Ethics and Rulership

[irdeggman]

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

Hmm using the Sword of Roele adventure as an example of BR "trending" is really a bad idea.

Unless I am mistaken that adventure is almost universally treated with contempt because of the way it was "written" not as a BR-type material but rather more of a FR cast-off.

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.

It depends on where you are in Cerilia.

For example in the Khinasi lands wizards are much more common than elsewhere in Cerilia.

Wizardly magic (except for bards) are much more common there. Magicians are common (and welcome) profession in the lands there.

Hence higher level wizard regents are a logical outgrowth of this cultural norm.

In general I didn't notice a great discepancy in the over all levels of the NPCs in the Khinasi PS (or Cities of the Sun), but there are more higher level wizards (again there should be).

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.

In Anuire definitely.

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?

Even though there are 2 wizardly colleges of reknown.

The Imperial College and the one in Moedre.

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.

But not in the Khinasi lands - there is only the 5 Oaths.

[rugor]

Even though there are 2 wizardly colleges of reknown.

The Imperial College and the one in Moedre.

True, but the preference would certianly be to those with Noble backing, who could make monetary donations... the qualifications needed for non-bloodeds to be accepted would likely be extremely high, and then there would likely be expected servitude to the College in return for what they offered.

[kgauck]

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.

I don't think Ruornil actually did anything, let alone appeared in Cereilia. I think both sides have cause to attribute the battle and the founding to Ruornil, because for Suris and Medoere, they hope it adds divine legitimacy to what is otherwise outlaw behavior. For Diemed and the Diems, it removes some of the sting of the defeat. Rather than saying we screwed up and lost 2/3rd of our land, say we were gonna get it all back and just as that was about to happen a god intervened to prevent us.

The moon may have been in the sky on the day of the battle, and got the credit for events it had nothing to do with.

[rugor]

I don't think Ruornil actually did anything, let alone appeared in Cereilia. I think both sides have cause to attribute the battle and the founding to Ruornil, because for Suris and Medoere, they hope it adds divine legitimacy to what is otherwise outlaw behavior. For Diemed and the Diems, it removes some of the sting of the defeat. Rather than saying we screwed up and lost 2/3rd of our land, say we were gonna get it all back and just as that was about to happen a god intervened to prevent us.

The moon may have been in the sky on the day of the battle, and got the credit for events it had nothing to do with.

Well it specifically states on page 7 of PS of M that no arrow was fired, or sword clashed, and a beam of moonlight struck Diemed's troops like fire from the sky.

Now, I could see that being adapted to something else, like a wizard reigning down fireballs on them, but for the fact that they were killed to a man... unless there were survivors, but that requires adaptation to what is actually there... which does not seem the intent of the writing.

[kgauck]

If you like gods playing politics, leave it as it is. But the gods are supposed to have a pact not to interfear, and I'd rather not have deus ex machina explanations for politics in Cerilia.

[rugor]

Fine then, all the more reason for Diem to be confident in going back in there and reclaiming his lands... If there is no real concern for direct godly intervention.

[kgauck]

IMC, Diemed allies with Ghoere to reclaim the South Coast. During a war between Boeruine and Avanil, the Ghoere-Diemed alliance conquires Medoere, Ilien, and Roesone. Diemed has nominal control over his old Duchy. He controls the highest positions in the feudal hierarchy, but many of the lower ranks, the knights and lords are Ghoere's men, rewarded for their service so far. Two provinces Abbatuor and Bellam were never part of Diemed, but Ghoere imposes itself on its parter a bit here. She wants Bellam, which is easy enough, but has no use for Abbatuor. Instead, she wants Fairfield, over which she has contended several times. Diemed can have Abbatuor as compensation.

Also, Diemed must back the Baron of Ghoere's claims to the Iron Throne.

Next, Ghoere turns on Osoerde, installs a friendly duke (from one of his counts or a senior officer, and rewards men with land in Osoerde. Those who have land in Roesone, generally give up their little Roesone estates for more land and better titles in Osoerde, and the Dukes of Diemed can reward their followers with more land in Roesone and some small estates in Osoerde. Ghoere won't be able to vacate all of the estates it took in Roesone, but a little intermeshing of the realms is inevitable in the division of spoils.

After that, continued expansion is bound to result in a general war if it hasn't already. Going further would require some sense of what other realms have done, who is winning other wars, and so on, but that's what Ghoere and Diemed envision for the future IMC.

[Gman]

Gotta put my pennys worth in.

Absolute truth, morality and fact do exist.
Call me a Hyper-modernist if you like.

The problem is discerning and understanding what these are. Our perspective is always to some degree flawed, misinformed or just plain wrong.

Without perfect information and perfect apparatus there is always a margin for error - even "pure" science and mathematics as it approaches its theoretical limits becomes subject to conjecture, disputed theory and "error".

The aim however of most sciences is to get as close to "perfect" fact - through provable, repeatable undisputed empirical evidence and theory that works in every circumstance.

You can place sciences on a line that slowly converges with a vertical line representing "absolute fact" some are much higher and closer to this line that others. "Facts" can be reexamined, revisited and reevaluated and moved further up this line (or down according to the current paradigm).

(Incidently most "scientific though and research" (and philosophy) was due to a belief in a cause or beginning of things and that we can attempt to understand the absolute - and the original reason people had this belief was that because they were religious and believed in a creator.)

The examination of history does not use the same knowledge theories as science - you cannot empirically repeat the experiment. The sources of information are not as readily available and endless resources or not available(gravity is always there - Hitler is not). Literature and each and every other academic area uses different theories and methodology (with crossovers) your writings have to be accepted by your peers in each area.

The fact that you cannot pin things down perfectly does not mean that a common understanding of them does not work and that truth does not exist.

Things can been seen in a relative way from different perspectives but that does not mean that any interpretation of an event is valid - competing theories and ideas can be weighed up and compared logically some of them will be more valid, more provable and some of them can be just plain wrong. The different perspectives of different observers can be assessed and used to clarify the situation. Some things are more difficult to assess than others.

Which brings us to Morality.

I would argue that killing any person is wrong in an absolute sense - no one should have their greatest right removed. However because we live in a complex and difficult world sometimes we are put in a situation where we have to weigh up which is the lessor evil - based on our imperfect understanding, information and perspective. The rights of the slavering psychokiller breaking down our door to kill our loved ones armed with lots of pointed bladed things vs our loved ones is a no brainer (to me). (But what is even nicer is that in our modern society we usually just pay for police and soldiers to remove these little dilemmas from our control and conscience).

Most of us can use our brains and twist and justify a lot of different actions to avoid having much ethical/moral responsiblility in the right (or wrong) circumstances but the measure of - "would I like this done to me" is a pretty good measuring tape. (relativist/utilitarian/humanistic/christian whatever your perspective)

The nice thing about a fantasy world is that if you are the GM you have absolute control over all the variables in it. You can sit down and establish the morality you expect from your players and enforce it with the game system. The different churches ethics and expectations can be spelt out.

Some evil is obvious in a lot of fantasy - orc's, demons, etc some is more insidious (even in LOR saraman/half orcs and denathor). This Doesn't mean that everthing is going to be simple for the players - moral dilemmas and complexity has always added to the roleplaying in every game I've ever played - so enjoy a somewhat more easily quantifiable world!

So the good thing is that you can clarify tour internal game morality - or lack of it and set if up just as you like - no matter what your perspective. Its nice when you can stand on principle and not get shafted for it (or at least have the gods honour you for it later) and a company of Haelyns Paladins turn up just at the battle seems lost but if you don't like heroics - run things the gritty low fantasy way - personally I prefer the escape from dark gritty life.

Just as long as everyone understands your expectations.

[geeman]

At 04:21 PM 2/17/2008, kgauck wrote:

>If you like gods playing politics, leave it as it is. But the gods
>are supposed to have a pact not to interfear, and I`d rather not
>have deus ex machina explanations for politics in Cerilia.

According to the BoP, the pact is only that the gods will never again
battle one another in physical form, which leaves an awful lot of
room for things like divine intervention, avatars walking the earth
and otherwise interfering in human affairs.

Gary

[kgauck]

In classic D&D PC's can eventually rival dieties in power, and displace them, ascend, or whatever, but if the focus is on politics, either gods can overwhelm politics and player activity, or PC's can rival gods and why exactly do they bother doing politics, then the game is not political.