Blood score rising/decline

[Mirviriam]

Generally speaking, how long till there's no more blood or magic in Anuire?

It's been awhile since I've been reading the BCRS scores thing, but it seems to me like someone set it up so everyone but the bloodstealers would become common folk in the near future. Especially after the BCRS then halved the blood line scores. Failing that rampant inbreeding occurs?

[Retillin]

I would think as long as a royal family always has a large number of children that wouldn't happen. I've always thought the opposite. How long until the royal blood is spread very thing to a large % of the general population. By large I mean 20ish %. (I recall in the 2nd ed rule book it said about .1% or so of all people had some kind of blood)

[DanMcSorley]

If you assume the bloodline halves every generation, then even a
bloodline of 100 will dwindle to 0 in 7 generations.

On the other hand, if you assume that the children of a regent tend to
have a lower bloodline than their parent (because most regents will
marry someone with a lower bloodline than themselves), but that the
direct heir of the regent is invested with their progenitor`s
bloodline, then major bloodlines will only decrease very slowly over
time. How fast depends on how often you imagine the investiture to
fail (because the regent dies before it can be done, the heir is
usurped, or whatever).

In fact, in the second model, bloodlines will tend to increase over
time, I think, as regents occasionally raise their bloodlines, and
their children slowly increase as well, resulting in slow growth over
generations.

For example, if the first generation of dukes all had a 50 bloodline,
they would probably marry unblooded people (since their spouses didn`t
fight at Deismaar), and their children would have bloodlines of 25.

The second generation of dukes might have a 51 (invested from their
predecessor), and they would marry those 25s; the third generation of
lords would have bloodlines of 38.

The third duke might have a 52, marry a 38, and have children with a
45 bloodline.

It wouldn`t be as regular as that, obviously, but it seems possible.

Occasionally marrying into a more-blooded house would boost the
bloodline even more. In the novel, Michael Roele`s 6 or 7 sisters all
married dukes. That next generation was probably quite a heroic era.

[AndrewTall]

Inheritance is potentially the key to the endurance of bloodlines - particularly if two blooded parents leave their bloodline to the favoured child.

The second point is family size - with even minor clerical magic (L0 spells are sufficient) death in childbirth becomes almost unheard of for a noble, cure disease, create food and drink, and any curative spell also significantly increases the chance of surviving childhood - likely to almost 100%. As such unless the noble family compensates by using prophylactics families of a dozen or more children are likely to occur in noble families - even ignoring bastard offspring.

As an example, with inheritance increasing to at least the parents strength and denoted with a + sign leads to:

Generation 1: 40
Generation 2: 40+; 20 * 5
Generation 3: 40++, 20+*10, 10 * 25
Generation 4: 40+++, 20++*15, 10+ * 75, 5 * 125

If you factor in inter-breeding and other scion families the question starts to be why isn't everyone blooded if inheritance always strengthens the original line to at least the parents score.

There is the odd issue with inheritance brought up a little while ago of leap-frogging generations - the parents probably die a little while after becoming grandparents, with clerical magic the die possibly even after becoming great grandparents - that delay in inheritance slows down the above expanse considerably if factored in although the top number will keep bouncing up as the elder heir eventually fails a shuffle check and passes on the big family bloodline.


Random events will tend to drag bloodline scores down (looking at both 2e and brcs) which make it much harder to lose RP/BLS than to gain it. This assumption of loss appears however due to expectations of the masses - if everyone becomes weak then it is easier for the good few to shine out and so while the average level may fluctuate over time if it drops too low you get ghenghis khan/alexander the great etc whomping everyone around them and gaining massive strength from success which is then passed on to many 9likely many many) children.


The key issue is the strength of inheritance, if the children fail to gain at least the original strength of their parent, then decline in the overall level is almost inevitable. If inheritance adds several points to each tier's top bloodlines then an explosion is probably equally inevitable barring frequent failure to inherit.

As a rule I'd want levels to slowly rise over time excluding external events, so that the Gorgon's harvesting of bloodlines makes sense and acts as the ultimate restraint on bloodline levels. That suggests that each generation should expect to add a point or three from inheritance, great deeds, usurpation, etc with successful families adding 1-3 more and failing families losing the same. The Gorgon's 2-3 generational rivings then act to cull the greatest lines by their gains over the period leaving us with a coppiced sort of approach - with the maiden (or standard) trees culled and the underwood then left t strive for greatness in the renewed light.

[DanMcSorley]

> If you factor in inter-breeding and other scion families the question starts to be why isn`t everyone blooded
> if inheritance always strengthens the original line to at least the parents score.

Well, nearly everyone in England can trace their family back to
William the Conqueror, right? Same with Mongolia and Ghenghis Khan.
Those lords only lived a thousand and 800 years ago, respectively.
Deismaar was 1524 years before the "present" of Cerilia.

I think the key there is the first stat I posted, that a bloodline of
100 would die out after only 7 generations; a score in the twenties
would only make it 5. Commoners wouldn`t have access to investiture to
maintain their bloodline across generations, and wouldn`t have most of
the clerical magic you mentioned, either.

So it seems to me that nobility would tend to marry each other to
maintain their own nobility (bloodline), and any bloodlines that
escaped into the wild would peter out pretty quickly.

Assuming a 30-year generation, it has been 51 generations since
Deismaar, so I think you`d see a core of noble houses, and then very
minor bloodlines among those who can trace their ancestry to a noble
within living memory. If family legend has it your great-grandfather
was a duke`s byblow, you might have a 1 or 2, any farther than that
and it doesn`t make a difference.

[Mirviriam]

> If you factor in inter-breeding and other scion families the question starts to be why isn`t everyone blooded
> if inheritance always strengthens the original line to at least the parents score.

Well, nearly everyone in England can trace their family back to
William the Conqueror, right? Same with Mongolia and Ghenghis Khan.
Those lords only lived a thousand and 800 years ago, respectively.
Deismaar was 1524 years before the "present" of Cerilia.

I think the key there is the first stat I posted, that a bloodline of
100 would die out after only 7 generations; a score in the twenties
would only make it 5. Commoners wouldn`t have access to investiture to
maintain their bloodline across generations, and wouldn`t have most of
the clerical magic you mentioned, either.

So it seems to me that nobility would tend to marry each other to
maintain their own nobility (bloodline), and any bloodlines that
escaped into the wild would peter out pretty quickly.

Assuming a 30-year generation, it has been 51 generations since
Deismaar, so I think you`d see a core of noble houses, and then very
minor bloodlines among those who can trace their ancestry to a noble
within living memory. If family legend has it your great-grandfather
was a duke`s byblow, you might have a 1 or 2, any farther than that
and it doesn`t make a difference.

No human ruler starts 100 or even close, take a generate or two off that estimate.

Great point Dan on the cost of investiture! Do we dare discuss if the ceremonies by canon are over inflated & monks or poor parish priests will conduct the ceremony with minimal fuss for reasonable or 3 month's wages type of cost?

As to the relation thing - is that proven unbroken chains or just people who want to think they have connection? I'm 50% Irish...but on St.Patrick's Day, everyone is Irish!

[Mirviriam]

Inheritance is potentially the key to the endurance of bloodlines - particularly if two blooded parents leave their bloodline to the favoured child.

...

If you factor in inter-breeding and other scion families the question starts to be why isn't everyone blooded if inheritance always strengthens the original line to at least the parents score.

...

The key issue is the strength of inheritance, if the children fail to gain at least the original strength of their parent, then decline in the overall level is almost inevitable. If inheritance adds several points to each tier's top bloodlines then an explosion is probably equally inevitable barring frequent failure to inherit.

...

At what point do you need new genes in the pool? We know there's an extremely high defect rate in 1st & 2nd cousins medically speaking. Scion families can't just keep marrying off reliably...though I agree if you have just 3 kids per family with 30 countries avoiding 2nd cousins is more a headache of tracking the lineage than a true scarcity. That said, the feuding between houses will make sphere's of influence for breeding the truly major scions. That 3 per rule would be a stretch though, from what I've read none of the rulers in players secrets have more than a handful & the Mode is 1 with Mean is close if not 1.

So the argument of large ruling families is out. The bastard angle holds more water, but harder to track via published books(there are definitely some mentions, but even more rare than 2 children in human noble families - lets go ahead and acknowledge that's probably due to lack of funds for making the game->thus time invested in game story fleshouts). Let's also acknowledge that 95% of bastards will not have an inheritance & die out.

...or is that the gorgon's plan...inbreed the powerful clans until the peasants thank the gorgon for killing off the drooling moron's on the thrones of each realm!

PS: I had read Dune series awhile back, one of the 'ruling estates/classes' was the priesthood of logical/deadly nuns ... they had the power to live forever or nearly a thousand years. They didn't because people are jealous and it would cost the nun's their power base & probably their lives. Fit's in with the social code people on these forums argue for using in campaigns (who cares if the elves do it).

[Lord Rahvin]

In my own personal model, I prefer to regard bloodline and family
separately. Bloodline becomes more connected to "House", so you could have
related, branching but distinct bloodlines, even within the same family.
Likewise, two members of the same bloodline might be, under some situations,
members of different families.

In this model, players who go off and gain prestige and lands and titles can
establish their own Houses, and their own bloodlines, and might have
children that they might choose to marry off to family members of another
bloodline...

Also, I like to assume that bloodline strength score is essentially random
for each individual, and the family`s bloodline score is just some kind of
average. This allows for those occasional "special births" that the family
hasn`t seen since your Great Grandfather Benedict. Why, you even look a
little like him. Your brother, who has a lower bloodline score, would always
be seen as something less and would never live up to your potential,
harboring resentment and ill-will for years until one day...

When bloodline strength score is more random, and family bloodlines are
considered much smaller units, you have a lot more interaction and story
plots to work with without things becoming all weird. I would still base
the random score on the family bloodline strength score, so on average it
can still go down over time... just at a much slower rate, and the
composition of the bloodline is more likely to die off and spawn other
bloodlines.

Thus, even if you do trace your ancestry all the way back to the first
Emperor of Anuire... (and who doesn`t?) that doesn`t necessarily mean your
bloodline is his, or that you have his destiny.

[dooley]

At what point do you need new genes in the pool? We know there's an extremely high defect rate in 1st & 2nd cousins medically speaking.

Actually the defect scare stories usually only apply if there are preexisting problems in the family, and many of the others are because of Teratogenesis.
If there aren't defective genes then there's actually LESS chance of a problem, it's outbreeding that will bring in new bad genes. Plus the infinitesimal mutation chance of course.
It's when the defective are allowed to breed generation on generation, as in the noble families of Europe, that the problems occur.
This obviously doesn't negate the "Ich, with my cousin?" factor.

For thousands of years humans have been line-breeding animals to get the traits they want and culling those they didn't want.


Scion families can't just keep marrying off reliably...though I agree if you have just 3 kids per family with 30 countries avoiding 2nd cousins is more a headache of tracking the lineage than a true scarcity.


Heralds in RL were there in part to keep the "stock" books up to date. Somebody will be doing the same thing in Cerelia as it's a source of wealth and power



That said, the feuding between houses will make sphere's of influence for breeding the truly major scions. That 3 per rule would be a stretch though, from what I've read none of the rulers in players secrets have more than a handful & the Mode is 1 with Mean is close if not 1.

So the argument of large ruling families is out. The bastard angle holds more water, but harder to track via published books(there are definitely some mentions, but even more rare than 2 children in human noble families - lets go ahead and acknowledge that's probably due to lack of funds for making the game->thus time invested in game story fleshouts). Let's also acknowledge that 95% of bastards will not have an inheritance & die out.


One of the many problems I have with the d20 and 3.x versions of how blood works is that if you try and apply those rules to reach 551MR from when blood was first given by the death of the old gods then the Gorgon has already won. All the other bloodlines have died out.
Unless people say the mechanism for blood has changed (and if it has when and why?) any rule in use now should be able to cover the entire history since Mt. D

[AndrewTall]

Actually the defect scare stories usually only apply if there are preexisting problems in the family, and many of the others are because of Teratogenesis.
If there aren't defective genes then there's actually LESS chance of a problem, it's outbreeding that will bring in new bad genes. Plus the infinitesimal mutation chance of course.
It's when the defective are allowed to breed generation on generation, as in the noble families of Europe, that the problems occur.

There are 'defective' genes in every living creature, and more arise spontaneously due to genetic damage over time. Sexual reproduction and paired genes are so utterly dominant in RL precisely because they prevent flawed genes from manifesting to start with or being passed down. Nor is the only risk from in-breeding the obvious deformities etc - the vulnerability of homogeneous stock to disease and parasites is very apparent.


For thousands of years humans have been line-breeding animals to get the traits they want and culling those they didn't want.

Indeed, sometimes it worked, mostly it didn't - compare horses to zebra's or dogs to cats. Comparing humans to dogs, cattle, sheep, chickens etc makes clear that selective breeding hasn't worked well in practice with people. I'd also note that it generally needs a lot of wealth and time to properly breed for desired traits, despite our millennia of effort only a tiny minority of animals and plants have been effectively & deliberately selectively bred by humans.


Heralds in RL were there in part to keep the "stock" books up to date. Somebody will be doing the same thing in Cerelia as it's a source of wealth and power

Absolutely, they did for medieval families without bloodline and a direct power point will inevitably be noted just as noted intelligence, strength, weaknesses, etc were noted.


One of the many problems I have with the d20 and 3.x versions of how blood works is that if you try and apply those rules to reach 551MR from when blood was first given by the death of the old gods then the Gorgon has already won. All the other bloodlines have died out.
Unless people say the mechanism for blood has changed (and if it has when and why?) any rule in use now should be able to cover the entire history since Mt. D

The rules stated in 2e were only ever adequate for covering bloodlines 0-100 - if a bloodline over 100 was even considered possible - I can't see anything clearly stating whether 100 could be exceeded and el-stony could be said as proving that the answer is 'no'.

In terms of other bloodlines dying out, inheritance under 2e (+1 to highest of the two as Dan noted above) is sufficient to stop this occurring, while fairly rapid wastage of off-core line bloodlines is required to stop bloodlines becoming commonplace.

[Birthright-L]

There is an interesting argument/interpretation to be made when it
comes to bloodline that could address some of the issues having to do
with familial lines the way Lord Rahvin is talking about. That is,
one of the problems that seems to often crop up amongst the BR
community is the possibility of some scion somewhere starting up some
sort of breeding program. The problem with the system as presented
in the original materials is that bloodline is a straight averaging
of the parents` bloodline. On its face, that does seem to make good
sense, but on reflection what kind of inheritance works that
way? Genetically we are a random combination of our parents` DNA,
with recessive traits, mutations and the interaction of a massively
complex structure leading to all kinds of strange, random characteristics.

Of course, bloodline having a divine source means it needn`t work
anything like the way biology functions, but I`d argue that if
anything that source means that bloodline should result in things
that are even MORE strange and unpredictable than DNA. After all, it
is by definition beyond the ken of mortals, so shouldn`t it be beyond
the (overly) simplistic averaging two numbers?

There are two major ways that I see this kind of issue taking effect:

The first is bloodline score. If we think of bloodline as being made
up of four factors (derivation, strength, score and blood abilities)
then it seems like some of those factors should be based on
family/inheritance. Derivation, for example, doesn`t seem like it
should be randomized. Similarly, strength is the kind of thing that
is pretty generalized and is based upon a direct family/lineage
link. Bloodline score, however, seems like it could be where this
kind of thing could take effect. What if derivation and strength are
determined by parentage, but score is determined randomly for each
scion? In the original materials there is a table for determining
bloodline score that provides a wide range of values. It`s possible
using that system to have a bloodline score for a tainted bloodline
(4d4; max 16) that is higher than a minor bloodline (score 5d6; min
5) a major bloodline (score 8d6; min 8) or even great bloodline (8d8;
min 8 again.) That`s an awful big range, and expresses a kind of
randomization in effect that is very dramatic.

So, what would happen if parentage determined only bloodline
derivation and strength but not score? Well, in the original
materials there`s still not much of a reason for a scion NOT to have
a breeding program because an act of bloodtheft results in at least a
point of bloodline strength no matter what. My own interpretation of
how bloodtheft works changes things so that bloodline only increases
if the victim of the attack has a score within 20 points of the
thief, and even then the increase is only a possibility. In
combination the two game mechanics make for a very interesting
system, but also make it less likely someone would want to breed
scions because their score might be so low as to make the program worthless.

It would also make family dynamics interesting. First borns might
not be the best to lead if one were to consider their bloodline score
as the guiding factor. The rivalry between siblings would be related
to a more obvious and quantifiable value. There`d be a conflict in
most Cerilian cultures (that are based on European ones) which
feature primogeniture. What if a second or later child was
demonstrably more better to rule, other factors being equal? There
are all kinds of implications to how leadership might work using such
an interpretation.

The second issue is blood abilities, and on this one I`m much less
sure about how one would want to game mechanically portray the
issue. However, the game itself doesn`t deal with this issue very
well, and never has. In the published materials there are families
in which the members have the same blood abilities, which hints that
in at least some cases, blood abilities are supposed to be
inherited. (I`m thinking in particular of the family of Aram ibn
Malik described as the protectors of The Sielehr in the BoM p80, all
of whom have the Long Life blood ability.) This seems like a natural
way of portraying bloodline and its abilities, and leads to some
interesting characters. Unfortunately, there`s no game mechanical
way of representing this in the setting materials. There could be
any number of ways of going about such a thing, but it seems like it
is evidence that blood abilities--which are determined randomly in
the game--might not be as random as all that.

Gary

[dooley]

There are 'defective' genes in every living creature, and more arise spontaneously due to genetic damage over time. Sexual reproduction and paired genes are so utterly dominant in RL precisely because they prevent flawed genes from manifesting to start with or being passed down. Nor is the only risk from in-breeding the obvious deformities etc - the vulnerability of homogeneous stock to disease and parasites is very apparent.

We seem to be discussing similar things in different, but related, threads. Disease and parasites can be fairly readily countered by magic.
Culling and careful selection of the breedstock in an organised atempt, or basic survival of the fittest deals with many of the problems.



Indeed, sometimes it worked, mostly it didn't - compare horses to zebra's or dogs to cats. Comparing humans to dogs, cattle, sheep, chickens etc makes clear that selective breeding hasn't worked well in practice with people. I'd also note that it generally needs a lot of wealth and time to properly breed for desired traits, despite our millennia of effort only a tiny minority of animals and plants have been effectively & deliberately selectively bred by humans.

When it has worked it's changed things totally, the most common bird on the planet is the domestic chicken.
Virtually all attempts at human selective breeding have always had some group of genetically inferior people getting to add to the mix because they were the sponsors.
Birdkeeping is not that expensive, though it can be time consuming just like any other hobby. The number of traits in each of the thousands of species that are kept in the hobby increase year on year.
Most of the plants and animals are still unknown to most people so the premise is false, and you seem unaware of just how many hobbyist Aviculture and Horticulturists are busy creating their own hybrids of species to bring out traits they want.


In terms of other bloodlines dying out, inheritance under 2e (+1 to highest of the two as Dan noted above) is sufficient to stop this occurring, while fairly rapid wastage of off-core line bloodlines is required to stop bloodlines becoming commonplace.

The problem with relying on Investiture to maintain the strength of the major players is what do you do about the sudden loss of blood when it fails? Surely you're not trying to say that the core bloodlines have never suffered a break in the Investiture chain? It's doubtful for any one of them, let alone all of them

[dooley]

The first is bloodline score. If we think of bloodline as being made
up of four factors (derivation, strength, score and blood abilities)
then it seems like some of those factors should be based on
family/inheritance. Derivation, for example, doesn`t seem like it
should be randomized. Similarly, strength is the kind of thing that
is pretty generalized and is based upon a direct family/lineage
link. Bloodline score, however, seems like it could be where this
kind of thing could take effect. What if derivation and strength are
determined by parentage, but score is determined randomly for each
scion? In the original materials there is a table for determining
bloodline score that provides a wide range of values. It`s possible
using that system to have a bloodline score for a tainted bloodline
(4d4; max 16) that is higher than a minor bloodline (score 5d6; min
5) a major bloodline (score 8d6; min 8) or even great bloodline (8d8;
min 8 again.) That`s an awful big range, and expresses a kind of
randomization in effect that is very dramatic.

Interesting.
Makes getting the bloodline Investiture pretty much a have to have, whilst at the same time making it pretty bad when it's stopped.


So, what would happen if parentage determined only bloodline
derivation and strength but not score? Well, in the original
materials there`s still not much of a reason for a scion NOT to have
a breeding program because an act of bloodtheft results in at least a
point of bloodline strength no matter what. My own interpretation of
how bloodtheft works changes things so that bloodline only increases
if the victim of the attack has a score within 20 points of the
thief, and even then the increase is only a possibility. In
combination the two game mechanics make for a very interesting
system, but also make it less likely someone would want to breed
scions because their score might be so low as to make the program worthless.

Less likely that the powerful would do so really.
A caster of True magic due to having a Taint (5) can see many benefits still.
The fact that it's only a possible increase will in some ways make slave farming more likely, as needing to kill multiple scions for an increase is a lot more work than gutting a few slaves.


The second issue is blood abilities, and on this one I`m much less
sure about how one would want to game mechanically portray the
issue. However, the game itself doesn`t deal with this issue very
well, and never has. In the published materials there are families
in which the members have the same blood abilities, which hints that
in at least some cases, blood abilities are supposed to be
inherited. (I`m thinking in particular of the family of Aram ibn
Malik described as the protectors of The Sielehr in the BoM p80, all
of whom have the Long Life blood ability.) This seems like a natural
way of portraying bloodline and its abilities, and leads to some
interesting characters. Unfortunately, there`s no game mechanical
way of representing this in the setting materials. There could be
any number of ways of going about such a thing, but it seems like it
is evidence that blood abilities--which are determined randomly in
the game--might not be as random as all that.

Isn't there a list of the abilities of those of el Arassi blood in the Ariya Players Secrets?
Roele blood has Courage and Divine Strength, but probably not Detect Poison based on BoM p79

[AndrewTall]

We seem to be discussing similar things in different, but related, threads. Disease and parasites can be fairly readily countered by magic.
Culling and careful selection of the breedstock in an organised atempt, or basic survival of the fittest deals with many of the problems.

It takes a L3 clerical spell to stop disease, which is far from common and certainly unable to handle an epidemic, deal with genetic disease (spells impacting genes tend to be higher level and wizard spells, none are in 2e canon that I recall), while parasites will simply repeatedly infect a vulnerable host given a source stock even if they are impacted by the spell itself. The basic premise of survival of fittest also argues strongly against repeated inbreeding as the inbred are likely to be 'weaker' than their competitors. This is far less of a problem for humans than animals - witness the european royals - but will still have an impact.


When it has worked it's changed things totally, the most common bird on the planet is the domestic chicken.
Virtually all attempts at human selective breeding have always had some group of genetically inferior people getting to add to the mix because they were the sponsors.
Birdkeeping is not that expensive, though it can be time consuming just like any other hobby. The number of traits in each of the thousands of species that are kept in the hobby increase year on year.
Most of the plants and animals are still unknown to most people so the premise is false, and you seem unaware of just how many hobbyist Aviculture and Horticulturists are busy creating their own hybrids of species to bring out traits they want.

I never questioned the rare successes, merely the assumption that it would work with any animal easily and the suggestion that inbreeding issues are mythical or take so long to arise that they can be ignored.

Birds such a pigeons, which Darwin was particularly fond of have indeed been bred over a prolonged period to create visible distinct birds that he rhapsodized over - but he also noted that left to breed on their own they rapidly returned to the rootstock of the rock pigeon - you need a breed that does not return to stock to support your arguments of new lines of blooded animals, that is much harder to encourage and create.

In the context of this thread, human breeding programs have never come close to success of breeding certain animals and plants - people are attracted to those with different genes and far more able to circumvent breeding restraints than animals in most circumstances.


The problem with relying on Investiture to maintain the strength of the major players is what do you do about the sudden loss of blood when it fails? Surely you're not trying to say that the core bloodlines have never suffered a break in the Investiture chain? It's doubtful for any one of them, let alone all of them

Breaks are inevitable, but if investiture raises the line on average, then over time then the frequency of breaks will impact whether lines average to increase or decrease. To get a stable system it needs to balance out - increasing the power of inheritance requires making failure to inherit more common. Whether inheriting the bloodline should be the dominant factor in the math is much more interesting as a debate - but tends to make high bloodlines difficult to sustain.

[dooley]

It takes a L3 clerical spell to stop disease, which is far from common and certainly unable to handle an epidemic, deal with genetic disease (spells impacting genes tend to be higher level and wizard spells, none are in 2e canon that I recall), while parasites will simply repeatedly infect a vulnerable host given a source stock even if they are impacted by the spell itself. The basic premise of survival of fittest also argues strongly against repeated inbreeding as the inbred are likely to be 'weaker' than their competitors. This is far less of a problem for humans than animals - witness the european royals - but will still have an impact.

Could be major use of the Healing ability too, and parasites can be eradicated from an area.
If we're talking about farmed blood again then culling will be done to the weak, by making them the first animals hunted.
in the case of wild the the likely ones perish and the unlikely but superior ones flourish


I never questioned the rare successes, merely the assumption that it would work with any animal easily and the suggestion that inbreeding issues are mythical or take so long to arise that they can be ignored.

Poor-Poor will result in bad next generation, no doubt about that. Consistently only breeding Good-Good does mean that it's usually several generations before problems arise, and I never said you ignore them, I've been advocating the culling of the weak from the breeders in any planned attempt.


Birds such a pigeons, which Darwin was particularly fond of have indeed been bred over a prolonged period to create visible distinct birds that he rhapsodized over - but he also noted that left to breed on their own they rapidly returned to the rootstock of the rock pigeon - you need a breed that does not return to stock to support your arguments of new lines of blooded animals, that is much harder to encourage and create.

No I don't need a stable new breed because that's merely what you assumed I was talking about, rather than asking me if that was so.
I've given a mechanism for how a cluster of blooded animals could occur in an area, and the fact that they're a resource to be exploited. I also commented on the fact that the mechanism could be done by those who wanted to with a little ability.


In the context of this thread, human breeding programs have never come close to success of breeding certain animals and plants - people are attracted to those with different genes and far more able to circumvent breeding restraints than animals in most circumstances.

Unfortunately those capable of breeding for blood in Birthright are also those most likely to be able to force their will onto others.
From a personal moral and ethical standpoint it's vile, but as a DM I like it. There's no shades of grey about it it's WRONG
As I mentioned on the blood animals thread PCs trying to do this will make me smile, and as any Player knows "NEVER trust a smiling DM!"




Breaks are inevitable, but if investiture raises the line on average, then over time then the frequency of breaks will impact whether lines average to increase or decrease. To get a stable system it needs to balance out - increasing the power of inheritance requires making failure to inherit more common. Whether inheriting the bloodline should be the dominant factor in the math is much more interesting as a debate - but tends to make high bloodlines difficult to sustain.

Making Investiture so critical does give a bit too much power to priest regents IMO, something not reflected in the number of theocracies, or church dominated kingdoms on Cerelia. Somebody will have a problem with any system though.

[irdeggman]

Generally speaking, how long till there's no more blood or magic in Anuire?

It's been awhile since I've been reading the BCRS scores thing, but it seems to me like someone set it up so everyone but the bloodstealers would become common folk in the near future. Especially after the BCRS then halved the blood line scores. Failing that rampant inbreeding occurs?

Check the "sanctioned" chapters 1 and 2 from the link on top of the threads for BRCS. Replace the existing ones with those for the most up to date versions.

The blood score went back to roughly what it was.