 
  order to stop it and to protect the residents who live above 
  it. Or the Harpers may be trying to bring down a powerful, 
  universally feared spymaster who has unjustly arrested and 
  abused hundreds for expressing dissident opinions—but 
  who also possesses information that has kept a belligerent 
  rival city at bay for more than two decades, and the 
  removal of whom could result in war.
  lords’ Alliance vs. emerald enclave
  Lords’ Alliance view: Civilization vs. savagery
  Emerald Enclave view: Nature vs. development
  A conflict between the Lords’ Alliance and the Emerald 
  Enclave will generally involve a ruler, official, or institution 
  pursuing either resource development or rebels, criminals, 
  or spies in lands controlled by the Emerald Enclave, while 
  the Emerald Enclave seeks to defend its territory from the 
  heavy hand of the Lords’ Alliance, which is doing more 
  damage than it realizes (or cares to know). For instance, 
  the Lords’ Alliance may be dealing with raiders from a 
  traditional tribe that makes its home in a nearby forest and 
  seeking to attack the problem at its root, while the Emerald 
  Enclave recognizes that tribe as conscientious stewards 
  of their part of the woods and sees the Lords’ Alliance as 
  interlopers who can afford to spare what they’ve lost to the 
  tribe’s raids. Or the Emerald Enclave may anticipate that 
  a sacred stand of woods, at the heart of which is a band 
  of awakened trees that defend the area against incursions 
  from the Shadowfell, is threatened by settlers from a 
  nearby city-state, which is growing and needs more farms 
  to supply it with food.
  lords’ Alliance vs. Zhentarim
  Lords’ Alliance view: Integrity vs. corruption
  Zhentarim view: Survival vs. subjection
  A conflict between the Lords’ Alliance and the Zhentarim 
  will generally involve a ruler, official, or institution that 
  the Zhentarim has corrupted or infiltrated, while the 
  Zhentarim’s activities offer opportunity to an oppressed 
  or neglected group within the city-state. For instance, the 
  Lords’ Alliance may be seeking to identify and prosecute 
  members of the city guard that are accepting bribes in 
  exchange for allowing illegal activity to occur, while the 
  Zhentarim is the only group in the city that will employ 
  tieflings and is distributing proceeds from that activity 
  to create a crude social safety net for the city’s tiefling 
  population. Or the Zhentarim is trying to destabilize a 
  city-state that has been unusually successful at quashing its 
  criminal enterprises by inciting the overtaxed citizens to 
  rebel, while the Lords’ Alliance is trying to hold the city-
  state’s government together—and finding the effort more 
  and more expensive, necessitating the raising of taxes.
  order of the gauntlet vs. harpers
  Order of the Gauntlet’s view: Means vs. ends
  Harpers’ view: Relativism vs. absolutism
  A conflict between the Order of the Gauntlet and the 
  Harpers will often find them fighting a common enemy, 
  with the Order of the Gauntlet favoring a blunt, direct, 
  uncompromising approach, while the Harpers favor a 
  subtle approach that allows some cutting of corners as 
  long as the goal is achieved. For instance, the Order of the 
  Gauntlet may want to expose and slay a formerly virtuous 
  minor lord who has fallen under a vampiric curse, while 
  the Harpers may see more benefit in keeping his secret 
  and recruiting him to spy on its other enemies. Or the 
  Harpers may have an embedded agent following the 
  threads of a conspiracy, whose work and life are threatened 
  by the Order of the Gauntlet’s aggressive determination to 
  bring down a particularly ruthless and brutal lord whose 
  correspondence is a key source of information on that 
  conspiracy.
  order of the gauntlet vs. emerald enclave
  Order of the Gauntlet’s view: Duty vs. detachment
  Emerald Enclave’s view: Big picture vs. small picture
  A conflict between the Order of the Gauntlet and 
  the Emerald Enclave will typically involve a beast 
  or monstrosity that’s simply hunting for food and/
  or defending its territory—and in the process killing 
  bystanders who’ve made the mistake of straying too 
  close—with the Order of the Gauntlet seeking to slay the 
  creature and end the threat, while the Emerald Enclave 
  would rather the creature were left alone, perhaps because 
  its presence is a check against the runaway proliferation 
  of a prey species. The Order of the Gauntlet frames the 
  conflict in terms of its duty to protect the innocent and 
  deplores the Emerald Enclave’s apparent indifference, 
  while the Emerald Enclave frames it in terms of the 
  natural balance and deplores the Order of the Gauntlet’s 
  shortsighted meddling.
  
  6
  order of the gauntlet vs. Zhentarim
  Order of the Gauntlet’s view: Selflessness vs. 
  selfishness
  Zhentarim’s view: Pragmatism vs. rigidity
  A conflict between the Order of the Gauntlet and the 
  Zhentarim will generally involve criminal activity that 
  the Order of the Gauntlet seeks to quash but that benefits 
  some population other than the crime’s victims (if any 
  even exist—the crime may be victimless). In this instance, 
  the benefited group must be one for which it’s possible for 
  the pcs to feel sympathy, such as a persecuted minority, 
  a social class with newly acquired economic mobility, 
  or a group of rebels thumbing their noses at a repressive 
  regime. But it may also involve the reverse: The Zhentarim 
  may be collaborating with a brutal regime—not because it 
  supports the regime’s brutality, but for the simple reason 
  that collaboration is safer—while the Order of the Gauntlet 
  stirs up an insurgency against it.
  harpers vs. emerald enclave
  Harpers’ view: Knowledge vs. mystery
  Emerald Enclave’s view: Purity vs. transgression
  A conflict between the Harpers and the Emerald Enclave 
  will generally involve the Harpers’ pursuit of information 
  or a magic item held or defended by the Emerald Enclave. 
  The Harpers may have a greater goal in mind, such as 
  using the information or item to gain an advantage against 
  a foe—or they may simply claim that they do, while 
  pursuing the information or item for its own sake. The 
  Emerald Enclave may be committed specifically to keeping 
  the information secret or keeping the item out of others’ 
  hands, or its primary concern may be territorial—keeping 
  trespassers out of the place where the information or item 
  happens to be. For instance, enemies of the Harpers may 
  have enlisted the aid of a pit fiend to oppose their work, 
  driving them to track down a moonblade sword that deals 
  lightning damage to fiends, while the sword lies within a 
  part of the forest of Cormanthor that the Emerald Enclave 
  has deemed off limits to all except a single tribe of wood 
  elves who guard other secrets as well. Or the Emerald 
  Enclave may be in possession of a great mystery—a secret 
  bridge to the Feywild, a unique method of resurrection, or 
  a prophecy about a transformative event that will forever 
  alter the races of Toril—that the Harpers are doggedly 
  trying to discover, whatever the consequences may be.
  harpers vs. Zhentarim
  Harpers’ view: Empowerment vs. exploitation
  Zhentarim’s view: Predictability vs. upheaval
  A conflict between the Harpers and the Zhentarim will 
  generally involve the Harpers’ efforts to disrupt the 
  Zhentarim’s exploitation of a group with less power or 
  status, with the Harpers seeking to empower and liberate 
  the exploited group, while the Zhentarim argue that 
  Harper meddling tends to result in unpredictable shake-
  ups of the social and economic order; the chaos of drastic 
  change often produces greater harm to more people than 
  the injustice that precedes it. For instance, the Harpers 
  may wish to break the hold of a Zhentarim den in a city 
  with an ancient aristocracy; as the Zhentarim weakens, 
  it will no longer have the authority or the resources to 
  keep the feuding families in line, and soon the whole city 
  will be embroiled in a cycle of revenge-driven violence, 
  with abundant collateral damage. Or the Zhentarim 
  have uncovered an arcane secret that could be dangerous 
  in the hands of a rival—of course, it’s dangerous in the 
  Zhentarim’s hands as well, which is why the Harpers are 
  after it. But once two different factions know about it, how 
  long can it remain a secret?
  emerald enclave vs. Zhentarim
  Emerald Enclave’s view: Preservation vs. extraction
  Zhentarim’s view: Prosperity vs. poverty
  A conflict between the Emerald Enclave and the Zhentarim 
  will often involve a competition for resources—at least, 
  the Zhentarim see it as a competition for resources, while 
  the Emerald Enclave see the resource extraction process 
  itself as a threat. Perhaps the Zhentarim are poaching rare 
  game in Emerald Enclave territory, have dug an illegal 
  mine, or are timbering a nearly extinct type of tree—and 
  in the process, bringing much-needed economic activity 
  to a desperately poor settlement nearby. Or the Emerald 
  Enclave, angered by the encroachment of civilization on 
  threatened land, has begun harassing residents of a certain 
  village or travelers on a certain road—a village or road 
  that’s part of the Zhentarim’s smuggling network.
  other fActIonS
  If your setting includes factions in addition to or in place 
  of these five, you can set the stage for other conflicts by 
  giving them “personalities” the same way player characters 
  are assigned personal characteristics in chapter 4 of the 
  Player’s Handbook.
  Personality traits
  A faction’s personality traits are the stereotypical qualities 
  of its members. Lords’ Alliance members tend to be 
  conservative, cautious, and pragmatic. Order of the 
  Gauntlet members tend to be idealistic, direct, and bold. 
  Harpers tend to be charismatic, erudite, and flexible. 
  Emerald Enclave members tend to be mystical, stormy-
  tempered, and standoffish. Zhentarim members tend to be 
  ambitious, opportunistic, and cold-blooded. Yet members 
  of all these factions, and of any other, share one quality in 
  common: uncompromising commitment to the ideals of 
  their faction.
  
  7
  Ideal
  A faction’s ideal is its reason for being. It includes not just 
  the values and virtues that its members hold dear but also 
  the threats it fears and the goals it seeks to bring about 
  (see “The Struggle Is Real,” above, for examples). This ideal 
  must be rooted in a fundamental truth for the faction 
  to be worth supporting—but for the faction to be worth 
  opposing as well, there must always be some circumstance 
  in which that truth ceases to be true, or at least in which 
  some other truth matters more.
  Bond
  A faction’s bond is to the cultures and subcultures with 
  whose interests it’s most closely aligned. The Lords’ 
  Alliance is most strongly supported by aristocrats, 
  bureaucrats, and merchants, and in turn, it looks after their 
  interests most assiduously. The Order of the Gauntlet sees 
  itself as doing the work of the gods, and it supports and is 
  supported by good-aligned religious orders—but it also 
  includes folk heroes and altruists of all stripes. The Harpers 
  work in close association with those who preserve and 
  study lore, both historical and arcane, as well as those who 
  traffic in secrets. The Emerald Enclave is the defender of 
  nature itself, along with the societies that live in harmony 
  with it, both advanced and traditional. The Zhentarim is 
  an organization of criminals, but it also commands the 
  loyalty of folk who are mistreated by legitimate authorities 
  and must turn to an alternative power structure for 
  security and justice. A faction must have a social support 
  base to be a significant player in humanoid affairs.
  flaw
  Every faction has an ideal, be it noble or petty; every 
  faction also has a blind spot. The Lords’ Alliance takes 
  its own legitimacy for granted, and by extension, it also 
  takes for granted that all its activities and decisions are 
  legitimate as well. The Order of the Gauntlet tends to 
  believe it has a monopoly on virtue and has difficulty 
  imagining that its priorities might be out of order. The 
  Harpers are heedless of the truth that some knowledge is 
  better kept under wraps, whether for the sake of public 
  safety or simply for the sake of an individual’s privacy 
  and dignity. The Emerald Enclave, as it proclaims the 
  importance of the natural order, often fails to honor 
  the equal importance of the lives of those who dwell in 
  settled civilization. The Zhentarim concocts elaborate 
  rationalizations to justify its activities as somehow 
  beneficial or necessary to the functioning of humanoid 
  society, but behind these sophistries, it’s aware that its 
  activities harm the social fabric—and simply doesn’t care. 
  A faction’s flaw gives rival factions openings to criticize it, 
  challenge it, and offer competitive alternative viewpoints 
  and courses of action.
  Sample faction: the Silver ravens of Sembia
  The Silver Ravens, established and originally commanded 
  by a onetime adventurer named Miklos Selkirk, are an 
  armed company dedicated to the defense of the land of 
  Sembia. Numbering too few to constitute a conventional 
  army, the Silver Ravens are a combination of elite soldiers, 
  whose function is to burnish Sembia’s reputation through 
  open displays of valor, and spies and hired adventurers, 
  who pursue the nation’s interests covertly by gathering 
  information and acquiring items of arcane power.
  Personality Traits. Silver Ravens are patriots, loyal to 
  Sembia above all other ties. The faction’s warriors are justly 
  renowned for their skill and valor—and equally justly 
  gibed for their vanity. Its plainclothes members are known 
  within the company for their matter-of-fact efficiency, 
  resourcefulness, and focus; outside it, they’re not known at 
  all, and that’s how they like it.
  Ideal. The Silver Ravens are committed to the interests 
  of Sembia. A country once subjugated by the Netherese 
  and ravaged by war with neighboring Cormyr, formerly 
  wealthy Sembia has struggled to get back on its feet and 
  regain control over its outlying cities and their hinterlands. 
  The Silver Ravens are motivated by a desire to see Sembia 
  reunited and prosperous under the rule of law; the chaos 
  of the status quo, with secessionists, pirates, and cultists 
  running amok, is intolerable.
  Bond. The Silver Ravens are an arm of the ruling 
  aristocracy of Selgaunt, the seat of power in Sembia since 
  the destruction of the former capital city, Ordulin. They 
  are strongly supported by the merchant class, but they also 
  enjoy broad popular support among loyal Sembians of all 
  social classes, for whom the Silver Ravens are a source of 
  pride. If you ask a Silver Raven, they’ll say they’re devoted 
  to all the people of Sembia, high and low, and most of them 
  truly believe it.
  Flaw. The Silver Ravens aren’t without honor, but when 
  it comes to pursuing the interests of Sembia, honor is 
  immaterial. If dishonorable methods are more effective 
  than honorable ones, Silver Ravens will employ them. If an 
  ally holds valuable information, Silver Ravens will spy on 
  that ally. If an ally possesses an artifact that would benefit 
  Sembia, and Silver Ravens are ordered to steal it, they won’t 
  question the order or hesitate to follow it. All that matters 
  is what strengthens Sembia.
  Sample rivalry: Silver ravens vs. harpers
  Silver Ravens’ view: Sembia vs. its enemies
  Harpers’ view: Knowledge vs. censorship
  The Harpers operate in Sembia, but only clandestinely: 
  the faction is banned by law, and membership is 
  considered treason. A conflict between the Silver Ravens 
  and the Harpers will generally involve a competition for 
  intelligence, arcane secrets, or a powerful magic item, 
  with the Silver Ravens seeking to advance the interests 
  of the Sembian government and the Harpers pursuing 
  
  8
  the information or item for its own ends. For instance, 
  the Silver Ravens may be gathering information and/or 
  resources that will help Sembia bring the breakaway city-
  state of Urmlaspyr back under the central government, 
  while the Harpers may be aiding the forces seeking to 
  maintain Urmlaspyr’s independence out of respect for the 
  principle of self-determination. Or the Harpers may be 
  digging up secrets that cast doubt on the legitimacy of a 
  key figure in Sembia’s leadership, while the Silver Ravens 
  seek to protect that figure because their removal could 
  weaken the already struggling government even further, 
  making it easy prey for hostile neighbors.
  
SOURCE: textdata/thevault/Dungeons & Dragons [multi]/5th Edition (5e)/3rd Party/We See It Differently.pdf