Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

[JMcL63]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

Originally Posted by keithcurtis

In the descriptive method of combat, I take great pains to convey useful information. ... Or I could say, "Critical hit! 12 Body and 36 Stun..."

 

You say that as though it is an either-or proposition: it isn't.

 

Incidentally, I have the exact same objection to players who take the point of view opposite to yours: that saying "12 Body and 36 Stun" is a sufficient description of combat. This isn't "story-time", but it isn't "adventures in arithmetic", either. It's a role-playing game, which is something greater than both.

 

I just realized we've gotten pretty far afield of the nominal topic, though. I don't have anything else to add on this particular tangent, but if I'd realized the divergence sooner I'd have stopped sooner. Sorry about that.

Magic-using characters will always have to have some kind of knowledge of the nuts and bolts of the magic system and of the forces it manipulates. This is not the same thing as what the general public might know about magic, its existence perhaps as well as much as how it works. This is pretty basic, because magic-use in HERO is typically delivered through skill use, which brings in KS and SCI as complementary skills. But of course, that knowledge doesn't necessarily have to be correct...!

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

Chris:[/i] HOLY CRAP! Torsion's force field is still down: he's only got five points of resistant PD right now. His freaking internal organs are hanging out' date=' man, why didn't you freaking [i']say[/i] something?

 

 

 

If his internal organs are hanging out, or nearly so, the GM should include it in his description. If you're going to do away with overt game mechanics in combat, it is necessary that details like disembowelment not be overlooked. On the other hand, it is more likely in some cases that a character would fight on even though he's been seriously injured, given that he doesn't have a little counter telling him that one more hit will kill him.

 

The character shouldn't ever be in a position where his guts are hanging out unbeknownst to him, but at the same time, it is not necessary that he have a quantifiable level of injury.

 

EDIT: Catching up with the rest of the thread, yeah, I agree that this has turned into a minor derail. And as has been pointed out, this isn't really an either-or situation, although I would definitely tend toward the hidden mechanics side of things if it came to that.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

I'd like for PCs to pay proper levels of respect to the law' date=' nobility, upper class, etc.[/quote']

 

Something I have found useful to convey this is to give the PCs an example of the individual's behavior in action prior to the PCs having anything to do with them. For example, a servant who does well might be rewarded, a disrepectful ambassador might get tossed into prison, or a minor thief might get their arms and legs cut off. That kind of thing. It sets the tone for what the PCs can expect from the NPC, and how they ought to adjust their behavior to compensate.

 

It doesn't always work. PCs can be amazingly dense.

[Foxx!]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

I'd like for PCs to pay proper levels of respect to the law' date=' nobility, upper class, etc[/b']

 

This has been a frequent "problem" in both games that I have run and been a player in, and it has always bothered me. Admittedly, this is largely on the GM for not setting the tone properly. I think a lot of the behavior I don't like from players concerning this stems from years of not having to take the in-game social heirarchy seriously, so it's not entirely their fault.

 

I'd like to see PCs do things like not make eye contact king, and at least go to one knee (if not prostrate themselves) in his presence, if they ever see him at all. I'd like for them to treat him like the powerful figure that he is. I'd like them to fear angering him, cheerish opportunities to make him happy, and generally treat him the way kings get treated in fantasy literature. I'd also like them to have to do similar things with Dukes, Barons, Lords, Chancellors, Regents, or whoever is in a station above that of the PCs.

 

I'm am completely willing to admit that this falls on the GM to enforce, and it probably wouldn't take to much forethought to make it happen. I just have had lots of experiences where it didn't, and I think it would have been way cooler if everyone would have acted a bit more like I think they should, which is to say like in the novels. I can only think of a few gamers I've ever played with that would have considered going down on their knees because the royal carriage was going by. And I'm pretty sure the ramifications for not doing so could be horrific. But if the GM doesn't make bad things happen, then the players have nothing to fear.

 

Does anyone know of any RPG books that cover things like this? Explain something like how a particular king likes to be addressed, or how his "subjects" are expected to act in his presence? I'm sure I could come up with some stuff if I bothered, but I have more money than time these days...

The BBB had a small section in the back about dealing with superheroes who don't respect the law. I think you can modify that to a Fantasy world. However, be careful not to force a genre. Some players just won't care.

 

One way to deal with this is give nobles high PRE with extra PRE for being in THEIR court surrounded by THEIR subjects. When you are told to bow, you bow.

 

Another method is just to say that the players go down on one knee, and see if anyone refuses.

 

You can use punishment for bad manners, but rewarding good manners is also effective. Players who show proper respect can gain a Favour/Contact perk, a free stay at the castle, or even a gift.

 

Cheers!

[Lightray]

PCs shouldn't have a perfect knowledge about the magic system

I think this is a problem endemic with the trope of fantasy magic, as alluded to by many in this thread. The solution I've tried is to use more "realistic" magic systems.

 

By which I do *not* mean following scientific logic, nor mimicking physical laws.

 

I mean "realistic" in the sense that magic functions similarly to what people in historical eras apparently thought it did. Alchemists and their ilk were not interested in providing better communication, transportation, or health care. They were in it for personal advancement/enlightenment. Immortality, usually.

 

In fact, when alchemists had to seek patronage from nobles to fund their work, they considered turning their art toward making wealth to be a debasement of it. Spiritually dangerous as it were.

 

So if my fantasy world's metaphysics adhere to this principle, mass production of magic and everyday applications are not going to happen. If spiritual enlightenment in some form is required for your magic, by prostituting your magic you may actually remove your ability to use it at all (e.g., the planetary spirits no longer heed your commands after you again summon them up to turn base metals into gold).

 

"Go ahead, Rabbi Yosef, make an army of your golems of clay... if you think you won't be struck down for your hubris..."

 

I'd like for PCs to pay proper levels of respect to the law' date=' nobility, upper class, etc[/b']

Now, see, this is when I start cheating. When we were playing L5R, my players weren't up on their Rokugani etiquette. So instead of saying "The Crane daimyo offers you a gift, what do you do?" I'd tell them "The Crane daimyo offers you a gift -- will you refuse it twice as is customary, or immediately accept it in order to shame him?"

 

All of the information on the world is being filtered through what you tell the players. If you tell them that their clan enslaves thralls, they might have that visceral 20th c reaction to slavery. If you tell them that their clan only enslaves the foul Orlevings who murdered their grandmothers, they'll take a different view.

 

Likewise with the law and the nobility. I don't just tell them that the law shows up -- I tell them they are relieved at the arrival of the Emerald Magistrates, because they will deal with the smelly ronin without the PCs having to soil their weapons and spend days purifing themselves in the nearest shrine.

 

If the PCs still charge in bull-headedly, well, then the campaign will be taking an unexpected turn from "honored samurai" to "hunted ronin dogs on the run".

[keithcurtis]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

However' date=' be careful not to force a genre. Some players just won't care.[/quote']

 

--and that's a pity. I fail to understand why someone would play a genre-based rpg and not play within the genre. If I were going to run a Western, I wouldn't want someone trying to play an alien with a laser pistol.

 

Unless it was That Sort Of Game.

 

Keith "maybe I'm spoiled with my group of players" Curtis

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

I don't just tell them that the law shows up -- I tell them they are relieved at the arrival of the Emerald Magistrates' date=' because they will deal with the smelly ronin without the PCs having to soil their weapons and spend days purifing themselves in the nearest shrine.[/quote']

 

That is an interesting technique. I am not sure I would be comfortable imposing so much onto other people's characters (it's probably over the line of what my game group would find acceptable), but it's an interesting way to convey setting information.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

I fail to understand why someone would play a genre-based rpg and not play within the genre.

 

Gaming is a social activity: people play games because their friends want to play. If they don't play within the expectations of the genre, it may not be intentional. Maybe they don't "get" the genre. Of the two most flamboyant failures I have had as a player (not GMing the game), one was while playing Paranoia and the other was while playing Morrow Project. In both cases I was trying to play along with the genre, but just didn't quite get the premise, so it went downhill fast.

 

I think I could give Morrow Project a shot again, someday; I think I get it a little better now than I did then. But I have no intention of ever trying Paranoia again. Maybe I "get" it, or maybe I don't, but I think that's a stupid, pointless game, and I didn't have any fun playing it whatsoever.

[Vondy]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

I like either or prepositions...

[Lightray]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

That is an interesting technique. I am not sure I would be comfortable imposing so much onto other people's characters (it's probably over the line of what my game group would find acceptable)' date=' but it's an interesting way to convey setting information.[/quote']

The idea isn't to mandate what the PC does, but to supply the cultural information the character knows but the player does not. As the GM, I'm responsible for providing all the information the character has available -- both sensory details ("the Emerald Magistrates arrive") and cultural details ("you are samurai and respect The Emperor's Law").

 

For a game like L5R, it's merely a shorter method of conveying that information -- otherwise I'd have to digress on a 10-min. lecture everytime something new shows up. So it's either:

 

"You are confronted by an Ise Zumi, a Tattooed Man. His name is Togashi Saetsu. Ise Zumi are samurai monks of the Togashi family, who seek enlightenment through mystical tattooes they gain that give them unusual abilities. They are known for being enigmatic and strange, ... blahblahblahtattoocakes"

 

OR

 

"You are confronted by Togashi Saetsu, whose head is shaved like he is a monk, but who is carrying the katana of a Dragon Clan samurai... He is probably about to use one of his magical tattooes -- like the fiery dragon on his chest -- to do something weird, or may be about to speak a clever riddle or koan."

 

By giving them an idea of what their character would guess of the intent of people in their culture, they have more information to take action on -- and they've received it in character. And I'm a boring lecturer, anyway.

[Sword-dancer]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

I'd like for PCs to pay proper levels of respect to the law' date=' nobility, upper class, etc[/b']

 

The possible solution for this Problem is

give this respect to PCs who are from this class.

Not a thing like that the regent disrupts the speech of a Baron in the Council of Nobility where every fiefholder has the right to speak, not even the empereor has the right to do it.

Don`t go over the rights, privileges and status of Nobility and upper class if the Noble gives a Oath of Character this means you must overcome his othworth.

 

Another

This has been a frequent "problem" in both games that I have run and been a player in, and it has always bothered me. Admittedly, this is largely on the GM for not setting the tone properly. I think a lot of the behavior I don't like from players concerning this stems from years of not having to take the in-game social heirarchy seriously, so it's not entirely their fault.

 

I'd like to see PCs do things like not make eye contact king, and at least go to one knee (if not prostrate themselves) in his presence, if they ever see him at all.

That depends definitely on the rules between Ruler and the PC.

1 My Amazon Priestess would bow to nearly No Man and definetely to No worldly Ruler, going to one knee is definetly out of question.

OTOH their worldly ruler of the Kingdom is their Queen who is considered a living Saint.

Next Point the last Empereor of the Empire is in her Eyes Nothing More than heretic Blasphemic Deathsinner, who had not only have the hybris to declare himself a god, order a Demon conjured, punish the mage for Not Controlling him which followed in an Ogre Invasion, one half of the Amazons of her Home castle died by fighting them off, hewas as unfit to rule as The next donkey.

He tried to take the fief of one of his loyalst and powerfulst dukes, btw the dukes vasalls had fought tooth and Nail at the dukes word, for one of his compadres.

He gives the margrave post of one his greatest Cities and the fief to a man for a good song.

Her Position to him is the following, backed up by church and mage law death.

-His son was a wellmeaning honorable man, not a welldoing ruler.

His wife is now regent.

Followed by, first she broke the laws of one of the imperial own fiefs, only a man could become King of this realm, woman would be Grandearls, she led her daughter accepts the law of the Land then crown them in an imperial fortress as Queen, the nobles naturally didn`t object to much under the pressureof imperial arms.

But now this fiefdom, the only imperial fiefdom which hadstood loyl to herm an and her during the ursuoation is naturally in unrest.

Folowed by for the war against the dark invaders she rasied and orederd nw taxes.

Nice thing, only nothing of these are legal, she has no right to do this, only the Council of the realm.

Her Grandmarschall first orders all fugitives of the lands taken by dark invaders should be refused, then burns regularly troops who get of his own stupid orders into trouble.

 

to get it short If the Person of the ruler deserves No respect, his crown will bring him none.

[Markdoc]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

I'd like for PCs to pay proper levels of respect to the law' date=' nobility, upper class, etc[/b']

 

The answer, as you note, is simple: the GM must enforce such respect. I make it plain to the players when their characters should know they are going over the line (and I tend to surround powerful social figures with the appropriate hierachy anyway, so the players reaction to the emperor is moot - they get to meet with one of his minor official's secretaries instead). I don't do this to be mean - failure to enforce some sort of social structure leads to a very "PCs in video-game-land" feeling where actions don't have consequences.

 

I'd hate to bully the characters, but if they cannot or will not restrain themselves, they will eventually suffer the consequences. In one game I ran, set in medieval Japan, two players simply could not cope with the idea of a rigid social structure, that placed high social value on things like not starting fights in bars just for fun. Inflicting penalties on the characters simply made the players mad: the only solution I could find so as to preserve the game for the other 4 players was to talk it over out of game with the two offenders - they chose to leave the game, rather than conform.

 

cheers, Mark

[Susano]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

I'd hate to bully the characters, but if they cannot or will not restrain themselves, they will eventually suffer the consequences. In one game I ran, set in medieval Japan, two players simply could not cope with the idea of a rigid social structure, that placed high social value on things like not starting fights in bars just for fun. Inflicting penalties on the characters simply made the players mad: the only solution I could find so as to preserve the game for the other 4 players was to talk it over out of game with the two offenders - they chose to leave the game, rather than conform.

 

Was that the game here, or elsewhere?

[Markdoc]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

Was that the game here' date=' or elsewhere?[/quote']

 

that was here in Copenhagen. All you guys in Washington were more into the whole anime/chambara thing, so you naturally adapted your style of play appropriately. Interestingly, the player who had the hardest time adapting - although a good GM (I played in his recently finished RQ game for two years) - doesn't really like anime or chambara movies, so in hindsight, maybe I should have expected it.

 

But with you guys I only got partway through 11 of 20 adventures, so I still had half the story arc I wanted to run! Pity - I would have liked to see Nishi versus the Wu (actually I would have just liked to see your face when you realised it was a Wu! ) or Yabu strutting his stuff at the big martial arts tournament...

 

cheers, Mark

[Susano]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

But with you guys I only got partway through 11 of 20 adventures, so I still had half the story arc I wanted to run! Pity - I would have liked to see Nishi versus the Wu (actually I would have just liked to see your face when you realised it was a Wu! ) or Yabu strutting his stuff at the big martial arts tournament...

 

Argh... I forgot... what's a Wu? Sorcerer?

 

Oh, and did you see that Nishi made it into NINJA HERO?

[Outsider]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

In reference to Sword-Dancer's amazon :

 

Yes, there are characters who, perfectly within character, will not respect the social heirarchy. Unfortunately for such characters, it is also perfectly within character for the noble to whom they are discourteous to respond by doing some pretty bad things back. A 'peasant' class person who doesnt show proper respect might be killed out of hand. A free citizen might be severely whipped or imprisoned. Another noble within the same feudal system might get in trouble with his leige lord, and be challenged to a duel. (And in my game's dueling code, the higher ranking party can always choose to be represented by a champion) A foreign noble failing to follow the proper forms might sour relations between their kingdom and the one they have offended a noble of, or even spark a war, if the insult is grave enough. If the other 'noble' is not from a recognized and respected country, they might not even get treated as a noble at all. Uncouth barbarians!

 

If a player makes such a character, how does the GM handle it, is the question. I'd say that you impress on the player that it is a serious character disadvantage, and give them disad points appropriately. Let them know that the only time they will ever be able to meet with a nobleman is if the noble is 'incognito' or if he really, really, really needs their help with something. Any other time and their lack obeisance to the social/governmental order will likely get them beaten, whipped, or imprisoned, and resistance to those results will get them killed or outlawed. (outlawry = a nice fat hunted, gained in play, so no character points added to their sheet) If they still want to make the character with that disad, its on their head.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

In reference to Sword-Dancer's amazon :

 

A 'peasant' class person who doesnt show proper respect might be killed out of hand. A free citizen might be severely whipped or imprisoned. Another noble within the same feudal system might get in trouble with his leige lord, and be challenged to a duel. (And in my game's dueling code, the higher ranking party can always choose to be represented by a champion) A foreign noble failing to follow the proper forms might sour relations between their kingdom and the one they have offended a noble of, or even spark a war, if the insult is grave enough. ...

If a player makes such a character, how does the GM handle it, is the question. I'd say that you impress on the player that it is a serious character disadvantage, and give them disad points appropriately.

...

Any other time and their lack obeisance to the social/governmental order will likely get them beaten, whipped, or imprisoned, and resistance to those results will get them killed or outlawed.

 

And also impress upon them that in most cases, such penalties will be fully expected and supported by the general populace. Monarchies lasted a looong time.

 

Keith "o/` No more Kings o/`" Curtis

[Susano]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

A foreign noble failing to follow the proper forms might sour relations between their kingdom and the one they have offended a noble of' date=' or even spark a war, if the insult is grave enough. If the other 'noble' is not from a recognized and respected country, they might not even get treated as a noble at all. Uncouth barbarians! [/quote']

 

It is reported that Vlad Tepes (a.k.a Vlad the Impaler, Vlad Dracula, a.k.a. Dracula), Prince of Wallachia and/or Trannsylvania nailed the hats of the visiting dignitaries to their heads when they refused to doff them in his presence.

[Sword-dancer]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

In reference to Sword-Dancer's amazon :

.

1 My Character isn`t an Amazon but an Amazon Priestess, a priestess of great renown and proven worth to the goddess(The Marschall of the Pantheon, Goddess of HonorableWarriors, Knights and so on)

2 Even if she were an Amazon, she would be therefore a member of the sisterhood therefore a member of their own branch of church.

The last Highqueen is a saint the ruling high Queen considered the chosen Champion.

Even one of this reasons would be more than enough to not let her be subject to any other law then that of the sisterhood or any other court, with the possible exception of a court of the churches of the Pantheon.

 

3 As a Priest of one of the gods of the Pantheon, she is autiomaticaly a judge if needs calls, as a priestess of the sisterhood she is automatically a judge of the sisterhood.

Which means she is fully authoriced to hold court even over the highest nobility except an emperor, given by old imperial law.

This is practically not changeable

 

4 Any fighting able Person who would send a Champion against a priestess of the goddess in a duell of honor etc would mark himself a coward.

btw she would refuse a duell because named persons aren`t honorable and therfore not worthy of a duell, which would be an deadly blow to their reputation.

 

5 Priests in these Lands are considered proven by their gods and call therefore high respect even the lowlist priest from the highest ran(at least in theory) andnoPriest answers to worldly law or court.

[Markdoc]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

Argh... I forgot... what's a Wu? Sorcerer?

 

Oh, and did you see that Nishi made it into NINJA HERO?

 

Yeps - I saw.

 

And a Wu... well, think the magical bodyguard in 3x3 eyes (actually, I think you have a Wu writeup on your webpages).

 

cheers, Mark

[Susano]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

Yeps - I saw.

 

And a Wu... well, think the magical bodyguard in 3x3 eyes (actually, I think you have a Wu writeup on your webpages).

 

cheers, Mark

 

 

Oh, right, I knew the name. Yup.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

1 My Character isn`t an Amazon but an Amazon Priestess, a priestess of great renown and proven worth to the goddess(The Marschall of the Pantheon, Goddess of HonorableWarriors, Knights and so on)

2 Even if she were an Amazon, she would be therefore a member of the sisterhood therefore a member of their own branch of church.

The last Highqueen is a saint the ruling high Queen considered the chosen Champion.

Even one of this reasons would be more than enough to not let her be subject to any other law then that of the sisterhood or any other court, with the possible exception of a court of the churches of the Pantheon.

 

3 As a Priest of one of the gods of the Pantheon, she is autiomaticaly a judge if needs calls, as a priestess of the sisterhood she is automatically a judge of the sisterhood.

Which means she is fully authoriced to hold court even over the highest nobility except an emperor, given by old imperial law.

This is practically not changeable

 

4 Any fighting able Person who would send a Champion against a priestess of the goddess in a duell of honor etc would mark himself a coward.

btw she would refuse a duell because named persons aren`t honorable and therfore not worthy of a duell, which would be an deadly blow to their reputation.

 

5 Priests in these Lands are considered proven by their gods and call therefore high respect even the lowlist priest from the highest ran(at least in theory) andnoPriest answers to worldly law or court.

 

If all this is part of the campaign world, and the character has paid for the perks, then it would be appropriate for this character to stand or sit and speak to most nobles as an equal or superior. Any other characters with this Amazon character would most likely be considered part of her retinue, and would either not be admitted to the audience chamber, or would at least be expected to remain silent unless spoken to.

[Sword-dancer]

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming

 

The perks of the character are automatically ingrained in the Backrground of the character/setting.

The rest of the group was normally an Priest of the standard branch of the same goddess or an warrior with a sword blessed by another goddess itself, an mage of the higher ranks of the high nobility, an elf who is completely removed from the social rank concept or an merc of the Nation the empire has invaded.

 

Equal or superior is a very tricky question:

1 Nobles rule and priests show the way of the gods and follow their orders but...

2 Divine rules break secular.

A Priest is acting on his duties if he critices an Noble for not following divine rules, or to act against him if he considers his act grave enough, something he must prove for the church.

 

OTOH even the noble PCs who are from imperial fiefs, have no respect for the old empereor or the regent.

The first is consiedered a blasphemic weakwilled fool, the second an oathbreaking tyrant, and with this they stood not alone.

That didn`t mean they wouldn`t follow the rules of etiquette and politeness.

The first they will called ill advised, the second let`s say they wouldn`t try to break records to rescue their live.

[Houston GM]

The power of kings & emperors

 

Sword-dancer, I hope your GM is reading this.

 

 

Even one of this reasons would be more than enough to not let her be subject to any other law then that of the sisterhood or any other court, with the possible exception of a court of the churches of the Pantheon.

Who cares? The emperor takes her to court in front of the Sisterhood or the Pantheon.

 

Is the leader of the Sisterhood willing to risk the Emperor's wrath just to protect a prideful priestess? Even if she is, the Emperor will just appeal to the Pantheon court.

 

What percentage of the Pantheonic court does the Emperor need to get his way? Half? Two thirds? How many of the church leaders would be willing to condemn your Amazon priestess to death (even if she was innocent) just to curry favor with the Emperor?

 

 

she is fully authoriced to hold court even over the highest nobility except an emperor, given by old imperial law.

This is practically not changeable

He's the Emperor. The deck is stacked in his favor. He will find a court that is authorized to judge you. The presiding priest will from a church that is a traditional rival (or enemy) of the Amazon Sisterhood. The presiding priest will be a personal enemy of your Amazon priestess, one with a long-standing grudge.

 

Rumors will start spreading around the Empire about all the dirty tricks your priestess is attempting, and how the upstanding Pantheonic court is foiling them all. (Who cares if it's patently false? The population is going to believe in the Emperor.)

 

 

Any fighting able Person who would send a Champion against a priestess of the goddess in a duell of honor etc would mark himself a coward.

Emperors aren't considered fighting persons. Amazon priestesses are. This ploy would backfire immediately.

 

The population won't understand the social intricacies that allow priestesses to avoid duels. They're just going to hear how an Amazon priestess was too cowardly to answer a duel, and they'll believe the rumors.

 

 

Priests in these Lands are considered proven by their gods and call therefore high respect even the lowlist priest from the highest ran(at least in theory) and no Priest answers to worldly law or court.

And no Emperor will care about that.

 

Emperors don't care that a law is "practically not changeable". By definition, that means that only the Emperor can change it ... at his whim.

 

Is your Amazon priestess the leader of the Amazon Sisterhood? So what. The Emperor will find an ambitious subordinate of yours that's looking to advance. He'll execute you (and your most loyal subordinates) and install the ambitious subordinate in your place. The subordinate will publicly denounce the "hubris" of her predecessors.

 

Is the entire Amazon Sisterhood fanatically (and personally) loyal to you? No problem. The Emperor will find some rival (i.e. patriarchal) churches who will publicly announce that the Amazon's are breaking the law, and the Emperor is simply enforcing divine mandate.

 

Read Chinese history. There are several accounts of churches acting in defiance of the Emperor. The outcome is formulaic. The Emperor summons the army, kills the priests, destroys the temples, and burns the books. The church only continues to exist in hiding or exile (where they no longer have influence in the Empire).

 

And many Emperors are the highest religious court, as defined by imperial and religious law.

 

 

Don't tell me what the Emperor can't do. He's the Emperor because he can do whatever he chooses.

 

Do you need further convincing? Henry VIII (a mere king) drove the Holy Roman Catholic Church (perhaps the most powerful ecclisiastical institution in history) out of England because they wouldn't give him a divorce.

 

Even if the Emperor is only a figuredhead (a puppet for the true powers), the powers behind the throne will not want to risk the status quo by allowing one Amazon priestess to expose the true state of affairs. That sort of thing could be a destabilizing influence in the Empire. They would not hesitate to kill one prideful priestess (under the guise of proper imperial authority) to keep you from disturbing their happy state of affairs.

 

 

OTOH even the noble PCs who are from imperial fiefs, have no respect for the old empereor or the regent.

The first is consiedered a blasphemic weakwilled fool, the second an oathbreaking tyrant, and with this they stood not alone.

In other words, you're in the unique position of having an extremely weak Emperor. If your campaign is realistic, he will be overthrown in the next year or two (because someone can). The new Emperor will be a strong Emperor, and he will be fully capable of doing everything I've described. In fact, he will not hesitate to make necessary examples as he consolidates the power of his throne.

 

 

let`s say they (the nobles) wouldn`t try to break records to rescue their (the Emperor and Regent's) lives.

The Emperor and Regent have commited the only Imperial sin: they've lost power.

 

According to Chinese history, as soon as the nobles stop assembling armies when the Emperor commands, one of the nobles assembles his army and overthrows the Emperor. There are at least two Chinese legends where the power-hungry noble plays a little political brinkmanship with the Emperor then says "We can't do it this year, but we'll check again next year." The first year that the nobles refuse to send their armies, the Imperial Throne changes hands.

 

Even a weak Emperor would probably execute a discourteous priestess (even in defiance of the law) in order to keep from looking weak (and ripe for overthrowing).

[Lightray]

Sword-dancer' date=' I hope your GM is reading this.[/quote']

If so, no need to limit him/herself to Chinese imperialism as a model for fantasy imperialism.

 

Egyptian pharoahs during several dynasties were heavily dominated by influential priesthoods. Powerful essentially had the pharoah as a figurehead, while they did what they wanted. That would seem to fit many of the details that have happened to the Amazon priestess.

 

Conversely, Roman imperialism seems more notable for how little influence religions had over imperial rule. The emperor was both emperor and chief priest of the empire (and occasionally, god) so the religions were part of his own rule - at least up until the Christian church became a political force in its own right. Of course, the later happened after the emperors' power had been considerably weakened.

 

Really, no matter how her GM has structured the politics of his/her campaign -- realistic or no -- this seems an excellent opportunity for the Emperor to cry out "Will no one rid me of this turbulent Amazon priestess!"

 

Of which the result can only be gaming fun.