[quote=@bloonewb]
[@DracarysBitch] 

A "baron" (or more derisively, a "robber baron") is also a colloquial term for a businessman who has such a powerful stranglehold on his field of industry that he has managed to create an effective monopoly or trust. Famous examples of such include Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Vanderbilt. Often, the barons are portrayed as having a large hand in government as well, buying off political leaders to further their profit and investing heavily on public infrastructure. I believe that was the idea the GMs were going for in the Triarchy.
[/quote]

Thanks for explaining! XD Although, not to be a nobility-obsessed loser here (100% what I am though), but those aren't barons, they're Americans, a nation which very memorably abolished aristocracy, that system is actually more similar to the oligarch system, currently most easily seen in the Russian Federation. I'm actually rather ignorant of those American wealthy families (because I'm biased af), but as far as I understand, whilst they have tremendous wealth and influence, they don't have formal titles, which is what I was thinking of. I based my earlier stuff only on the british systems, since the victorian era is specifically mentioned, the types of barons differed from kingdom to kingdom in europe, they overlapped, but had distinct differences, for example in Germany, Barons were formerly Knightly families, later made barons when they changed their system a bit. In GB and Ireland, Baron/Baroness is the lowest rank of nobility (there are 4 other ranks in general below Baron; Baronet, Knight, Esquire, Gentlemen, and their immediate equivalents, but these ranks are not used by the British). The thousand year history (more or less) since the creation of the title (in the isles) has changed up it's purpose over time, but essentially, they were people who held lands given to them directly by the king. They were loyal vassals being rewarded by their immediate overlord. Like House Stark awarding House Bolton (theoretically, not actually, because fuck the boltons, but for comparison, that's effectively their power difference). Powerful nobles like (non-royal)-Dukes and Earls also went onto to award the title of baron to some of their vassals whom they had given land to. Due to the large number of them, and their sworn duty to serve their king/overlord, they ended up forming what eventually would become parliament and later the house of lords. As of 1660, being a baron is no longer tied to owning land due to the Tenures Abolition Act of 1660. In parliament they could speak and vote, but that was the extent of their power, and more or less, is the same today. 

Historically, Barons had little power in government, they were just easy votes to buy and/or coerce. The Dukes were the most powerful of the nobility, particularly because many claiming descent from royalty. My working theory is mostly that the triarchy is run more like England during the civil war, or a bit like the goals of the Fronde in France, just titled Barons 'cause it sounds cooler and more steampunk-y than Duke. 

(also, because we've never met before, that's not said in any mean spirited way at all! I just love Europe! And I'm really sorry if my nerdy tone came out mean instead! :/)