Leadership Feat

[Birthright-L]

Do you require the leadership feat for regents to have lieutenants?

The feat/cohort system replaces the old henchman system from 2e.
Lieutenants were henchman with benefits for regents. But Leadership isn`t
available until 6th level, and it looks like it only allows one cohort.

I`m thinking just use the character`s charisma modifier as the number of
lieutenants he can have, and bypass the leadership system entirely.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:

> On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 10:23, Kenneth Gauck wrote:
> > AFAIC, cohorts serve the person, lieutenants serve the realm.
>
> A pleasant distinction. I like the definition.

As do I.

> The situation is generally more complex however. Loyalty to the realm
> does translate to loyalty to the regent of the realm in many case -
> especially when the mechanics of the game dictate a lieutenants
> actions are determined by the regent.

Ideally, yes, because it would be best if the interests of the realm and
the interests of the regent coincided perfectly. However, even in
historical monarchies and modern dictatorships there is a distinction
drawn between what is best for the ruler and what is best for the
country. This is not to say that cohorts are the people who choose leader
over country and lieutenants are the people who choose the reverse -- for
cohorts may well switch sides to save themselves if they see the leader is
doomed, and lieutenants may well be personal cronies whose only chance to
keep their jobs and privileged lifestyles is to ensure the ruler keeps his
job -- but rather to say that the general complexity we both recognize is
more easily modeled by keeping the two job descriptions separate.

In some ways they are similar, and in others they are different; I think
the differences are important enough not to combine the two groups. One
major difference in game mechanical terms is what determines the suggested
limits on the power of the two kinds of followers: for example, a famous
adventurer who retires to rule a tiny realm will have much less trouble
attracting other very high-level adventurers to go dragon-hunting with
than finding a good general to command his 50-man "army" while he is off
adventuring. The opposite is easier to arrange (the brand-new 1st-level
ruler of Avanil hires a powerful adventuring party to ensure he survives
running through "The Keep on the Borderlands"), but these people are more
properly considered hirelings than henchmen -- they serve for the money,
not personal comradeship.

> Are then all lieutenants not cohorts by default? (although the person
> to whom they are a cohort changes with changes in domain regent)

No, because they are willing to follow a weak person who has a powerful
job, and because some of them are likely to quit if ordered to follow the
regent into a dungeon crawl.

> Are cohorts of a regent lieutenants by default? (i.e. they lose
> lieutenant status if the person the serve loses their domain or dies)

This is easier to arrange, in that appointing someone a lieutenant is a
free action, so you can have as many as you want. However, the regent may
not want his adventuring bodyguard to go off and perform actions without him.

> (i) Assuming that a character is limited in the number of cohorts
> (ii) A domain should also be limited in the number of lieutenants that
> are attached independently of the regent

I agree with both of these ideas, even though I think lieutenants are not
the same thing as cohorts. For (i), I have no trouble applying the DMG
rule as printed. For (ii), I would support this change from the BR
rulebook because even though any tiny realm can create as many grandiose
titles as it wants, it may have difficulty filling them with people of
enough ability to be useful -- or even with enough different people, as in
"The Mikado" where the same minor noble in a tiny village is "First Lord
of the Treasury, Lord Chief Justice, Commander-in-Chief, Lord High
Admiral, Master of the Buckhounds, Groom of the Back Stairs, Archbishop of
Titipu, and Lord Mayor, both acting and elect, all rolled into one," in
order to draw as many government salaries as possible without actually
having to do much of anything. Or at least, even if the number of
available officials is not to be regulated, then the competence of the
countless hordes ought to be related to the prestige of the realm.

I would make a composite number (for limiting either or both of lieutenant
quantity and quality) from combining your domain point number with the
standard ideas of charisma bonus and bloodline bonus. A nobody ruler of a
nothing realm who desperately wanted one really good lieutenant I would
probably allow to get one, at the price of giving up any claim to another
lieutenant of any ability at all, and a significant threat of being
deposed in a Great Captain event.


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

Power acts like a gravity well on the ambitious. Little nothing regents of
noting realms should have just as many lieutenants as they want, but they`ll
tend to be the most prominant local figures whoever that may be. Imagine
having members of the Commoner class as your lieutenants. Yeah, my new new
Admiral Gwain can fish pretty well, he handles a three main sailing vessel
with skill. He can navigate well enough in very familiar waters, and he`s
knowledgable in all the fisherman`s lore of the cove. Gwain is qualified to
keep me abrest of the rumors running through the fishing community. Perhaps
monitor the fishermen so that I get my twelfth share. And maybe he can even
organize them to help me move a lot of soldiers across the cove under cover
of night. He`s clearly not an administrator, diplomat, or in most respects
is he a traditional lieuteant.

If I were DM`ing a campaign centered around a single lord who was the vassal
of the Count of Shadowgreen, these are about the lieutenants he would be
attracting. Some of the fun happenings would include actual PC class
lieutenants being recruited away by friends and allies of greater power.
Ranger and woodsman Pelien, who was once my lieutenant is now a functionary
in the organization of the High Mage Aelies. Pelien is now in effect the
lieutenant to a lieutenant of Aelies, and his job is now to look after
source manifestations in Shadowgreen. When he worked for me he mostly keep
an eye on the fishermen`s occassional need for lumber in the forest. Now he
watches out for agents of Rogr Aglondier and occasionally assists his boss
in carrying out actions delegated by the High Mage.

When you`re the Queen of Aerenwe you get the Alwier twins as lieutenants.
When you`re a vassal of the Count of Shadowgreen you get a 1st level ranger
and a 3rd level commoner as lieutenants.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> When you`re the Queen of Aerenwe you get the Alwier twins as
> lieutenants. When you`re a vassal of the Count of Shadowgreen you get
> a 1st level ranger and a 3rd level commoner as lieutenants.

Agreed. My support for a cap to the number of lieutenants is wishy-washy
at best, but my support for a cap to the quality of lieutenants is strong.
I would add personal qualities of the regent to this as well -- if you are
a brand-new vassal of the Count of Shadowgreen, but only 30 years old and
just retired from an adventuring career as a 12th-level ranger/rogue, you
are likely to be seen as someone with great potential for power growth;
this is the sort of situation for which a cohort makes a particularly good
starting lieutenant.

The best reason I could see to cap numbers is DM sanity when trying to
keep tabs on a large number of player realms, but I have no real objection
to having hordes of hangers-on so long as the power they represent is well
balanced to the power of the domain they serve.


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 07:51, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 10:23, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

>
> > Are then all lieutenants not cohorts by default? (although the person
> > to whom they are a cohort changes with changes in domain regent)
>
> No, because they are willing to follow a weak person who has a powerful
> job, and because some of them are likely to quit if ordered to follow the
> regent into a dungeon crawl.
Good point. But can`t cohorts quit too if not treated right? This does
lead to the point of some lieutenants being relatively independent of
the domain ruler, and some being controlled by the domain ruler.

From a design point of view, I`d create an abstract base class called
Henchman, of which Cohort and Lieutenant are concrete class instances.
(over-use of the word class, out of context in D&D) i.e. I`d create a
limit on the number of Henchmen, but not define what a Henchman could or
could not do. Then introduce the derived classes of Cohort and
Lieutenant (who are all `Henchmen` and subject to the limit but no other
condition).

>
> > Are cohorts of a regent lieutenants by default? (i.e. they lose
> > lieutenant status if the person the serve loses their domain or dies)
>
> This is easier to arrange, in that appointing someone a lieutenant is a
> free action, so you can have as many as you want. However, the regent may
> not want his adventuring bodyguard to go off and perform actions without him.
But is this likely? (I mean aren`t they under the control of the regent)

I just thought of a possibility. While I`m not trying to be
obstructionist, what if: a character was lieutenant to a realm, and a
cohort to a character other than the regent of the realm? - given that
the character is an NPC, and that both the regent of the realm and the
other character are both PCs - what`s the control situation?

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 10:36, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Kenneth Gauck wrote:
>
> > When you`re the Queen of Aerenwe you get the Alwier twins as
> > lieutenants. When you`re a vassal of the Count of Shadowgreen you get
> > a 1st level ranger and a 3rd level commoner as lieutenants.
>
> Agreed. My support for a cap to the number of lieutenants is wishy-washy
> at best,
Mine too. Quality/Schmality -- as far as administration of a realm goes,
the level of a lieutenant`s character class(es) should be pretty much
irrelevant.

What of a regents need/desire for lieutenants as a matter of ruling
`style` or because of a lack of experience?

What of a realm`s potential to supply and support able administrators
and diplomats? (including their staff)

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:

> Good point. But can`t cohorts quit too if not treated right?

Indeed they can. What I meant is that the two kinds of follower sign up
for different sorts of duties, and thus have different notions of what
constitutes being treated "right".

> This does lead to the point of some lieutenants being relatively
> independent of the domain ruler, and some being controlled by the
> domain ruler.

Well, ideally they`d all have individual personalities and the DM would
use those features as the sources for court intrigue plots, but yes in
practice an LT does whatever the regent says unless the DM says otherwise.

> From a design point of view, I`d create an abstract base class called
> Henchman, of which Cohort and Lieutenant are concrete class instances.

And here I am, just having stopped using C++ to go back to Fortran four
months ago. =) But to use object-oriented terminology, I would consider
Lieutenants as derived from the Holding base class, though multiple
inheritance from some sort of generic Person might link them to Henchmen.

> > However, the regent may not want his adventuring bodyguard to go
> > off and perform actions without him.
>
> But is this likely? (I mean aren`t they under the control of the regent)

Yes, they are under control, but they get different kinds of orders.
What I meant is that lieutenants are people you send away to do a job
in your stead, but cohorts are people you bring with you to help you do
the job yourself.

> I just thought of a possibility. While I`m not trying to be
> obstructionist, what if: a character was lieutenant to a realm, and a
> cohort to a character other than the regent of the realm? - given that
> the character is an NPC, and that both the regent of the realm and the
> other character are both PCs - what`s the control situation?

That`s rather like being the vassal of two different liege lords, which
was not all that rare historically (and indeed sometimes the case for all
vassals if you consider conflicts between, say, your Count and the King).
It`s uncomfortable. Mostly you just hope they never ask for conflicting
things. If it did come to an irreconcilable conflict, the one in the
middle would have to make a choice, and basically quit (at least
temporarily) his job as follower of one of them. Who wins? DM fiat is
all I can see to resolve it.


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 12:29, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:
>
> > Good point. But can`t cohorts quit too if not treated right?
>
> Indeed they can. What I meant is that the two kinds of follower sign up
> for different sorts of duties, and thus have different notions of what
> constitutes being treated "right".

I`m not sure that it makes any difference. After all, it`s possible
(probable even) that not all cohorts sign on for the same reasons
either. These have to be taken into account as part of the normal scheme
of things.

>
> > This does lead to the point of some lieutenants being relatively
> > independent of the domain ruler, and some being controlled by the
> > domain ruler.
>
> Well, ideally they`d all have individual personalities and the DM would
> use those features as the sources for court intrigue plots, but yes in
> practice an LT does whatever the regent says unless the DM says otherwise.

Obviously the same holds true for cohorts as well.
Kenneth`s distinction is all well and good, but it reflects the
recruitment and attachment aspects of the situation rather than the
behavior of the characters.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Lubke" <peterlubke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 9:34 PM

> Obviously the same holds true for cohorts as well.
> Kenneth`s distinction is all well and good, but it reflects the
> recruitment and attachment aspects of the situation rather than the
> behavior of the characters.

PC`s are rarely looking for the same kind of chartacter for these two roles
as well. Lieutenants are often something along the lines of being a 6th
level aristocrat, or a 2nd level priest/4th level expert, both of which have
skills that support domain maintenance (Diplomacy, Administration, Knowledge
(Law). Cohorts, having a motivation to join a PC for different reasons,
wants to follow the PC to take part in his adventures, and so is more often
a more action-oriented class and isn`t so well prepared to stand in to
administer a rule action or supervise construction.

The fact that there can be a huge overlap between motivations, character
concept and design, as well as actual duties being performed doesn`t force
us to abandon the distinction. Cohorts, being attracted to the PC, are
governed by the Leadership Feat. Powerful PC`s with the proper bonuses for
the feat get more and better cohorts. Lieutenants, being attracted to the
realm, are governed by a 3e version of the lieutenant rules. Powerful
realms attract better lieutenants.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 5:36 PM

> The best reason I could see to cap numbers is DM sanity when trying to
> keep tabs on a large number of player realms, but I have no real objection
> to having hordes of hangers-on so long as the power they represent is well
> balanced to the power of the domain they serve.

Very true. Once we get down to the point of having a man-off-the-street
type of NPC as a lieutenant, you don`t really need to keep track of them
unless the PC wants to role play interactions with his Dogberry.

Dogberry is the character played by Micheal Keaton in Branagh`s "Much Ado
About Nothing". This lieutenant of the old Leonato is probabaly a 2nd level
commoner. Comic presentation not withstanding.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 15:57, Kenneth Gauck wrote:
>
>
> PC`s are rarely looking for the same kind of chartacter for these two roles
> as well. Lieutenants are often something along the lines of being a 6th
> level aristocrat, or a 2nd level priest/4th level expert, both of which have
> skills that support domain maintenance (Diplomacy, Administration, Knowledge
> (Law). Cohorts, having a motivation to join a PC for different reasons,
> wants to follow the PC to take part in his adventures, and so is more often
> a more action-oriented class and isn`t so well prepared to stand in to
> administer a rule action or supervise construction.
>
> The fact that there can be a huge overlap between motivations, character
> concept and design, as well as actual duties being performed doesn`t force
> us to abandon the distinction.
Yes, so far.

> Cohorts, being attracted to the PC, are
> governed by the Leadership Feat. Powerful PC`s with the proper bonuses for
> the feat get more and better cohorts. Lieutenants, being attracted to the
> realm, are governed by a 3e version of the lieutenant rules.
(The concept is fine - and now you have to go spoil it all by placing
restrictions on implementation)

> Powerful
> realms attract better lieutenants.

Hmmmmm, really? Any justification for this? -- just extending from the
`more powerful characters get more and better cohorts` as a
generalization?

Quantity and quality determined by `power`. I don`t think I really like
that as an absolute rule. Perhaps quantity, but quality ?...

How do you rate a realm`s power?
Define `better` in the context of `better lieutenants` and `better
cohort`.

I think that "powerful characters will tend to have cohorts that are
more powerful than the cohorts of less powerful characters", where
"power" is defined in terms of effectiveness in adventuring actions.

But for domain regents, "powerful regents will tend to have lieutenants
that are more powerful than the lieutenants of less powerful regents",
where "power" is defined in terms of effectiveness in domain actions.

Even so, political power is not always held by "effective" men. (hence
the use of "tend to have").

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

This is my vaersion of the Recruit Lieutenant action from
http://my.homeip.net/abbe/birthright/domai...on-lieRecr.html (http://my.homeip.net/abbe/birthright/domainactions/action-lieRecr.html)


As you can see, you can get very powerful lieutenants by spending loads of
RP.

A limit you have to know about is that nobody can spend more RP on a single
action than they have BloodlineRating - this includes lieutenant actions.
Thus, a low-bloodline lieutenant can be very valuable.

Lieutenant Recruiting
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

This action is used to recruit NPCs that can act as lieutenants or agents
for PCs. The lieutenants level is determined by the result of the die roll
(not the margin of success), and is equal to the roll divided by five (all
fractions are dropped). As the difficulty of the action is 15, lieutenants
are of at least third level.

A randomly generated lieutenant`s level can be no higher than yours at the
time of creation. The lieutenant will advance in level like any other NPC.

A lieutenant is 1d6 years old per level (including the first). To this is
added a base depending on rance and gender. Races marked * roll d10 instead
of d6 for level-based age.

10 Human Female
15 Human Male
20 Halfling, Half-elf*
40 Dwarf*
A lieutenant can be blooded. For every five points of penalty you take on
your Recruit Lieutenant action, the lieutenant has a blood rating of 1d6+2.
Blood ratings under 5 are latent, and have no effect on the game.

A lieutenant can be of your own race or human at no penalty. Any other race
gives a -5 modifier on the recruiting action. A lieutenant should be
generated as a full NPC.



__________________________________________________ ___
Följ VM på nära håll på Yahoo!s officielle VM-sajt www.yahoo.se/vm2002
Håll dig ajour med nyheter och resultat, med vinnare och förlorare...

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Birthright-L

A lieutenant is 1d6 years old per level (including the first). To this is
added a base depending on rance and gender. Races marked * roll d10 instead
of d6 for level-based age.

10 Human Female
15 Human Male
20 Halfling, Half-elf*
40 Dwarf*

Why are human males older than females? (If so, why that isn't so for half-elves?)

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Lubke" <peterlubke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 11:45 PM


> Quantity and quality determined by `power`. I don`t think I really like
> that as an absolute rule. Perhaps quantity, but quality ?...

There is no such thing as an absolute rule in social affairs. Humans have
the ability to make choices, and so will from time to time make choices that
defy the trends identified. No DM should ever be constrained by what is
generally the case when developing a specific locale. The reason one wants
to spend time in advance imagining what is generally the case is to guide
the bulk of descriptions. Exceptions are often the interesting stuff that
adventures include.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

No. This is about the age of the lieutenant- A female lieutenant is younger
than a male one.

My version of BR is not gender-neutral. Among other things, females are
generally considered full-grown much earlier than men. Thus the age
difference.


> Ariadne wrote:
>
Originally posted by Birthright-L
>
> A lieutenant is 1d6 years old per level (including the first). To this is
> added a base depending on rance and gender. Races marked * roll d10
instead
> of d6 for level-based age.
>
> 10 Human Female
> 15 Human Male
> 20 Halfling, Half-elf*
> 40 Dwarf*
>
> What`s that? Do you mean, a female human does have less lieutenants than
a male? We are in a fantasy world: There is NO discrimination of females...
>
>
>
************************************************** **************************
> The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
> Birthright-l Archives:
http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
> To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
> with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
>


__________________________________________________ ___
Gratis e-mail resten av livet på www.yahoo.se/mail
Busenkelt!

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Birthright-L

[...]My version of BR is not gender-neutral. Among other things, females are
generally considered full-grown much earlier than men. Thus the age
difference [...].
Why? O.K., men are mostly a little bit slowlier than woman, but as I said already, I don't think, females are 2nd class people! There may be a difference between the parts of Cerilia, but even in Vosgaard a woman can dominate a man, if she is strong enough (or cunning)...

Anuire is a dublicate of the european middle age, but they needn't to copy everything, it's fantasy!

[Birthright-L]

From: "Ariadne" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>

> Anuire is a dublicate of the european middle age, but they needn`t to
copy everything, it`s fantasy!
>

I`m not sure if making the age of adulthood lower is really reducing the
value of women!

I have many strong females IMC - Including 2 1/2 female PCs. When the
characters were last away on a long adventure, women ran the country.

But that is not the same as saying the sexes are the same or equal.


__________________________________________________ ___
Följ VM på nära håll på Yahoo!s officielle VM-sajt www.yahoo.se/vm2002
Håll dig ajour med nyheter och resultat, med vinnare och förlorare...

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> Dogberry is the character played by Micheal Keaton in Branagh`s "Much
> Ado About Nothing". This lieutenant of the old Leonato is probabaly a
> 2nd level commoner. Comic presentation not withstanding.

Dogberry is a Commoner 2, but perhaps Mr. Keaton is a Comic Actor 10. =)


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:

> On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 15:57, Kenneth Gauck wrote:
>
> > Powerful realms attract better lieutenants.
>
> Hmmmmm, really? Any justification for this? -- just extending from
> the `more powerful characters get more and better cohorts` as a
> generalization?

It`s rather like a modern application for employment -- bigger and
better-known realms attract a larger pool of applicants, richer ones can
offer better benefits, and powerful ones offer the ambitious greater
possibilities of advancement; so if a big, rich realm hires the same
number of lieutenants as a small, poor realm, the average quality of those
hired can generally be greater. The justification is also expressed by
saying "powerful realms have an easier time keeping better lieutenants" --
if the Lord Mayor of Seaharrow acquires a lieutenant who quickly proves
himself to be the most able administrator in all Boeruine, the Archduke
will certainly grab him away for his own service. Bigger regents can
also easily steal good lieutenants away from smaller ones who aren`t their
feudal underlings simply by offering a more important job at a higher
salary and with better prospects for advancement.

> How do you rate a realm`s power?

Easy first answer: domain points needed to create the realm from scratch,
including army, treasury, banked RP, etc. This should also be modified
somehow by the bloodline strength of the regent.

> Define `better` in the context of `better lieutenants` and `better
> cohort`.

Better at doing what you generally use them for, just as you and Kenneth
both have done.

> Even so, political power is not always held by "effective" men. (hence
> the use of "tend to have").

Indeed. Some variation is required, especially as you say for sinecures
for ineffective cronies (to account for this, perhaps it is better to say
that the "maximum available effectiveness" is a function of realm power),
and also for good people who refuse to take "better" jobs when offered
them (my family has served his family for twelve generations, your Grace,
so I must respectfully decline your generous offer). But as a starting
point from which to introduce variations, lieutenant power proportional to
realm power seems best.


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Thu, 2002-12-05 at 01:32, Ariadne wrote:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at: http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1125
>
> Ariadne wrote:
>
Originally posted by Birthright-L
>
> A lieutenant is 1d6 years old per level (including the first). To this is
> added a base depending on rance and gender. Races marked * roll d10 instead
> of d6 for level-based age.
>
> 10 Human Female
> 15 Human Male
> 20 Halfling, Half-elf*
> 40 Dwarf*
>
> What`s that? Do you mean, a female human does have less lieutenants than a male? We are in a fantasy world: There is NO discrimination of females...

There is in my campaign. Women in Anuire and (to a lesser extent)
Brechtur have far fewer rights.

But of course you are correct, there shouldn`t be a rule that
discriminates.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Peter Lubke

There is in my campaign. Women in Anuire and (to a lesser extent) Brechtur have far fewer rights.[...]
Why? O.K., in the BR book about Michael Roele (sorry, but I forgot the name) it was "normal" to sell woman as a wife to a noble, if blooded. But since this is some hundred years ago, I thought, meanwhile are woman equal righted (especially in a game!!!). A question: Why woman are discriminated in Brechtür (this part is based on the 17th century and I think, the rights are a little bit better than in middle age)? If you like to copy everything, why don't start to create those religious hats for Khinasi like woman must wear in Iran or in the past of Afghanistan? (Was black humor and I hope, you don't!)

In our campaign it is normal (we have a very harsh female player) to get, what you want. If she is discriminated by someone, she kills him simply (if she is in good mood)!

[Peter Lubke]

On Thu, 2002-12-05 at 19:20, Ariadne wrote:

> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at: http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1125
>
> Ariadne wrote:
>
Originally posted by Peter Lubke
>
> There is in my campaign. Women in Anuire and (to a lesser extent) Brechtur have far fewer rights.[...]
> Why?



O.K., in the BR book about Michael Roele (sorry, but I forgot the name) it was
"normal" to sell woman as a wife to a noble, if blooded. But since this is
some hundred years ago, I thought, meanwhile are woman equal righted
(especially in a game!!!). A question: Why woman are discriminated in Brechtür
(this part is based on the 17th century and I think, the rights are a little
bit better than in middle age)? If you like to copy everything, why don`t
start to create those religious hats for Khinasi like woman must wear in Iran
or in the past of Afghanistan? (Was black humor and I hope, you don`t!)

Well, because it is a game - I wanted a bit more variety between the
human cultures. (and as DM I get to make the rules - tee hee - when I`m
allowed to).

Anuireans tend to be shorter than Rjurik and Vos too (although that`s
already in the rulebook). My Anuireans are based on a late Roman-Empire
model (empire in decline). They have lots of agriculture, and loads of
wealth - generally (historically) this concentrates in the hands of
fewer and fewer individuals leading to a situation where women
(especially noble women) have less duties, leading to less rights,
leading to (after many years) a kind of second class citizen (if not
being outright chattels of the males). The rights of women in the late
medieval and renaissance periods were in fact worse than earlier -- ay
Nesirie! -- could it be true? (Plus we shouldn`t disregard the effect of
a faith like Haelyn on such a culture)

On the other hand in Vosgaard and Rjurik, women share equally in the
work and rulership - there are far fewer social distinction (less wealth
too for that matter) - a strong woman can certainly rule in her own
right - (plus the average height of such women - raised in cultures that
have a more protein rich diet - will be much higher - 5`10 to 6`4 is
average!) Do not mess with these gals! In Vosgaard particularly the
Torva Vos, all members of the tribe must contribute or perish - and
female warriors can prove their worth as easily as men. The great
distinction among the Rjurik and the Vos (particularly the Vos) is
between the free and the unfree (not necessarily slaves though).

I define Brechtur to be somewhat like the Anuireans, and in the ways of
commerce - property rights, inheritances, etc -- even worse in their
treatment of women. Women cannot own property in their own right in
Brechtur (although they can hold it as custodian for a family - woe
betide a Brecht women without children or younger brothers - breed baby
breed), although their general stature and situation is higher. A strong
woman will find a way though! (it`s part of the challenge)

Ah, the Khinasi! Yes, and no. You have to consider the role of Avani (a
female god) as patroness to these people. (Sera softens the attitude in
Brechtur too, but have you noticed how Cuiraecen has almost supplanted
her?) I find that there is a wider variance in Khinasi. There are
Khinasi nomads (some plains states esp Binsada) where women have 100%
equal rights (as Rjurik and Vos). Then there are the affluent city
states, where the population of the realm is concentrated in the cities
- lots of wealth and trade again - but it`s more equal -- harems do
occur, but no women in veils.
The Khinasi have a structured/tiered society --- but the head of a named
family is as likely to be male as female -- your rights may depend on
who happens to rule your family group. A woman born to a male hegemony
is on the outer - but the same is true for a man born to a matriarchal
dynasty.



>
> In our campaign it is normal (we have a very harsh female player) to get,
what you want. If she is discriminated by someone, she kills him simply
(if she is in good mood)!

We have two female players - who both play female characters. One is
pretty much full-time and the other is a "floater" - okay there`s two
floaters (I change that to three players). Seeing as how the main female
character is Rjurik, it`s not out of character for her to be pretty much
that way too -- but killing someone has landed her in trouble more than
once.

Those Anuireans are insufferable stuck-up pigs anyway! (as well as being
decadent and weak) Her ... ummm spear (very quiet chuckle) is always
hard and to the point.

(Heather has mellowed since moving in with Chris - and getting a dog -
I`m not sure which event is the cause ...)

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

I am a male who enjoy playing female characters. But to me it is pointless
to play a female who has the same rights and opportunities as a male - then
I could just as well be playing a male character. Thus, for me, a part of
the fantasy of playing a female character is diminished if the sexes are
equal in all ways.

For a female player, this would probably not be so. The female player in my
Birthright group plays a character pretty much like you describe - and her
(male) relatives have had to cover for her crimes on many occasions - though
she has yet to murder someone over somethig like this. That is fantasy for
her - playing an "unfettered" female character.

In my world, about 1/2 of women live "active" lives comparable to those of
men. They go to war and fight or choose some other active character class.
About 1/2of them don`t - they live more traditional lives as mothers,
housewives and so on. But it must be remembered that managing a
pre-industiral household is by no means a light chore - these women have
plenty of things to do and much responsibility. It is just not the same kind
of responsibility that men have.

/Carl


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ariadne" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
To: <BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM>
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: Leadership Feat [2#1125]


> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1125
>
> Ariadne wrote:
>
Originally posted by Peter Lubke
>
> There is in my campaign. Women in Anuire and (to a lesser extent) Brechtur
have far fewer rights.[...]
> Why? O.K., in the BR book about Michael Roele (sorry, but I forgot the
name) it was "normal" to sell woman as a wife to a noble, if blooded. But
since this is some hundred years ago, I thought, meanwhile are woman equal
righted (especially in a game!!!). A question: Why woman are discriminated
in Brechtür (this part is based on the 17th century and I think, the rights
are a little bit better than in middle age)? If you like to copy everything,
why don`t start to create those religious hats for Khinasi like woman must
wear in Iran or in the past of Afghanistan? (Was black humor and I hope, you
don`t!)
>
> In our campaign it is normal (we have a very harsh female player) to get,
what you want. If she is discriminated by someone, she kills him simply (if
she is in good mood)!
>
>
>
************************************************** **************************
> The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
> Birthright-l Archives:
http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
> To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
> with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
>


__________________________________________________ ___
Gratis e-mail resten av livet på www.yahoo.se/mail
Busenkelt!

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by kgauck

[...] Ah, the Khinasi! Yes, and no. You have to consider the role of Avani (a female god) as patroness to these people. (Sera softens the attitude in Brechtur too, but have you noticed how Cuiraecen has almost supplantedher?) I find that there is a wider variance in Khinasi. [...]
Yes, I've noticed (my character is one of his high priestesses of Aftane). The things you told about Khinasi I agree with (but it still sounds a little bit exotic to create a harem [male or female]).


Originally posted by kgauck

[...] Seeing as how the main female character is Rjurik, it`s not out of character for her to be pretty much that way too -- but killing someone has landed her in trouble more than once. [...]
She loves to play Vos or Rjurik women and gets in trouble very often, but she doesn't want to learn (and I think, it's fun). In many things she seems to be identically to your player. ;)




Originally posted by Birthright-L (Starfox)

But to me it is pointless to play a female who has the same rights and opportunities as a male - then I could just as well be playing a male character.
I can't agree with that (O.K., I'm female and I play only female characters), but I wouldn't play a male only because I want more rights! I play adventurers (as every PC, I think) and those aren't mothers and rise children (except as a short break of one to two years) and definitively no housewives. Most have a little problem of getting enough time for other things apart from adventuring, but they will live on their own ways and fight for it.

[Azrai]

What the hell is going on here?


1. In the D&D game there is traditionally no difference between male and female characters. No ability adjustements, no feat and skill adjustement. So in the pure core rules male and femals are equal.

2. One could discuss, if a "realistic" middle-age campaign handles this different. In principal, one could do it as he like, but this is not the common way of doing it. All official campaign worlds gave male and females the same rights. This is the case for FR and also for BIRTHRIGHT.
Take a look at the Cerilian sourcebooks. There a many female regents, many female mages, females in leading positions, female guild masters, female temple leaders. These are the official rules.

As a conlusion let me point out again that in D&D males and females are equal per definitionem. Any other guy who has other points of view had never played with females or does not play BIRTHRIGHT and D&D!

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ariadne" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 10:01 AM

> it still sounds a little bit exotic to create a harem [male or female]).

One of the reaons to play role playing games is to experience the exotic.

> I can`t agree with that (O.K., I`m female and I play only female
> characters), but I wouldn`t play a male only because I want more rights!
> I play adventurers (as every PC, I think) and those aren`t mothers and
> rise children (except as a short break of one to two years) and
definitively
> no housewives. Most have a little problem of getting enough time for other
> things apart from adventuring, but they will live on their own ways and
fight
> for it.

The male characters are exceptional in regards their own gender`s typical
behavior as well, just not quite so much. Just like no one wants to play
the dotting mother and matriarch who runs a household, neither does anyone
want to play the duitiful father who stays at home and oversees his lands.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Azrai" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 10:36 AM


> 1. In the D&D game there is traditionally no difference between male
> and female characters. No ability adjustements, no feat and skill
> adjustement. So in the pure core rules male and femals are equal.

That is in large measure because D&D presumes there are no families, just
independent adventurers. Families, as they exist, are mostly used as hooks
by putting them at risk the adventurer must rescue them.

> 2. One could discuss, if a "realistic" middle-age campaign handles
> this different. In principal, one could do it as he like, but this is not
the
> common way of doing it. All official campaign worlds gave male and
> females the same rights.

Can we dispense with the "rights" language. Rights are granted by a
governing authority. There is no governing authority who guarantees equal
rights. There is a convention by the publishers to be inclusive. Gaming
should be open to both males and females, but as I mentioned in my reply to
Ariadne that doesn`t mean we have to model a society based on the premicises
of modern societies. I think its sufficient to observe that all adventurers
and PC`s are exceptional and are able to transcend what is commonly done by
most people. Even in the middle ages, 10% of people did not marry, and so
there were some leading women. Gaming just tends to boost that ratio a bit
in the favor of women. It doesn`t explicitly equalize it.

> This is the case for FR and also for BIRTHRIGHT. Take a look at
> the Cerilian sourcebooks. There a many female regents, many female
> mages, females in leading positions, female guild masters, female
> temple leaders. These are the official rules.

Counting is loads of fun, because it does often reveal just what the
situation is on the ground, and its often different from initial
perceptions. My database of published BR characters is based on Anuire in
part of Brechtuer. I have 169 characters, of which some of offspring.
Let`s count all of them and not just limit ourselves to rulers. I count 48
females, or just under a third. That`s not equal, its twice as many men.
And as you say, "These are the official rules."

> As a conlusion let me point out again that in D&D males and females
> are equal per definitionem. Any other guy who has other points of
> view had never played with females (or even never talked to one), or
> does not play BIRTHRIGHT and D&D!

D&D aims to be equally inviting to males and females, it does not say that
NPC women don`t often miss out on adventuring opportunities because of the
need to raise their children. While I will agree with the presumption that
male and female PC`s should be equally viable, why insist that NPC society
cannot reflect real societies? We know from cross-cultural examiniation
that such requirements as compatibility with childcare (esp. nursing), the
greater expendability of males from the breeding population, the greater
upper body strength of males, and the economy of effort that goes with the
fact that males are already doing dangerous things far from home. We might
ignore the issue of strength for PC`s (though earlier editions of D&D
didn`t), but seeing how we focus on things like population growth - a
perennial topic on this list - we must imagine that women are not getting
themselves killed by the scores in battles, mines, woodlands, and all the
other dangerous places. As long as the most fertile women have sexual
access to men, the population continues, albeit without the labor of the
lost men. The loss of women is far more demographically significant. So,
again, why insist that NPC women don`t have a greater likelihood to be home
with their children? Especially when it is clear that not all women do
this, and PC females are not constrained?

Finally, don`t insult people you don`t know. I`m married with two daughters
and I have a sister. That doesn`t mean I insist role playing must be
politically correct.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Azrai]

Sorry, not meant as a personal insult. My point was that people with this special opinion maybe do not have any females in their gaming group.

I still claim the following: The starting point of the discussion was to invent different rule mechanics for males and females. I do not care if the female quote is 1/3 or 1/2 (which statisticly is not a big difference), I do not care if your typical female NPC is a housewife.

I do care if female have game mechanic restrictions. tell that fhielie the sword of tuornen.

[Birthright-L]

On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Ariadne wrote:
> Why? O.K., in the BR book about Michael Roele (sorry, but I forgot the
> name) it was "normal" to sell woman as a wife to a noble, if
> blooded. But since this is some hundred years ago, I thought,
> meanwhile are woman equal righted (especially in a game!!!). A
> question: Why woman are discriminated in Brechtür (this part is based
> on the 17th century and I think, the rights are a little bit better
> than in middle age)? If you like to copy everything, why don`t start
> to create those religious hats for Khinasi like woman must wear in
> Iran or in the past of Afghanistan? (Was black humor and I hope, you
> don`t!)

The Khinasi are more like "Arabian Nights" merchant arabs or persians than
modern fundamentalist muslims. The burka isn`t period :)

> In our campaign it is normal (we have a very harsh female player) to
> get, what you want. If she is discriminated by someone, she kills him
> simply (if she is in good mood)!

And you don`t enforce consequences for murder? I`d have more of a problem
with your campaign than one which uses medieval gender biases for flavor.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

I should start out by noting that I really don`t like the Leadership
feat. Aside from it being amazingly imbalanced, vaguely worded, easily
misinterpreted, that it has very little to do with a character`s actual
development, doesn`t have much to do with how characters might attract
followers from a role-playing standpoint, and has an extraordinary "wham-o"
effect if taken at higher levels, I just don`t think giving a player access
to a whole other character/characters through a feat is the way to go.

Instead, I think what would make more sense is to use a reputation system
similar to that originally presented in the WoT. Followers/cohorts/LTs
could appear based on the overall reputation score of the
PC/scion/regent. The reputation score itself might look much like the
"leadership score" from the Leadership feat, but no actual feat need be
burnt in order to get it, or one could just use a system like that in the
WoT in which a character makes a Reputation check upon leveling up to
determine whether or not he attracts followers. That is, a certain DC
check is made and the results of that check give the PC a certain number of
levels to spend on as many followers as he likes. Followers who have NPC
class levels count as 1/2 that of other character classes.

Now, I personally draw a further distinction between characters with core
classes and those with NPC classes. Followers core classes can operate as
LTs at the domain level, while those with NPC classes can act as advisors
(from the Book of Rulership.) I also assign different amounts of points to
spend on ability scores for those two types of characters. NPCs who get
the core class/LT "package" get the standard array (8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15)
while those who have NPC class levels/advisors have a lower "average array"
(8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13) or enough points to spend on Table 2-1 to roughly
equate to those ability scores. I guess one way to look at this is to see
it as similar to the difference between "cohorts" and "followers" in the
Leadership feat.

In addition to the modifiers presented on the Leadership feat description
(with a few tweaks here and there) I`d go with a few additional
bloodline/domain level influences like:

+1 Minor bloodline
+2 Major bloodline
+3 Great bloodline
+4 True bloodline
+1 Each 3 levels of province population controlled (round down.)
+1 Each 5 levels of law, guild or temple holdings controlled (round down.)
+1 Each 7 levels of source holdings controlled (round down.)

One could also use modifiers similar to those that determine the loyalty of
provinces in the Rulebook:

+1 Success in war
+1 Low tax rate
+1 Success in adventure action that increases fame (DM`s discretion.)

Using a system like that (a bit more intelligently and completely
articulated than that above) would eliminate the need for Leadership
feat. Further, it could interact with character classes by making bonuses
to reputation a feature of certain classes. The knightly prestige classes
might get a +2 to his reputation score at to reflect his potential to
attract a squire or page. Other prestige classes would be apt (war priest,
highwayman maybe) and one could even give a +1 per level to reputation
score for a Noble character class.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

It always strikes me as odd in a game with dragons, giants, wizards and
participant gods that a modern take on gender equity becomes the issue that
breaks a person`s ability to suspend their disbelief. We rarely see RPGs
that accurately portray the rampant skin infections of the middle ages, the
horrific plumbing or the prevalence of diseases involving the lower GI
tract, all of which are at least as realistic as female "second class"
citizenship. In fact, "adventuring" itself is a pretty ridiculous concept
in the D&D sense. A female adventurer might be marginally more ridiculous
than a male one, but why bother drawing that line at gender? If one were
going to posit "adventures" in the first place, social class seems more apt.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 03:01, Ariadne wrote:

>(but it still sounds a little bit exotic to create a harem [male or female]).
>

Aw c`mon -- never been unable to decide between two potential partners
you like? What if, culturally, that was acceptable -- in fact lot`s of
people do it all the time. (in RL it`s called "cheating" or now more
acceptably "playing" - a softening of attitude)

Then take it a bit further.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 10:53 AM 12/6/2002 +1100, Peter Lubke wrote:

> >(but it still sounds a little bit exotic to create a harem [male or
> female]).
>
>Aw c`mon -- never been unable to decide between two potential partners
>you like? What if, culturally, that was acceptable -- in fact lot`s of
>people do it all the time. (in RL it`s called "cheating" or now more
>acceptably "playing" - a softening of attitude)
>
>Then take it a bit further.

If you use the Leadership feat to reflect this "situation" that`s a little
pat, isn`t it? I mean, problem solved. Boom, gotcha both (or all three
maybe four if you OD on your Vitamin E.) Why would anyone with a libido
adventure after hitting 9th level? Burn some feats on Leadership....
retire into domestic bliss for all eternity. Brigham Young never had it so
good.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Azrai

Take a look at the Cerilian sourcebooks. There a many female regents, many female mages, females in leading positions, female guild masters, female temple leaders. These are the official rules.
There you are right, the landed regents of Thalinie, Medoere and (if I'm right) Roesone are examples. Maybe they are less often than males, but they can't be ignored (further no one knows how much male regents have a true female regent in their backs)! And as Azrai pointed out: Try to command Fhiele (or any priestess of Cuiraécen) around!



Originally posted by Birthright-L (Daniel McSorley)

And you don`t enforce consequences for murder? I`d have more of a problem with your campaign than one which uses medieval gender biases for flavor.
There is one problem: She always plays the landed regent (and executes her own laws)... ;)



Originally posted by Peter Lubke

Aw c`mon -- never been unable to decide between two potential partners you like?
Well, this bases on the character you play and no, I personally hadn't this problem until now...

[kgauck]

Gary,

For some of us (perhaps only a very few of us) part of the appeal of gaming
is escaping modernity, either for a post-modern Star Trek or a pre-modern BR
gaming experience. Why should we be obligated to draw the line on the
politically correct side of gender equity, especially after all the
assurances provided by this author that PC`s exceptionally extended to
gender? Not only does my campaign inhabit a world in which premodern
constraints limit NPC women, but so does pre-modern hygiene, disease (as
though I have not posted enough on disease, the inadequacy of a small cadre
of spellcasters to heal the world, and a revision of the Heal skill to
eliminate automatic cures), and even social class. Since you have
specifically complained about my BR conceptions of class ideology in the
immediately subsequent post (4:42 pm), it certainly appears that you have a
problem with the very application of a pre-modern ideology in gaming no
matter how it manifests. I rather prefer my NPC`s to have skin infections,
GI infections, and to die prematurely. And I like a Heal skill and cure
spell environment that can`t fix the problem for any but the lucky few, of
whom the PC`s are numbered. Furthermore, I like a social order in which a
hierarchy is considered natural, proper, and ordained by the heaven. Where
both social perceptions and metaphysical reality reflect a top down world in
which the will of heaven is expressed in earth by an elite, be they priests,
kings, or whomever. I don`t create such a world because I like it better
than the one I inhabit, I create it because its different. The same could
be said for gaming in a post-apocalyptic world, a Cthulhu setting,
Ravenloft, or a any number of other settings which are less than suitable
for family living.

Finally, I am happy to hear what other people do and think about in their
own games. I will take my part in describing what I do and think. I`m not
so happy to be scolded because someone thinks my gaming priorities are
misplaced.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 12:48 PM 12/6/2002 -0600, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

>For some of us (perhaps only a very few of us) part of the appeal of gaming
>is escaping modernity, either for a post-modern Star Trek or a pre-modern BR
>gaming experience. Why should we be obligated to draw the line on the
>politically correct side of gender equity, especially after all the
>assurances provided by this author that PC`s exceptionally extended to
>gender?

You keep asking the question, though. I`m not attacking your priorities
(frankly, I couldn`t be bothered) I`m just trying to answer the
question. More often than not I get the feeling you`re not really looking
for responses to particular posts, you`d rather just put stuff out into the
BR community for readers to digest at their leisure... which is all
good. The more material out in the electronic world related to BR the
better. In this case, however, you posed the question several times, and
that read to me like you were interested in a dialogue--or at least
expected some response. When I read, "why insist that NPC society cannot
reflect real societies?" and "So, again, why insist that NPC women don`t
have a greater likelihood to be home with their children? Especially when
it is clear that not all women do this, and PC females are not
constrained?" they don`t strike me as rhetorical. Anyway, that response is
twofold. Here it is in hopefully clearer (and certainly more verbose) terms.

#1 Personal aesthetic (read: fun.) I`m not usually on the majority side of
an issue, but I`m under the impression that I am on this one. That is, I
don`t get that much pleasure from role-playing gender inequality, or skin
disease, or irritable bowels. In fact, I lump those things in pretty much
the same container of the stuff that I am escaping when I engage in the
hobby. Oh, I don`t deal with many diarrhetic feminists with bad skin very
often in real life--maybe once or twice a month or so--but my even
occasional dealings with them (and their chest-thumping moronic, male
counterparts) are enough to satisfy my every need to deal with that area of
life, so I don`t bother to recreate them in a fantasy setting during my
hours of leisure. For pretty much the same reasons, a certain amount of
social class conflict is fine in my games, but I don`t want to turn a
role-playing session into an exercise in Marxian vs. pre-capitalist
ideology. It`s no skin off my nose if the skin comes off the noses of NPCs
IYC but--since you asked--I think that when most people escape into BR/D&D
they tend to escape further afield than you appear to prefer. Personally,
I occasionally play more gritty and "real" RPGs, but that`s not what I`m
looking for when I pick up my BR/D&D materials. Why not more realism in
BR/D&D? Because the material doesn`t particularly lend itself to more
realistic interpretations, and that`s because it wasn`t developed with such
interpretations in mind. There are many campaign/game systems (one or two
are even D20) where a more realistic interpretation was the intent, but I
wouldn`t count BR as one of them.

So, to conclude reason #1, "why insist?" Well, I don`t think anyone really
did insist, but to that extent that they did it would be because they find
it more fun to play that way. When it comes to such issues I aim for just
enough "realism" so that players can maintain their suspension of
disbelief. Much more than that starts to bog down play in my experience,
and I start to lose my "audience." (Interestingly, that`s the case whether
I`m playing or DMing. Too much realism loses the DM just as surely as too
much can lose the players.) Now, that`s not to say your games aren`t
fun. Some people "draw the line" further along the "realism" scale than
others, and there`s no "right way" here.

#2 Rationalizing the irrational. In a fantasy setting with all its
accoutrements (dragons, gods, magics, etc.) the answer to the question,
"Why insist that NPC society cannot reflect real societies?" is what forms
the basic rationale for the aforementioned escapism. That is, precisely
because it is a fantasy setting. The process of fantasizing a game world
that eliminates the need for PCs to suffer a hideous skin rash (unless
inflicted by a mummy or some such DM tool) is the same one that creates
participant gods, dragons, elves, etc. and can be just as easily applied to
the society of the gaming world to create what some people deride as
"politically correct" attitude towards gender. (People use different
meanings for the term "politically correct" so hard to tell what is meant
exactly by using it in this context. It has, however, come to be a
generally derogatory term, so I assume it`s being used in the same sense
here.) If one posits a degenerate orog society, it`s not such a leap to
posit a more "enlightened" human society--if for no other reason than to
contrast the human "ideal" expressed in the fantasy setting against that of
the monstrous one. If one posits a magical environment, foregoes any game
mechanical differences between how the sexes are portrayed (mostly ability
scores) and further introduces much more extreme and harsh societies (even
the most depraved of which are, in the final analysis, just variants of our
own society/history) then one can similarly employ more "enlightened"
human/elven/dwarven/halfling societies (which are, in the final analysis,
an ideal expression of--not a portrayal of--real societies.)

>Not only does my campaign inhabit a world in which premodern
>constraints limit NPC women, but so does pre-modern hygiene, disease (as
>though I have not posted enough on disease, the inadequacy of a small cadre
>of spellcasters to heal the world, and a revision of the Heal skill to
>eliminate automatic cures), and even social class.

That probably wouldn`t work for me. Out of curiosity, are these NPCs just
the background, or do you actually role-play them regularly as DM?

>Since you have specifically complained about my BR conceptions of class
>ideology in the
>immediately subsequent post (4:42 pm), it certainly appears that you have a
>problem with the very application of a pre-modern ideology in gaming no
>matter how it manifests.

I was looking for a clarification there, not refuting the application of
pre-modern ideology in gaming. I confess I don`t see how either your
definition or my response is really connected to the application of
pre-modern ideology to gaming in the first place. You described RP in a
way ("RP is power which creates belief, rather than belief that creates
power") that appeared to be paraphrasing the way the published materials
describe bloodline rather than regency. How does that definition represent
an application of pre-modern ideology?

As long as I`m at it, I don`t have any objection to applying pre-modern
ideology to a game. Personally, I prefer to go with the basics; monarchy,
the "three estates" and like that. Even those described in somewhat
general terms. Where greater detail aids a particular session (or even
becomes the point of a particular session) then it can be more thoroughly
explored, but such things are secondary to play.

>I rather prefer my NPC`s to have skin infections, GI infections, and to
>die prematurely. And I like a Heal skill and cure spell environment that
>can`t fix the problem for any but the lucky few, of
>whom the PC`s are numbered.

Hm. I`m not quite sure how to respond to that.... I mean, it`s fine. Go
to it. Have fun, I guess. I`m sure there are plenty of other maladies we
could suggest for your NPCs if ever run out of symptoms.

>Finally, I am happy to hear what other people do and think about in their
>own games. I will take my part in describing what I do and think.

As far as I can tell that`s all we`ve been doing. Up until this point,
that is.

>I`m not so happy to be scolded because someone thinks my gaming priorities
>are misplaced.

My previous post having to do with gender equity and fantasy components was
not directed at anyone in particular (there`ve been ample opportunities to
quote had it been) but was part of a general commentary on the thread. If
you felt scolded by that... well, then I don`t know what to tell you other
than I`ll try to make it more clear in the future that I`m scolding when
that`s my intent. Normally, in fact, I`d take this post off the list, but
#1 and #2 there are actually relevant to the discussion, so I won`t.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:29 PM

> So, to conclude reason #1, "why insist?" Well, I don`t think anyone
really
> did insist, but to that extent that they did it would be because they find
> it more fun to play that way.

Oh, but there was insistance, including capitalization, imputed moral
inferiority, suggestion of social malformation, and your own dismissive turn
(no one really uses social class or disease that way, so old timey gender
sounds more like a hang-up). These may have been at least partially
enthusiasic rhetorical excesses, but they did refuse to admit any role for
an alternative playing style. The implication was that its just not done in
this enlightened age. So all I am really asking for is the sense that it is
possible to play BR with this stuff. When I first see posts of this kind I
suppose it could just be as subtle as someone saying "will" when they mean
"may". As in the sentence "that will/may not be fun". So, I post something
along the lines like, "Oh, I think its fun", and I do get replies that say,
"I mean really, how is /that/ possible?"

Mostly, I do just post because I think some people will find this stuff
interesting. I`m not trying to convert people to my style of play, or
insist that there is some deficiency in gamers who do things exactly the
opposite of my approach. But I do have to ask why some of posts I see won`t
even admit the possibility of fun with some of this stuff, even after I
suggest it can be fun (not must be fun).

Admitedly, I don`t play RPG`s for escapism, I play the for exploration.
Like Schiller, I think entertainment should be didactic, not escapist. But
again, that`s just me.

> Too much realism loses the DM just as surely as too much can lose the
players.

Realism is a genre style (whether we`re talking about Realism or realism).
The key to success in this area is to set up the genre, and then just avoid
violating its rules. Otherwise its heavy handed.

> "Why insist that NPC society cannot reflect real societies?" is what
> forms the basic rationale for the aforementioned escapism. That is,
> precisely because it is a fantasy setting.

Except that until very recently, what we today call fantasy was not an
attempt to escape real society, but to comment directly on it. Talk to
people unfamiliar with myth about Greek mythology, and it will weird them
out. Gods having sex with siblings, turning into animals to seduce humans.
Ick! But the Greeks were commenting on their own existence, in a poetic
way, perhaps, but the real society of their daily life was its subject. So,
I have no problem with dragons, gods, and magics as a commentary on real
societies. I am just using ancient and medieval literary tools to look at
past societies in a way which they would probably find familiar. Rather
than using Greek figures like Perseus or Theseus, I use the BR stock of
places and people, and I don`t limit myself to any mythologies, literatures,
or traditions. BR`s setting allows a smorgasbord of other forms to be
applied.

I had written:
>> Not only does my campaign inhabit a world in which premodern
>> constraints limit NPC women, but so does pre-modern hygiene, disease,
>> and even social class.

> That probably wouldn`t work for me. Out of curiosity, are these NPCs
> just the background, or do you actually role-play them regularly as DM?

Stuff like hygene, mud, or bad plumbing is generally used to establish the
setting at the begining of a session, or during transitions to remind
players that our world is different. Disease and social class figure
regularly into NPC play. I don`t start characters off as rulers, though if
a players want to rule, he can be next in line of succession. This means I
need to remove a lot of NPC`s during the course of the game. Other NPC`s
start the game as old and sick. King Bervining of Halskapa is described in
tRH as having failing health. He died of pneumonia the first winter of the
campaign. I`ve had a PC get an infection from a wound, the healer lanced
his liver to drain yellow bile. The PC recovered nicely. An NPC once
caught a fever and now has a rheumatism, he complains of aches before it
rains. Eorl Njall Olivsson was badly wounded in the leg, infection set in,
and I basically retired him for a year. When the PC`s came to Hjorvaal
during his lengthy convalescence they found him walking with staff and
unable to leave his compound. He`s recovered. Eorl Olfjor Ylvarrik
recently had a heart attack while hunting, and he died. His eldest son,
Runolf, who had grown into a rival of the PC`s is now the Eorl of Arvaald.
Unlike old Olfjor, Runolf has grown into the campaign as a peer of the PC`s.
He approximates their level, his encounters with them, both friendly and
adversarial, fill the history of the campaign. Olfjor was a political
rival, Runolf is also a personal one. I`ve had NPC`s cough up blood on
several occasions to suggest vice or corruption. The players have shown no
interest in going to Thaele, so Eorl Andros Drakkenvir will probabaly die
soon of illness, and then the fate of the Tjarvaald colony will become
precarious, and it may ultimatly fail.

> You described RP in a way ("RP is power which creates belief, rather
> than belief that creates power") that appeared to be paraphrasing the
> way the published materials describe bloodline rather than regency.
> How does that definition represent an application of pre-modern ideology?

RP is just a metric for the way bloodline authorizes rulership. Bloodlines
are what makes BR what it is. Counting up points of power could be done in
any game. As a result of the American and French revolutions power is now
assumed to rest with the people, and governments are regarded as
illegitimate who hold power against the will of the people. Prior to this
the governance and social order were seen as a manifestation of the natural
order, and hence the divine order, from anthing from a remote watchmaker god
to the king being a semi-divine direct representative of heaven on earth.
In a premodern conception, the people are more thoroughly subject to their
leaders, as can be seen by the changing meaning of the word "liberty".

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by kgauck

[...] Whereboth social perceptions and metaphysical reality reflect a top down world in which the will of heaven is expressed in earth by an elite, be they priests, kings, or homever. I don`t create such a world because I like it better than the one I inhabit, I create it because its different. The same could be said for gaming in a post-apocalyptic world, a Cthulhu setting, Ravenloft, or a any number of other settings which are less than suitable for family living.[...]

If you mean equal rights for woman, in reality there are enough countries, where they aren't so different from your gaming. So may be some peoples like Birthright, BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE BETTER THAN THE REAL WORLD, not different.


Finally, I am happy to hear what other people do and think about in their own games. I will take my part in describing what I do and think. I`m not so happy to be scolded because someone thinks my gaming priorities are misplaced.
As Gary said already, I speak about my own game and that was NO insult to you personally. If you like your style, keep it, nobody stops you...