Results 31 to 37 of 37
Thread: Leadership Feat
-
12-06-2002, 12:38 AM #31
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
- Posts
- 474
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
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.
-
12-06-2002, 09:01 AM #32
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.
-
12-06-2002, 09:54 AM #33
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.
Originally posted by Peter Lubke
Aw c`mon -- never been unable to decide between two potential partners you like?May Khirdai always bless your sword and his lightning struck your enemies!
-
12-06-2002, 07:09 PM #34
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.
-
12-06-2002, 11:08 PM #35
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.
-
12-07-2002, 05:33 AM #36
----- 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.
-
12-09-2002, 01:49 PM #37Originally 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.[...]
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.May Khirdai always bless your sword and his lightning struck your enemies!
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks