Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Birthright Developer
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    388
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    ame tonight. Whoopee! First time I`ve been able to

    run a face-to-face game in years, and I cleverly engineered it to be set

    in Birthright. The players weren`t really interested in ruling kingdoms

    so much as adventuring, but I`ll work on them.



    They started out in Dhoesone, a barbarian, a barbarian/ranger, and a druid

    (they all picked rjurik, I have no clue why). Got hired to guard the

    prizes for a tournament the Baroness was throwing. Briefly debated

    stealing them themselves. Fought off the re-animating undead that were

    brought as a distraction, and then dispatched the rogue trying to steal

    the prize with a single critical hit. My poor NPCs.



    So the prize for the joust was this sword, golden or gold-plated, they

    don`t know. I figured the bad guys were stealing it because it`s darn

    valuable, and even evil cultists bent on world domination need money. But

    my players think it must be some kind of ancient magical thingamabob, and

    never let it be said I don`t aim to please.



    So my new plan is that the sword is Azrai`s sword. The way I figure it,

    when azrai died, he split into parts, plus lost some bits into the minor

    awnsheghlien that were created.



    These are fuzzy, but the general separation:

    Pride- I`d like his sword to have gained the pride aspect.

    Greed- The Cold Rider- wants to posess the entire shadow world.

    Envy- the Gorgon- he always envied his brothers.

    Wrath- Belenik- obviously.

    Sloth- the Apocalypse- it floats around slowly and eats things. This one

    is week.



    Which leaves:

    Lust

    Gluttony



    Kriesha doesn`t seem to fit any of these really, she`s described in the

    BoP as plotting and cruel. Maybe Lust? And that would still leave one

    open, which is fine, this doesn`t have to fit perfect right away, since

    all the players know is there`s a sword some dead guy wanted.



    I don`t know where this is going eventually, maybe if the Gorgon is

    tricked into using the sword to kill the Apocalypse, well, that`s 3 parts,

    something bad will happen. Who knows.



    By the way, skeletons in 3.5 have DR 5/blunt, meaning blunt weapons

    penetrate the DR. If some evil guy takes the time to fit them with iron

    banding on their major bones, you can just give them DR 5/- and freak your

    players out.



    --

    Daniel McSorley

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Some thoughts:

    Lust: This could be The Siren or the White Witch. I'd recommend the Siren, since she got her bloodline from another known to be dashing and ravishing.

    Gluttony: The Raven. The Kraken. The Leviathan. The Seadrake. Heck, make The Seadrake Greed and The Cold Rider Gluttony.

    Have you had a chance to see the video game Grandia II? It's got a plot line of gathering the pieces of a dead god to resurrect him. Might be helpful.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Germany, Rhineland-Palatinate
    Posts
    30
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Has noone thought of Garak the Glutton as Gluttony? He already got the name in Blood Enemies p. 117...
    Michael Romes
    (Assan ibn Daouta in RoE)

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    7
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    To really make this work, all of the awnsheghlien involved should have been present at Azrai's disintegration, or be able to trace a path back to that.

    Actually, the sword would be a good choice for Gluttony. Otherwise, probably the Leviathan.

    Lust is traditionally SEXUAL lust, and, given that the source was Azrai, the recipient really should be male (that is, it should be about rape rather than seduction). Actually, an embodiment of lust is a pretty questionable idea unless you are running a VERY "R" rated campaign.

    Sloth... Hard to make much of a villian out of Sloth. ("What can you tell me about the monster?" "Well, it just sort of sits there, and is ugly..."). Remember, the Seven Deadly Sins were not seen as properties of a wicked person, they were things which could trip up a righteous person. It makes a difference.

    Uncle Hyena

  5. #5
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,946
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by UncleHyena@Jul 27 2003, 01:44 PM

    Lust is traditionally SEXUAL lust, and, given that the source was Azrai, the recipient really should be male (that is, it should be about rape rather than seduction). Actually, an embodiment of lust is a pretty questionable idea unless you are running a VERY "R" rated campaign.

    Uncle Hyena
    Rape is not sexual. It is about power and is pure violence that has nothing do do with sex.

    By giving it the "sexual" label, people are detracting from the sheer violation that the act is about and the violence associated with it.

    Sorry for getting up on a soapbox but my moral code forces me to point out the distinction.
    Duane Eggert

  6. #6
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    ge -----

    From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

    Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 2:53 PM





    > Rape is not sexual. It is about power and is pure violence that has

    > nothing do do with sex.

    >

    > By giving it the "sexual" label, people are detracting

    > from the sheer violation that the act is about and the violence associated

    > with it.

    >

    > Sorry for getting up on a soapbox but my moral code forces me to

    > point out the distinction.



    An interuption of the 20th, or 21st century on a discussion of ancient or

    medieval theology is most unwelcome. This is where we distinguish between

    what the player knows and how the campaign works. Uncle Hyena is much more

    in tune with his medieval reading of the inherent dangers in sex as a

    corrupting influence (hence the chastity &c, its all there in Augustine)

    than this bit of modernism.



    Playing BR in which all of the ideas are none-the-less modern is more like

    playing dress-up with old clothes we found in the attic. Getting into the

    spirit of a different world suggests we adopt different ideas about things

    criminal, social, political, and scientific. Just to name a few.



    Kenneth Gauck

    kgauck@mchsi.com

  7. #7
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,178
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    7
    3 +0200, irdeggman wrote:



    >
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleHyena,Jul 27 2003, 01:44 PM

    >Lust is traditionally SEXUAL lust, and, given that the source was Azrai,

    >the recipient really should be male (that is, it should be about rape

    >rather than seduction). Actually, an embodiment of lust is a pretty

    >questionable idea unless you are running a VERY "R" rated campaign.

    >
    > Rape is not sexual. It is about power and is pure violence that has

    > nothing do do with sex.

    >

    > By giving it the "sexual" label, people are detracting from

    > the sheer violation that the act is about and the violence associated with it.



    I understand and sympathize with the effort to define the word as violence

    that has nothing to do with sex. In doing so the term is put into a purely

    legalistic and political sense which gives the subject more dispassionate

    attention by the authorities and the culture at large.



    Real life political expedience aside, however, we`re talking about

    characters that embrace a deadly sin, so portraying them as participating

    in an immoral or destructive act that is closely associated with that sin

    makes pretty good sense. Divorcing rape from lust would be like divorcing

    murder from wrath or theft from greed. By extension if one refuses to

    describe a character who embodied gluttony as fat because of the

    ramifications of that word it would IMO definitely detract from the

    symbolic nature of the character. One could, I suppose, have a character

    who embraced lust but only with responsible partners who gave their

    consent... but s/he`d be a pretty gutless character, wouldn`t it?



    Gary

  8. #8
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,946
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Then if we are using a "historical" reference for rape we shouldn&#39;t really be looking at it as a sin at all. Nobility had the right to use their servants (and fiefs) as they wished for that purpose. Husbands couldn&#39;t rape their wives since it was their divine right for relations, etc.
    Duane Eggert

  9. #9
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    ge -----

    From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

    Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 11:02 AM





    > Then if we are using a "historical" reference for rape

    > we shouldn`t really be looking at it as a sin at all. Nobility had the

    > right to use their servants (and fiefs) as they wished for that purpose.

    > Husbands couldn`t rape their wives since it was their divine right for

    > relations, etc.



    All religions breed some amount of schism between theology and social

    practice. Notions of sin are theological, stemming from the teaching of the

    church. The abuses you mention were acceptable practice, but condemned by

    the church. Sex was inherently evil, a product of the fall of man. Even

    sex for procreation was a neccesary evil. The only elevated state was

    chastity. Historical references to social practice among lay people does

    not properly substitute for the thinking of eminent theologians.



    Theological disputes, BTW, make a very nice inclusion when designing temple

    factions as well as cleavages between temples.



    Kenneth Gauck

    kgauck@mchsi.com

  10. #10
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,178
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    7
    3 +0200, irdeggman wrote:



    > Then if we are using a "historical" reference for rape we

    > shouldn`t really be looking at it as a sin at all. Nobility had the

    > right to use their servants (and fiefs) as they wished for that

    > purpose. Husbands couldn`t rape their wives since it was their divine

    > right for relations, etc.



    Well, first off, neither of those things are quite true. Both subservient

    peoples and wives had certain rights to their own bodies. There absolutely

    were seraglios and such things where sexual rights were absent, and we can

    also recognize a certain a de facto lack of enforcement on many occasions

    for violating those rights (I would make a comparison, however, to the

    marked but still unfavorable rate of enforcement and punishment in modern

    times for like crimes) especially when abusers occupy positions of

    authority or prominence (which draws pretty nearly the same comparison to

    the modern day) but that`s a bit different from saying that what would be

    termed rape today was the standard of behavior. If one goes through legal

    records of medieval and later times there are plenty of cases of sexually

    abusive behavior being prosecuted. (There was a tendency to prosecute

    promiscuity too, but that`s another issue....) Penalties in such cases

    could be wildly disparate, ranging from a simple monetary fine to capital

    punishment, but I`d suggest that such things aren`t particularly different

    from many other types of criminal proceedings of the time and warranted a

    comparable amount of attention.



    Secondly, even if we assumed that one couldn`t sexually abuse a wife or a

    serf that still doesn`t mean the legalistic definition of the crime doesn`t

    exist for other circumstances, so the conclusion that we shouldn`t look at

    it as a sin at all doesn`t follow.



    Gary

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.