Ethics and Rulership

[kgauck]

I can see what rugor is saying, and I don't think it had much to do with the things irdeggman is defending (a document near extinction anyway). Later materials, especially the adventures, but some other things as well did tend to drift back towards standard D&D. Standard D&D, rich with magic and high level characters do undermine the power of rulers. Certainly this board has hummed with discussions about high level characters making armies obsolete and high level magic turning every element of rulership on its head. So I'm not sure why a comment such as:

the more additions, and adaptations to Birthright there were, the more it seemed to be moving more towards a typical D&D over-magicked over-populated with powerful monsterous enemies type of setting. Which further minimized the importance of bloodline and temples.

...should even raise eyebrows. On the contrary, should we not all nod sagely?

[irdeggman]

I can see what rugor is saying, and I don't think it had much to do with the things irdeggman is defending (a document near extinction anyway). Later materials, especially the adventures, but some other things as well did tend to drift back towards standard D&D. Standard D&D, rich with magic and high level characters do undermine the power of rulers. Certainly this board has hummed with discussions about high level characters making armies obsolete and high level magic turning every element of rulership on its head. So I'm not sure why a comment such as:

Well I would almost never defend some of the published adventures. Especially, since IMO a lot of them were clearly FR throw-offs (Sword of Roele anyone).

But there were several that were uniquely BR. A lot of the the ones from Legends of the Hero Kings were very BR specific (Blood Hungry was one of my favorites) and then there was King of the Giantdowns, a very BR specific and time passing adventure. There was also one of other personal favorites, Seeking Blood Silver from Dragon Magazine (a very good adventure that tied things to the Shadow World nicely, even though the "item" was IMO far too powerful for the setting, the rest of the adventure was top notch and properly "themed").

Now if the comment is revolving around what some people are doing via their own evolutions of the game - that is something completely different. And unfortunetely, IMO, based on too much of a FR influence.

[kgauck]

Since Sword of Roele was specifically mentioned in a previous post of his, I take that to be the direction of his comment.

[rugor]

I can see what rugor is saying, and I don't think it had much to do with the things irdeggman is defending (a document near extinction anyway). Later materials, especially the adventures, but some other things as well did tend to drift back towards standard D&D. Standard D&D, rich with magic and high level characters do undermine the power of rulers. Certainly this board has hummed with discussions about high level characters making armies obsolete and high level magic turning every element of rulership on its head. So I'm not sure why a comment such as:

the more additions, and adaptations to Birthright there were, the more it seemed to be moving more towards a typical D&D over-magicked over-populated with powerful monsterous enemies type of setting. Which further minimized the importance of bloodline and temples.

...should even raise eyebrows. On the contrary, should we not all nod sagely?

Since Sword of Roele was specifically mentioned in a previous post of his, I take that to be the direction of his comment.

Thank you, that is what I was trying to get across.

Birthright seemed to drift more towards typical adventuring, with typical powerful weapons and monsters. Rather than developing the intricacies of diplomacy, spy networks, etc.... even in later PS Modules like Binsada, if I remember correctly, the NPCs were more powerful characters, magic was more potent, and of course, the Sword of Roele has already been mentioned.

This complicates the current discussion about the use of magic in Cerilia, how frequent it is for commoners to see or be effected by it, how powerful it is.

When the most powerful of wizards in Anuire being Cain, for example, who is 10th level, who has a major bloodline, or even Lasica Diem who has a strong major bloodline yet bounces between 2nd and 5th level (depending on the source of information) then any other spell caster of magic in this region should be significantly more limited. [Note: Obviously Taeghas and Ilien's regents have the potential to match them in power, as do one or two others.]

To me this suggests that in order to even be able to gather the neccessary components, and gain the education needed, you would need the resources and wealth available to only the most powerful nobles/bloodlines.

Even if a non-blooded person had the intelligence and ability needed to cast magic spells of significant power, where will they get the teachings, where will they get the needed components, how will they devote their lives to studying spells without the monetary means available to noble houses?

Many realms could even have laws against non-nobles from dabbling in magic, just as many have laws against worshippers gathering in the name of a foriegn/non-sanctioned religion.

They would have little to offer anyone capable of teaching them... I just think they would be few and far in between.

[kgauck]

Poetry is an excellent guide to the truth about what poets would like the world to be like. It is a terrible guide to the truth about what the world is actually like.

That really depends on the poet. Most writers do project their own wishes into their work, but there are others who attempt to describe the world as they understand it. In this case they are no different from the kind of historian who works in a narrative tradition, and attempts to tell a story. Whether the story is that of the siege of Troy, the success of Cesar Borgia, the fall of Richard II, or the death of Hamlet, we can ask, given a wide knowledge of the histories, biographies, art, monuments, and so on of a culture, does this story strike at core ideas, attitudes, or behaviors of the people in question.

Thucydides wrote in the introduction to his Peloponesian Wars that this book would be for the ages because men could always draw lessons from it, since the character of man would not change over time. He concluded that all wars were caused by interest, fear, and honor.

As such, what kind of guide is Shakespeare for Birthright. What does he tell us about court, the ambition of people, the trials of rulers, the strength or weakness of states, the power of ideas to influence men, and so on as might influence the game. I think he offers us more than one man's opinion.

The humanities is the accumulation of insights about the human condition, it offers us not only knowledge but wisdom. Science, for all its excellence, and I do value science greatly, does not offer us wisdom. Its knowledge has greater precision and reliability: as you say, its laws cannot be violated. Wisdom is about negotiating intangibles, making good choices even though human affairs does not obey strict laws.

If I were trying to construct an ethics (whether a personal ethics or the ethics for a ruler) I would start with history and biography, and seek to know these subjects widely. Then I should like to know some philsophy, and then some of the greatest literature, by the best poets who offer us wisdom about the hearts of people. Of course I want to know some criticism, both historical and literary, so that I can get some insights into the authors and use this to make sense about how the author's world influenced his work. The Iliad makes more sense if we know something about the Greeks, especially the archaic Greeks, than if we just pick it up at random and start reading it.

Aristotle observed that because the poet could deal only with his theme, he could be more clear, more didactic, than the historian could. Was Oedipus brought down by his hubris, or would it have been better to discuss the economic problems of Thebes, the legal policy, its diplomacy with other cities, the problems of the farmers, merchants, and the views of the priests. No doubt it would form a more complete picture and give what conclusions we might draw more confidence, but for many people the overwhelming information would be unmanageable and they could draw no conclusions from the life of Oedipus. More useful then to focus on his hubris as a lesson, and tell other stories to illustrate the other issues. Some might include Oedipus, some may not.

When we consider the ethics of rulers, give me the historians in abundance, give me plenty of poets, but there is little the scientists can tell me, though I'd want to include the evolutionary biologists.

[kgauck]

Perhaps more to the point, what actions are to be considered good or evil, and by whom?

To be the OIT, and add to the number of people worshipping Haelyn, by taking part in the eradication of the newly formed Medoere, the wholesale slaughter of Ruornil faithful, and helping to bring those lands back under the rule of Diemed, and the worship of Haelyn only.

I'd call this evil. But I do so because of certain assumptions I make. Principle among these is that it is not neccesary to be so brutal to restore the dominance of either the OIT or Diemed. Both can be accomplished with much less horror. Machiavelli reminds us often that excess cruelty puts our projects in doubt, because it does two things: first it attaches our cruelty to the project, so that no one could think of our project again without also recalling our brutal acts, and second, our own people will recoil and our enemies will be empowered by excess cruelty.

Suris Enlien must die, and she may have such devoted followers that they will never reconcile themselves to your new order, but any others who will reconcile to a generous and magnanimous ruler in the aftermath of a clear and decisive defeat, they should be forgiven and accepted into the new Diemed and OIT.

There will always be followers of Ruornil here. We have many descriptions of Vorynn comming to Ruornil just before Diesmaar, and it is very likely something that happened in Medoere. Rather than turning these inevitable Ruornilians into perpetual enemies, better to acknowledge the faith as valid, and to insist on no more than Anduiras did as Diesmaar. All may follow their own captains, but the ultimate command is Anduiras' and now his successor's. If OIT controls the holdings, who would complain that the people have a special connection to Ruornil?

[rugor]

It is not neccesary to be so brutal to restore the dominance of either the OIT or Diemed. Both can be accomplished with much less horror. Machiavelli reminds us often that excess cruelty puts our projects in doubt, because it does two things: first it attaches our cruelty to the project, so that no one could think of our project again without also recalling our brutal acts, and second, our own people will recoil and our enemies will be empowered by excess cruelty.

Suris Enlien must die, and she may have such devoted followers that they will never reconcile themselves to your new order, but any others who will reconcile to a generous and magnanimous ruler in the aftermath of a clear and decisive defeat, they should be forgiven and accepted into the new Diemed and OIT.

There will always be followers of Ruornil here. We have many descriptions of Vorynn comming to Ruornil just before Diesmaar, and it is very likely something that happened in Medoere. Rather than turning these inevitable Ruornilians into perpetual enemies, better to acknowledge the faith as valid, and to insist on no more than Anduiras did as Diesmaar. All may follow their own captains, but the ultimate command is Anduiras' and now his successor's. If OIT controls the holdings, who would complain that the people have a special connection to Ruornil?

Excellent points, this is one of my favorite Birthright topics:

The provinces which make up Medoere belong by all laws, both mortal and divine, to House Diem. It is not Ruornil's place to determine who has claim to Imperial lands.

The lands referred to as Medoere were granted to Suris Enlien's father, not to Suris Enlien. Upon his death, seisin of the lands reverted to the feudal overlord (Diem).

The provinces are technically in rebellion, they represent a threat to everything that Anuire is, and the Empire was, and stood for.

The rebel provinces have never been recognized by the House of Diem or the Emperor. Therefore it matters not who may or may not recognize their sovereignty (such as Roesone), they have no right to do so under Imperial Law.

Imperial Authority derives ultimately from Haelyn, to deny the Duke of Diemed seisin of said lands is a crime against Haelyn. As was the rebellion and usurpation of the provinces from the very outset.

Suris Enlien has violated Anuirean Common Law by commiting the tortious acts of conversion, tresspass to land and tresspass to private properties, nor is Suris a sovereign lord or recognized authority, she is a rebel who claimed her position through the murder of the lord designated by the ruling House of Diem.

Lastly, those beholden to the faith of Ruornil should expect little quarter from the Diemed armies should they ever reclaim the rebellious provinces by means of combat, the fact that their god Ruornil spared not one man of over 2,000 who marched to put down the initial rebellion, which remains fresh in the memories of all peoples of Diemed, makes it unlikely that they will be willing to show much mercy or quarter... or be willing to chance them uprising again.

[ThatSeanGuy]

Suris Enlien must die, and she may have such devoted followers that they will never reconcile themselves to your new order, but any others who will reconcile to a generous and magnanimous ruler in the aftermath of a clear and decisive defeat, they should be forgiven and accepted into the new Diemed and OIT.

There will always be followers of Ruornil here. We have many descriptions of Vorynn comming to Ruornil just before Diesmaar, and it is very likely something that happened in Medoere. Rather than turning these inevitable Ruornilians into perpetual enemies, better to acknowledge the faith as valid, and to insist on no more than Anduiras did as Diesmaar. All may follow their own captains, but the ultimate command is Anduiras' and now his successor's. If OIT controls the holdings, who would complain that the people have a special connection to Ruornil?

And that is, in my opinion, the difference between a Lawful Neutral and Lawful Evil regent. The Lawful Evil regend is going to be focused on siezing control-while he or she might not be crazy enough to try genocide, chances are hammering down on the Ruornilites will come to mind.

Whereas the novel idea of just making the rogue church part of the state religion...being part of the law and beholden to the law...might not occur to someone more morally charged in either direction.

Then again, the really clever guy would find a way to just get a puppet regent in over RCS, so that you have two temples holding eachother in check and competing with eachother, instead of being able to focus their attentions on your throne.

[kgauck]

Suris Enlien has violated Anuirean Common Law by commiting the tortious acts of conversion, tresspass to land and tresspass to private properties, nor is Suris a sovereign lord or recognized authority, she is a rebel who claimed her position through the murder of the lord designated by the ruling House of Diem.

I agree that Suris, Medoere, and RCS has a taint of rebellion attached to it, but if I were advising Heirl, I would tell him that the chance to treat Suris as an outlaw ended when you treated with her eight years ago. Your cause is legitimate as she holds what is lawfully yours, but you must now regard her as am unjust legal authority, the same you would if you sought to overturn the rulings of one of your lower courts.

On the other hand, I think that Haelyn withdrew his protection over the house of Diem, at least for a time, and prefered this abomination of insurrection rather than defend some terrible criminal who wore a crown. Achillies lost the protection of Zeus when he desecrated a corpse (dragging Hektor's body around Troy behind his chariot). Achilles got one in the heel. The Tarquins lost the protection of Jupiter when one of them raped Lucretia. They were cast out and Rome never had a real king ever again. Mars came to rule with the warrior class established a governing body to rule in place of the king (the Senate). Both Zeus and Jupiter are sky dieties of law and kingship. I think Haelyn would act likewise. A Diem did something that has cause the Mandate of Heaven to depart. It must be rectified and legitimacy restored before Haelyn will again smile on the house of Diem.

Whereas the novel idea of just making the rogue church part of the state religion...being part of the law and beholden to the law...might not occur to someone more morally charged in either direction.

I don't think its novel. These temples (the buildings) didn't spring up in the past eight years, and if Vorynn appeared to Ruornil here, there has been worship there since the day after Diesmaar. I think that the temples and faith of Ruornil have always been here and have always acknowledged the supremacy of Haelyn, until something happened eight years ago.

If the Duke of Diemed broke the laws of war, and the OIT winked at it, Haelyn might have withdrawn favor from both of them (at least as far as Medoere is concerned) and atoning, being punished, acknowledging, and rectifying this crime, perhaps even discovering the crime, all need to be done before things can be restored.

Then again, the really clever guy would find a way to just get a puppet regent in over RCS, so that you have two temples holding eachother in check and competing with eachother, instead of being able to focus their attentions on your throne.

I think this is too clever. Two unreconciled enemies will spend all of their time plotting to bring down the other and your realm will remain divided. Eventually one will convince the Duke that the other is treasonous and he'll have to destroy them anyway. Machiavelli reminds us that when you must perform a hurt, it is better to do it all at once, rather than constantly irritate and provoke so that no one can think of a time when the realm was happy and at peace. I think you try getting two large dogs that dislike one another and live with that for a while, then reconsider this strategy.

[rugor]

I agree that Suris, Medoere, and RCS has a taint of rebellion attached to it, but if I were advising Heirl, I would tell him that the chance to treat Suris as an outlaw ended when you treated with her eight years ago. Your cause is legitimate as she holds what is lawfully yours, but you must now regard her as am unjust legal authority, the same you would if you sought to overturn the rulings of one of your lower courts.

I don't believe I recall reading he ever treated with her, other than the fact that the cursed sword of the Diem's was returned. However, I will go back and revisit the PS of Medeore in the near future to be sure.

But lets be honest, he never had much choice but to stop pressing his position in the matter... when a god comes along and obliterates your entire army, that has a tendency to stall your determination.

On the other hand, I think that Haelyn withdrew his protection over the house of Diem, at least for a time, and prefered this abomination of insurrection rather than defend some terrible criminal who wore a crown. Achillies lost the protection of Zeus when he desecrated a corpse (dragging Hektor's body around Troy behind his chariot). Achilles got one in the heel. The Tarquins lost the protection of Jupiter when one of them raped Lucretia. They were cast out and Rome never had a real king ever again. Mars came to rule with the warrior class established a governing body to rule in place of the king (the Senate). Both Zeus and Jupiter are sky dieties of law and kingship. I think Haelyn would act likewise. A Diem did something that has cause the Mandate of Heaven to depart. It must be rectified and legitimacy restored before Haelyn will again smile on the house of Diem.

Thats one of the most insightful perspectives I've seen on the matter yet.

I myself, never liked the scenario of Ruornil coming down and eradicating an entire army, thought that was a bit much, a bit over the top, and a slap in the face to Haelyn and his followers.

But it certianly makes for an excellent chance for playing the part of a repentant Diem (especially if one injects another heir into the scenario, Lasica being a Wizard kind of makes her doing so improbable) going on a quest(s) to regain his god's (Haelyn) favor and to right the wrongs done by his line's predecessors...