Results 21 to 30 of 47
Thread: Blooded animals
-
08-29-2010, 03:00 PM #21
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
At 11:54 PM 8/28/2010, dooley wrote:
>The teen manifestation isn`t in the 2e rules, and merely makes
>infanticide the best way to deal with opposing bloodlines.
It`s not in the 2e rules, but there are at least two (I think 3+)
blood abilities that indicate it really must work that way given the
rest of the setting`s dynamics. Surely someone would have mentioned
the devastating effects of a colicky baby with the Divine Wrath blood
ability, or the existence of a baby with the Long Life blood ability
who remained an infant for decades.
In addition to those two, I`d offer the following speculation: If
bloodline doesn`t take effect at some point later then it manifests
at birth, right? Well, isn`t that manifestation just as arbitrary as
any other? Why not in utero? Why not a scion with a gestation
period of several centuries? One of the interesting things that
Frank Herbert did in his book Dune was premise an fetus becoming
aware and sentient during gestation due to a technological ritual
with an alien chemical. The result is an "abomination" with all the
memories of her ancestors. Well... in BR we have the Blood History
ability that basically functions the same way.... If blood abilities
manifest before some period of maturation then that kind of thing is
the natural byproduct of that blood ability.
All of that is an interpretation, but it`s one based on the published
materials, and I`d suggest that that interpretation is much more
direct than the idea of blooded animals.
>Murdering children because they`re weaker and easier to get to than
>adults has often been used politically, and the fact you get access
>to their blood without having to face the concurrent abilities makes
>it such a more tempting option.
>
>The cry of "Oh if he`d only reached (whatever) years of age his
>Poison Sense would have warned him not to eat those!", or similar
>with other abilities, is too important to overlook.
>
>Especially as it`s directly thwarting the "destiny" that such blood
>brings (according to some)
If their blood abilities don`t manifest until a scion reaches some
sort of age of maturity, then why would their bloodline score? I
suppose one could go with that kind of interpretation, but it seems a
little odd. If you assume that blood abilities manifest later, but
bloodline score happens at birth then wouldn`t it be relatively
common for scions to become invested as regents when their parent
dies but be too immature to act as a regent? A regent (in the sense
of a guardian) wouldn`t work in the same way in BR that it has in
real history because it is the actual leader who is invested. That
character isn`t a figurehead in the same way that a royal could be in history.
Using the same logic as above: why wait for birth? Wouldn`t a
pregnant woman be the best choice for such a bloodtheft? Just kill
the baby in the womb (a sort of bloodtheft abortion) and get all the
benefits of bloodtheft without the hassle of changing diapers?
Gary
-
08-30-2010, 04:15 PM #22
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Posts
- 50
- Downloads
- 15
- Uploads
- 1
Actually there are several more than that, what's really needed is thought into which abilities only manifest when 'mature' and those that are active from birth.
In addition to those two, I`d offer the following speculation: If
bloodline doesn`t take effect at some point later then it manifests
at birth, right? Well, isn`t that manifestation just as arbitrary as
any other? Why not in utero? Why not a scion with a gestation
period of several centuries? One of the interesting things that
Frank Herbert did in his book Dune was premise an fetus becoming
aware and sentient during gestation due to a technological ritual
with an alien chemical. The result is an "abomination" with all the
memories of her ancestors. Well... in BR we have the Blood History
ability that basically functions the same way.... If blood abilities
manifest before some period of maturation then that kind of thing is
the natural byproduct of that blood ability.
Even if nobody else gets anything from this I'll have what is, IMO at least, a better system for when Abilities occur than either of the official options.
All of that is an interpretation, but it`s one based on the published
materials, and I`d suggest that that interpretation is much more
direct than the idea of blooded animals.
I'll repeat, all I did originally was note them as a possible resource including a mechanic for how they could come about again. The rest of it is tweaking, and fellow DMs & players showing why it wouldn't fit into their version of Birthright.
If their blood abilities don`t manifest until a scion reaches some
sort of age of maturity, then why would their bloodline score? I
suppose one could go with that kind of interpretation, but it seems a
little odd. If you assume that blood abilities manifest later, but
bloodline score happens at birth then wouldn`t it be relatively
common for scions to become invested as regents when their parent
dies but be too immature to act as a regent? A regent (in the sense
of a guardian) wouldn`t work in the same way in BR that it has in
real history because it is the actual leader who is invested. That
character isn`t a figurehead in the same way that a royal could be in history.
Maybe a lot of the disagreement in this discourse is due to assumptions about what is believed to be startlingly obvious to the writer, but is just not thought of by the other involved parties. D'oh!
The most famous bloodline, although currently 'lost', actually has several preteen Regents. Unfortunately the fluff on BoM p79 can be read either way.
Either the young Emperor has full measure of the True bloodline and his abilities are suppressed until he puts on the crown, or he gets new abilities because of the crown and can use them right away.
The fact that at other times there was a "regent" in the RL sense helps to muddy the waters quite nicely.
Using the same logic as above: why wait for birth? Wouldn`t a
pregnant woman be the best choice for such a bloodtheft? Just kill
the baby in the womb (a sort of bloodtheft abortion) and get all the
benefits of bloodtheft without the hassle of changing diapers?
Gary
-
08-30-2010, 06:00 PM #23
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Posts
- 50
- Downloads
- 15
- Uploads
- 1
Isn't it more along the lines of 0.1% blooded.
1% of Rjuvik are shape-shifters according to the rules, but if you apply the chances to lose personality and go feral rules honestly then nearly 100% of them will go that way. The failure chance is just that high.
Depending on which way you combine the two probabilities you could have a 1 in 100,000 chance of being both a Shape shifter AND blooded, or 1 in 10 chance of being a blooded shape shifter, or some other figure.
It's these poor souls who'll make up the naturally occurring pockets of blooded animals that will flourish for a while and then fall away again. Just multiply the Rjuvik population by the percentage you prefer to see how many a generation this will be.
Then we have the case of the druid/wizard, and maybe some of the wizards chums too, who do it as a kink. These rare pockets too die out over time unless there's a new injection, but once a kink always a kink? The number of people tried for bestiality and other deviant practices in RL olden times, (IIRC one knight was made a knave for incest, pernicious buggery, and bestiality) shows that social stigma isn't a sure fire way to stop it
Then we have the premeditated breeding program by usually a Wizard, as there is advantage to be gained by doing so.
The effects are very variable, breeding in general has only recently with the benefit of DNA testing and so on, begun to move towards a real science. Much depends on the original quality of the stock, genetic variation present within the breed, the normal mating patterns and numbers, etc - when looking at notoriously sickly species such as humans the consequences tend to be tougher as nasty recessives pop up sooner.
Golden hamsters are a good example of what you've been suggesting. All captive G.Hammies come from 1 litter collected for research purposes in (from recollection) the 1930's. The continual inbreeding has left them notorious for dying young - from recollection only 1 of 3 that I and my brothers were given lasted to maturity. They survive as a species in captivity, but in competition with less in-bred cousins would be rapidly out-bred.
As a general rule it is safe to say that continued inbreeding will, sooner or later, cause loss of fertility, lower survival rates, etc and that limited genetic spread (inherent in inbreeding) makes a species more vulnerable to disease, parasites, etc - at some point any bloodline advantage is going to be outweighed by the benefits of fresh bloodstock reducing the immortal father syndrome.
As for the progenitor issue; fresh blood could be coming in every generation for a while as he mates with any available female not just those he's sired. In the case of the blood farmer there will probably be several parallel breeding lines he can cross.
The question is extent of the transformation - what happens to the various microscopic lifeforms within the shapeshifter changes, does the change extend to a genetic level? Does it convert the pre-existing sperm/eggs or would the new form have to be retained long enough to create new seed? What is the comparative genetic make-up of the new form to the old?
Not necessarily continuously, but you seem to be arguing that they should be fairly common, and reasonably strong which would indicate that they should have had a fairly continuous existence - I can't see any argument to support that approach or any way it would enhance the game to do so.
I'm not advocating that every wood and wild place has it's own group. You can't just let off a bow at random and hit a blooded animal
In-breeding risks are not mythical, and have been observed repeatedly in many species. By all means feel free to look-up some of the stats for large animals (which are the only cross-breeds we are discussing I presume) but any attempt to argue that having the same (male) parent for repeated generations will not reduce fertility, increase probability of disease, make out-breeding harder to prevent, etc - as you require to support your arguments that bloodlines averaging the parents can be retained over time via procreation from the rootstock - is doomed to failure.
It's also easier to hide from those who may take offense at your actions, and want to stop you
If you want to have lines of blooded animals in your game then feel free to say that the bloodline 'purifies the stock' or some such for your game, but in any RL based genetic approach you will find that it is far more easily to breed a strong line from wide stock than from a narrow pool and that once defects start popping up it is very hard to eradicate them without breeding out.
As noted, they were brought up as they are required to maintain the bloodline barring repeated parental-progeny matings. Without investiture, bloodline won't be inherited so it will fade rapidly, with the land's choice it may do so more swiftly than would otherwise be the case although that is less of an issue.
Unless we take your OPINION of bloodline decline as being the only true way of doing things of course. I'm sorry that my heresy offends you!
I can't see this being an issue in a game debate, 'generally only people can manifest bloodlines, animals/plants may be stronger/etc but don't seem to have bloodlines as such aside from awnsheghlien' seems a simple enough rule to be accepted by most players.
If it's just going to be, "well, erm, that's just the way it is and I'm the DM. OK!" why the hell would anybody want to play? Chalk this up to differing styles between groups
Even heroes fail, even empires fall - fate as the saying goes rules all - so some people succeed in their destiny and some do not. Those failures do not mean that those who failed weren't marked out for a chance at greatness and possibly given a helping hand - their less fortunate unblooded peers likely never even had the opportunity, or had to work twice as hard to get it.
From a metagame perspective, if bloodline guaranteed success then only the blooded could succeed and the the more strongly blooded would absolutely dominate which would make for a poorer game, so failure must be a possibility for gameplay - it is also a convenient way to avoid excessive book-keeping.
That bloodline has a strong but not dominant impact on success can be seen in the lack of unblooded rulers and the strength of the bloodlines of more powerful rulers - if there was no correlation between bloodline strength and destiny then other factors would be more dominant and we would see more rulers with very weak / absent bloodlines. What we can see at domain level will presumably extend at sub-domain level - why should it not?
Another question is do they fail? They certainly 'fail' in the sense that some families cease to be blooded, but does the actual bloodline itself - as distinct from the family it is passing down through - fail? If it is absorbed into a stronger line, passed via the Land's choice to someone unknown to the family, etc then the line itself may still survive - and if the family had proven itself unworthy by failing to attain greatness/etc why would it not move to/wait for a more worthy host?
MINE!
-
08-30-2010, 08:38 PM #24
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
At 09:15 AM 8/30/2010, dooley wrote:
>Actually there are several more than that, what`s really needed is
>thought into which abilities only manifest when `mature` and those
>that are active from birth.
I don`t think any of them should be active from birth. It should be
an all or nothing proposition. There`s just too much weirdness
involved in bloodline taking effect at birth. Blood abilities are
just one of the problems. There`s also issue with
1. Vassalage agreements. Why not set up a creche of "baby
regents/vassals" who transfer ALL of their RP to their Liege? Thus
any regent with access to a scion-baby could bypass the RP collection limits.
2. Awnshegh (and maybe ershegh) transformation could begin at birth
if bloodline kicks in then. That`s just weird.
3. There should be a good reason nobody has bothered committing
bloodtheft on children in BR before. It`s not a particularly
original idea, and certainly not outside the intelligence or morally
dubious nature of any number of BR characters, or entire Cerilian
races, for that matter.
4. Normally, characters don`t gain class and level until they reach
some sort of (near) adulthood. It just doesn`t really make sense to
me that the blood of the gods would affect someone who didn`t
actually have class and level. It`s like putting plutonium in a
bottle rocket, or powering your Ipod with lightning. A connection to
vast, otherworldly powers of divinity should at least have to
manifest in a 1st level fighter. So, either bloodline hasn`t
manifested or there should be babies with broadswords....
5. Aside from any mechanistic/thematic reasons in the published
materials, the moment when bloodline manifests has interesting
character development and background potential, especially in the
case of awnshegh who transform as part of that manifestation. I`ve
written up a few new awnshegh over the years, and my favorites are
often ones that have a sort of "X-Men/mutant-teenage angst" background.
On the whole, it`s just simpler (and more sensible) to just make
bloodline take effect at some point during the transition from child
to young adult.
Gary
-
08-30-2010, 09:17 PM #25
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
One more thing about the "blooded animal" idea that really goes a bit
beyond the "animals" but I`ll bring it up in this context for reasons
that`ll become obvious toward the end:
For a long time I`ve been mulling over the idea that there might be
something below "tainted" as a bloodline strength. In my rewrite of
the bloodline system, New Scions, I propose a few new optional
bloodline strength scores. In addition to the originals (tainted,
minor, major, great and true) there are touched, petty, lesser,
eminent and grand each a tick before the existing, standard strength
descriptions. This really hasn`t got much to do with anything except
in two ways:
First, if one uses the interpretation of bloodline strength being the
determinant of bloodline score through the generations, and bloodline
strength is always rounded down, then even the greatest bloodline
would disappear in 2-3 generations if combined with commoners the
whole time. However, if one has additional strength descriptions,
that would last a bit longer. Not really much longer because mixing
a true bloodline with the blood of a commoner could reduce the
strength more than one step, but doubling the total number of
bloodline strengths would mean that it would take 3-4 generations.
Second, the inclusion of new bloodline strength values hints at an
interesting possibility. What if bloodline strength never really
goes away entirely. There might be a sort of latent or dormant
bloodline strength that manifests no bloodline score (or, rather, a
score of "0" where a commoner has no bloodline score value at
all.) A character with a bloodline strength of "dormant" would have
no bloodline score, no blood abilities, no more ability to become a
regent than a commoner, but he would have two things:
1. The ability to spend RP to increase his bloodline. Some folks
have suggested commoners as regents in BR--I`ve always opposed that
idea because I see it as antithetical to the setting`s game
mechanics, theme and background, but if one were to go with this kind
of interpretation, then it starts to make some sort of sense to me.
2. The ability to commit bloodtheft. I understand a lot of folks
have used systems in which bloodtheft can be performed by commoners,
but in the original materials this was not possible. Again, I oppose
the idea of commoners committing bloodtheft for reasons very similar
to the commoner/regent thing.
Now, it`s this second one that I think has the most relevance
here. The existence of various awnsheghlien based on animals might
be the result of an ancient bloodline lying dormant for many
generations. Then, given some strange circumstance that led to
bloodtheft (or its equivalent) that animal might have acquired a
bloodline score. The way those creatures later develop is then
strictly along the lines of normal bloodline strength, score and abilities.
One would have to think about how a "dormant" or "latent" or
"recessive" (or whatever moniker one wanted to put on it) bloodline
strength would work. Would it remain in the family for countless
generations? Would it manifest only atavistically? Would it simply
be the last generation of a near-dead bloodline? Does it depend on
derivation? Maybe Azrai`s bloodline never completely goes
away? That would seem to make sense given the published materials....
Gary
-
08-31-2010, 12:35 PM #26
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Posts
- 50
- Downloads
- 15
- Uploads
- 1
Considering the place is populated with Dragons, Elves, Giants, Spellcasters etc. the fact you think that this is too weird is amusing.
It's your opinion though, and therefore valid to you, but please excuse me if I don't share it.
BoP p79 where it says both parties must be willing to enter the agreement causes problems too.
A few seasons later, when NO! and Shan't! are common responses by a child, who's going to risk having to constantly shell out for all those Vassalage Investitures?
Get to 9+ and there are Regents of that age, or there were historically, advising them on what to do were people with their own agendas so vassalage really begins about here.
2. Awnshegh (and maybe ershegh) transformation could begin at birth
if bloodline kicks in then. That`s just weird.
3. There should be a good reason nobody has bothered committing
bloodtheft on children in BR before. It`s not a particularly
original idea, and certainly not outside the intelligence or morally
dubious nature of any number of BR characters, or entire Cerilian
races, for that matter.
It's not like TSR would have gone out of their way to mention that slaughtering babies was a route to power.
Think of the atrocious publicity when the first lawyer claims that their client wasn't to blame, it was that evil RPG that poisoned their mind.
4. Normally, characters don`t gain class and level until they reach
some sort of (near) adulthood. It just doesn`t really make sense to
me that the blood of the gods would affect someone who didn`t
actually have class and level. It`s like putting plutonium in a
bottle rocket, or powering your Ipod with lightning. A connection to
vast, otherworldly powers of divinity should at least have to
manifest in a 1st level fighter. So, either bloodline hasn`t
manifested or there should be babies with broadswords....
5. Aside from any mechanistic/thematic reasons in the published
materials, the moment when bloodline manifests has interesting
character development and background potential, especially in the
case of awnshegh who transform as part of that manifestation. I`ve
written up a few new awnshegh over the years, and my favorites are
often ones that have a sort of "X-Men/mutant-teenage angst" background.
On the whole, it`s just simpler (and more sensible) to just make
bloodline take effect at some point during the transition from child
to young adult.
Just when does the change from child to young adult occur?
Are we talking physiological, or mental changes?
Even rite of passage rituals at a fixed age have their problems.
There's quite a range of age.
12-14 for physical, but starting at 9 (or even younger) sometimes, or delayed until 18+.
As a side point if it's physiological, if you castrate a boy before puberty will his bloodline never activate?
Mental changes is wide open; from child prodigy, to someone who doesn't get their shit together until their 30's.
What happens if the rite is disrupted or doesn't take place? can it be redone/done at another time?
As to the snide, "and more sensible".
What's more sensible, especially in order to perpetuate the bloodline, is that the Abilities are there when needed.
-
08-31-2010, 03:48 PM #27
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Posts
- 50
- Downloads
- 15
- Uploads
- 1
I'm confused, but then again as those who've actually read my stuff know that's nothing new!
You're using an interpretation that speeds up bloodline disappearance, then modifying it to slow down.
So why go through the speed up in the first place?
Second, the inclusion of new bloodline strength values hints at an
interesting possibility. What if bloodline strength never really
goes away entirely. There might be a sort of latent or dormant
bloodline strength that manifests no bloodline score (or, rather, a
score of "0" where a commoner has no bloodline score value at
all.) A character with a bloodline strength of "dormant" would have
no bloodline score, no blood abilities, no more ability to become a
regent than a commoner, but he would have two things:
1. The ability to spend RP to increase his bloodline. Some folks
have suggested commoners as regents in BR--I`ve always opposed that
idea because I see it as antithetical to the setting`s game
mechanics, theme and background, but if one were to go with this kind
of interpretation, then it starts to make some sort of sense to me.
2. The ability to commit bloodtheft. I understand a lot of folks
have used systems in which bloodtheft can be performed by commoners,
but in the original materials this was not possible. Again, I oppose
the idea of commoners committing bloodtheft for reasons very similar
to the commoner/regent thing.
-
08-31-2010, 06:15 PM #28
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
At 05:35 AM 8/31/2010, dooley wrote:
>Considering the place is populated with Dragons, Elves, Giants,
>Spellcasters etc. the fact you think that this is too weird is amusing.
>
>It`s your opinion though, and therefore valid to you, but please
>excuse me if I don`t share it.
I used the word "weird" to be kind, really.... The "weirdness" is
game mechanical, thematic and in just plain silliness, not "strange
and exotic" in the sense your using. Honestly, it`s not just
"weird." Aside from being downright goofy, the issues I described
later in that post are game-breaking problems. Things like infant
awnsheghlien seems like a pretty strange idea to me--not to mention a
particularly weird (mechanically, thematically, and silly)
interpretation of how the setting works, but if you want to play
"Awnshegh Babies" as a sort of Birthright: Looney Tunes edition then
by all mean go for it.
> There`s also issue with
>
>1. Vassalage agreements. Why not set up a creche of "baby
>regents/vassals" who transfer ALL of their RP to their Liege? Thus
>any regent with access to a scion-baby could bypass the RP collection limits.
>
>Just how is that done when the Vassal has to pass over the agreed
>amount during the Investiture ceremony?
>BoP p79 where it says both parties must be willing to enter the
>agreement causes problems too.
>A few seasons later, when NO! and Shan`t! are common responses by a
>child, who`s going to risk having to constantly shell out for all
>those Vassalage Investitures?
>Get to 9+ and there are Regents of that age, or there were
>historically, advising them on what to do were people with their own
>agendas so vassalage really begins about here.
Both of them must be "present and willing" but that doesn`t really
mean much. A vassal (capital "V" meaning Vassals in the BR sense of
an agreement between regents) must be "willing" to engage in the
agreement, but that doesn`t mean they have to be happy about
it. Lots of people are willing to do things they don`t like; most of
us do such things every day. In fact, most Vassals probably aren`t
wild about handing off their RP to some dominating Liege (again,
capital "L") at all.
Historically, rulers of that age were puppets to a regent-prince (not
a regent in the BR sense) who actually did the ruling, so I`m having
trouble seeing how you objection really applies. Yes, a child can be
petulant, but a child is going to be more easily controlled than an
adult Vassal under the same circumstances. Sure, there could and
would still be problems, but does anyone really think a child would
be more difficult to control as a Vassal in the Birthright sense than
would an adult in the same position? Children would be more easily
manipulated (cajoled, threatened or bribed) than would an adult
unless one somehow has a wildly different understanding of adults and
children than my experience would lead me to believe.... The
Vassalage system of BR already creates a loophole in the limitation
of regency collection and bloodline score. Having bloodline kick in
at birth makes that already problematic system even more problematic.
>----------- QUOTE ----------
>3. There should be a good reason nobody has bothered committing
>bloodtheft on children in BR before. It`s not a particularly
>original idea, and certainly not outside the intelligence or morally
>dubious nature of any number of BR characters, or entire Cerilian
>races, for that matter.
>-----------------------------
>
>Who says it hasn`t been done?
>It`s not like TSR would have gone out of their way to mention that
>slaughtering babies was a route to power.
>Think of the atrocious publicity when the first lawyer claims that
>their client wasn`t to blame, it was that evil RPG that poisoned their mind.
Generally speaking, BR is a more adult setting than most. It`s not
abjectly adult, of course, but the authors generally don`t shy away
from the more violent concepts implied by their work. Sure, maybe
their just leary, but taking even that assumption as a given, making
bloodline kick in at birth makes for a dramatic shift in the dynamics
of the setting. There already is a vibe in the setting that makes
for a sort of Wild West attitude in which players want to commit
bloodtheft in order to increase their PCs stats. Having bloodline
take effect at birth would make that all the more likely. I can`t
see a lot of players and DMs wanting to run a campaign in which
scions (I assume NPCs) are hunting the offspring of other scions as a
major campaign feature. Again, knock yourself out if you want to
play Birthright: Infanticide edition, but I don`t expect a lot of
people will go for that one either.
>------------ QUOTE ----------
>4. Normally, characters don`t gain class and level until they reach
>some sort of (near) adulthood. It just doesn`t really make sense to
>me that the blood of the gods would affect someone who didn`t
>actually have class and level. It`s like putting plutonium in a
>bottle rocket, or powering your Ipod with lightning. A connection to
>vast, otherworldly powers of divinity should at least have to
>manifest in a 1st level fighter. So, either bloodline hasn`t
>manifested or there should be babies with broadswords....
>-----------------------------
>
>Erm... There ARE zero level Regents in the source, Giantdowns having
>one, so the class and level thing is wrong.
I assume you`re talking about Anneke Sturmdotter from the KotG
accessory. Well, OK, I accept the reference, but this is a case in
which I think you`re wildly misinterpreting the evidence. First off,
that is a 2nd edition character written up to describe a frail old
woman at the end of her life. She`s not REALLY 0-level. She`s near
death. Her 0-level status is meant to describe her
frailty. Secondly, he portrayal of a character having a bloodline at
0-level at the END of her life doesn`t really work to validate the
idea that people should get a bloodline BEFORE they reach
0-level. In AS`s case, she`s DECLINED to 0-level after a lifetime of
being a scion. Thirdly, the BR materials are rife with
counter-examples of things that violate even the most basic rules of
D&D let alone the setting itself. This is especially the case when
it comes to the adventures which did things like introduce monkey
gods and transubstantiated dwarves (actually, that one was a PSo
text.) It`s one thing to express unique examples and elaborate on
them as a fanwank or retcon, but I think you`ve got this one
backwards from the beginning.
>------------ QUOTE ----------
>5. Aside from any mechanistic/thematic reasons in the published
>materials, the moment when bloodline manifests has interesting
>character development and background potential, especially in the
>case of awnshegh who transform as part of that manifestation. I`ve
>written up a few new awnshegh over the years, and my favorites are
>often ones that have a sort of "X-Men/mutant-teenage angst" background.
>-----------------------------
>
>So it`s your fluff/DM style that is important? If I want something
>with that Marvel taste there are several SHRPG to choose from better
>suited to that emo crap.
Without subscribing in any way to your insulting and disparaging
characterization: absolutely yes. That`s what the R in RPG
means. Call that what you like, but if that`s not what you play RPGs
for then I can`t help but wonder why you bother at all. Go play
checkers or a computer game if you don`t want "emo crap" in your
gaming. There`s no need to play at all, and certainly no need to
disparage the setting`s materials (which are full of exactly the kind
of thing you disdain) or those who contribute to it around here.
>------------ QUOTE ----------
>On the whole, it`s just simpler (and more sensible) to just make
>bloodline take effect at some point during the transition from child
>to young adult.
>-----------------------------
>
>Simpler?
>
>Just when does the change from child to young adult occur?
>Are we talking physiological, or mental changes?
>Even rite of passage rituals at a fixed age have their problems.
>
>There`s quite a range of age.
>12-14 for physical, but starting at 9 (or even younger) sometimes,
>or delayed until 18+.
>As a side point if it`s physiological, if you castrate a boy before
>puberty will his bloodline never activate?
>
>Mental changes is wide open; from child prodigy, to someone who
>doesn`t get their shit together until their 30`s.
>What happens if the rite is disrupted or doesn`t take place? can it
>be redone/done at another time?
>
>As to the snide, "and more sensible".
>
>What`s more sensible, especially in order to perpetuate the
>bloodline, is that the Abilities are there when needed.
Well, first off, "more sensible" isn`t snide. It`s standard, neutral
English. Any emotive response you`ve had to that term is a product
of your own characterization, and I deny any such content in my original post.
So, to reiterate: yes, it is simpler and more sensible. Nobody to my
knowledge has ever in the history of gaming ever felt the need to
delve into the issues you raise as objections, and we needn`t now.
Nobody needs to know the intricacies of child development in order to
make this kind of ruling. Rather, having bloodline take effect when
the standard (D&D) rules say it occurs: at the age of young adulthood
(which varies by race.) That`s the same age at which characters gain
level and class. It`s much simpler (and still more sensible) since
that`s the same age at which characters gain the rest of their
abilities, it doesn`t create any of the problems described earlier in
this thread and supports the role-playing aspects of the game
regarding character background and development.
Gary
-
08-31-2010, 06:30 PM #29
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- BR mailing list
- Posts
- 1,538
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
At 08:48 AM 8/31/2010, dooley wrote:
>You`re using an interpretation that speeds up bloodline
>disappearance, then modifying it to slow down.
>So why go through the speed up in the first place?
The speed up is based on how I think bloodline really gets
transferred down through the generations, and using that system leads
to the extension of the idea into the "dormant" bloodline
strength. On the whole, the idea is to explain how some characters
(particularly the awnshegh based on animals) might somehow get a
bloodline and transform after a bloodtheft event even though
commoners aren`t supposed to be able to commit bloodtheft at all in
the original setting materials.
>In the 2e rules even a score of 0 meant that you could have an
>Ability 10% of the time. I`m going to pinch your dormancy idea,
>reworking it to suit MC of course, for those who don`t make the roll. TYVM
That`s true. The table does say "0-10" not "1-10." I don`t think
that`s what the game designers meant, though. Technically, if one is
reading it that way then commoners will have the same chance at a
blood ability as a scion with a bloodline score of 10.
Gary
-
08-31-2010, 08:10 PM #30
- Join Date
- Feb 2003
- Posts
- 388
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Gary <geeman1984@verizon.net> wrote:
> That`s true. *The table does say "0-10" not "1-10." *I don`t think that`s
> what the game designers meant, though. *Technically, if one is reading it
> that way then commoners will have the same chance at a blood ability as a
> scion with a bloodline score of 10.
There`s a difference between someone with a bloodline of 0, and
someone with no bloodline at all, apparently. Commoners wouldn`t have
a 0, they`d have NA.
--
Daniel McSorley
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Blooded Undead?
By dunsel in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 39Last Post: 03-05-2008, 10:43 PM -
Kriesha's animals
By kgauck in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 40Last Post: 03-13-2007, 04:23 PM -
Animals with bloodlines
By graham anderson in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 32Last Post: 03-05-2004, 10:48 PM -
Do animals have CHA?
By Trevyr in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 4Last Post: 04-04-2003, 11:03 PM -
"Masterwork" animals.
By geeman in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 3Last Post: 06-29-2002, 04:26 AM
Bookmarks