Thread: Questioning chirine ba kal

Originally Posted by Bren

FB uses Social Rank (SR) which is a statistic based primarily on the character's birth and current rank and position in society. One's combat abilities, while crucial in surviving a duel, are nearly irrelevant in increasing one's Social Rank.

Some examples of Social Rank from my game.

Guy de Bourges: born an untitled noble (SR 8); he was made a Knight of the Order of the Holy Ghost, giving him the title of the Chevalier de Sainte-Marie-du-Bois (SR 9) which supersedes his birth rank.
Hypothetically, if Guy was made a Baron (SR 10) that would be his new rank.

Seigneur de Chambre: born a manorial lord or seigneur (SR 9) he possesses great wealth which gives him +1 SR for a total (SR 10).

Father Signoret: born an untitled noble (SR 8), he is a priest (SR 4) and a secretary to Cardinal Richelieu (SR 6), neither of which increases his social rank above that of an untitled noble.
Hypothetically, if Father Signoret was appointed to a Bishop�s Curia (SR 8) having two ranks at SR 8 would count as the next higher rank, i.e. (SR 9).

Captain Gaston Thibeault: born the son of a wealthy merchant; he is an accredited Fencing Master (SR 6) and the Captain-Lieutenant of the Cardinal�s Guard, which counts as a Guards company, giving him (SR 9).
Hypothetically, if Gaston loses his position as the head of the Cardinal�s Guard he would drop back to (SR 6) unless he could find another position e.g. in the army. Not surprisingly, Richelieu believes this social rank gap is a good incentive for maintaining Gaston's loyalty.

Thank you for posting this!!! This is an excellent example; Phil would do this 'in his head', from his index cards, and we learned to do the same when we lived in his world.

Wonderful Thank you!

Originally Posted by Bren

FB uses Social Rank (SR) which is a statistic based primarily on the character's birth and current rank and position in society. One's combat abilities, while crucial in surviving a duel, are nearly irrelevant in increasing one's Social Rank.

Let me elaborate on this a little bit, if I may.

Chirine is a Fifth Level Priest. He's also a Tenth Level Military Sorcerer. He thus has a pretty middling social position as a priest, but when he's in a military situation, he's got a lot more status.

He's also a Kasi, or 'captain', nominally in command of a 400-soldier cohort. However, he's a staff officer without an actual command, so he's got less status - line officers always have greater status then staff officers. Again, however, he's General Korunme's 'aide-de-camp', which is how it's put in English; a better translation would be "He's the General's personal hatchet-man, so do what he says." So, when he's on the General's business, he's as high status as the General himself; when not doing so, he's of lower status then the line officers.

He is a member of a sort of lower-middle clan, Eye of Flame, but got 'adopted' into the very high-status Iron Helm due to then-Prince Mirusiya. It also does not hurt when it comes to getting invitations to fancy parties that Chirine is also the guy who saved Mirusiya - the current Seal Emperor! - from an assassination attempt. There is an intangible status in being the known Imperial errand-boy, and known hatchet-man for the Tlakotani.

This is the kind of thing we learned to assess in a moment in Phil's games. The social situation and the niceties of one position played a very important role in our games, and I don't have a clue how you could 'quantify' it for games - but your example does!

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

I've split this off, as it may not be all that useful to the discussion.

'Prestige', in Tekumel gaming circles, has over the past two decades come to mean the prestige that some folks feel that they are due as old-hand gamers out at Phil's. Some fans refer to these people as "Barker's Own", and they do consider themselves to be an elite of the elite, and as such enjoy great and powerful prestige - or at least feel that this is their just due.

I had a player - Gronan knows who - who routinely told the younger players in my gaming group that as one of Phil's 1974 players, they were entitled to first pick of anything the group / party picked up in their adventures, and that as a 'senior' player they should automatically be in charge and in command of everything. Everything revolved around this person - and it had nothing to due with the PC they was playing. It made for some very 'sub-optimal' game sessions, and eventually most of the younger players got tired of it and dropped out of the group.

As a game mechanic, though, 'Prestige' is pretty useful - didn't "Flashing Blades" (shows how old I am!) have this?

Why didn't you talk to him sternly, being the Referee? I mean, that goes against the setting's principles.
I had an experienced player attempt similar stuff. It ended up quickly.
"Now you should listen to me, 'cause I'm the most experienced RPG player..."
"Wrong, I'm the most experienced RPG player at this table, and it wouldn't fly even if you were. Now drop it OOC and stop trying to play their characters for them. You want them to do something, persuade them IC."
Since it wasn't the only case, I guess I need a viking hat and am a bad GM.

Also, I've ran Flashing Blades, too. Unlike Bren, who took the social rank system and used Honor+Intrigue, I even ran it RAW.
Good games are good games, whether you're born in the 60ies or in the 80ies.

Originally Posted by nDervish

I think you've got the general idea of what I was asking, yes, but I think I'd like to hear a bit more at this point about how you saw the setting influencing the style. What I'm getting from what you (and Gronan in #1490) have said so far is that the main difference in how the settings affected the games was that Phil actually had a fully-developed setting on day 1, while in Dave's game "there was no there there" - the setting didn't influence the game much because, for the most part, the setting didn't exist to have an influence.

It will be interesting to hear what Gronan has to say. I'm reading him to mean that both Dave and Gary had a pre-existing setting, so there was a there there. It just paid as little attention to "can it exist on its own" question as Hollywood does.

Just to clarify (although I think you'd already sussed this), that's what I meant by the reference to "Prestige" - the Bethorm definition of Prestige as the average of Clan Influence and Professional Influence which determines your social standing, along with the general notes that a group of PCs should all have similar levels of Prestige and the description in section 3.4.4 Role-Playing Social Status that, if characters have a difference of 4 or more in their status, it's not considered appropriate for them to even speak to each other directly outside of exceptional circumstances. But it's sounding like that's something which has been built up over the years (possibly in the same way as the "you must learn Tsolyani" perception?) rather than something that Phil did himself.

Nah, man, that's not remotely the same. There are people that wouldn't talk to you unless you're recommended or cleared by their minions, always have been. They exist even today, and there's no indications the future would be any different.
Any criminal asking a US governor or president for clemency isn't likely to even see the man in question, just talk to some clerk who passes the petition to the guy with the power.
I'm glad Chirine cleared that out.

It worked likewise in Europe. As Flashing Blades noted in the 80ies, you can make any halfway reasonable demand if there is a 6-points difference in your Social Ranks. So, a free peasant will give food and shelter to the Baron who walked to his house. Since it's about being reasonable, some arguing can let you get away with a whole lot regarding people you outclass socially.

I wasn't aware of the other "prestige" you mentioned in the second post. It seems that there are a disappointingly large number of dysfunctional elements clinging to the Tekumel community.

As in all geek communities, the more info there is about the setting, any setting, the likelier it is to attract "setting purists" that know the canon forwards and backwards. Some of them try to get OOC benefits out of it.

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

Agreed! Looking forward to your thoughts on all this!!!

Thanks!

And in terms of social interactions with NPCs, remember we were also ALL "Diplomacy" players, and thus used to doing negotiations.

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

He's also a Kasi, or 'captain', nominally in command of a 400-soldier cohort. However, he's a staff officer without an actual command, so he's got less status - line officers always have greater status then staff officers. Again, however, he's General Korunme's 'aide-de-camp', which is how it's put in English; a better translation would be "He's the General's personal hatchet-man, so do what he says." So, when he's on the General's business, he's as high status as the General himself; when not doing so, he's of lower status then the line officers.

Good point. FB (and my campaign) does something similar. When acting for someone else one may be able to use the social rank of the superior instead of one's own social rank. Typically, a difference of 6 social ranks is sufficient for the higher ranked person to compel a favor from the lower ranked person (bribes, gifts, tips, or return favors are still in order).

Example: Guy de Bourges (SR 9) tells the servant acting as the porter (SR 3) at the Hotel of the Duke de Bellegarde that Guy urgently needs to see the Duke. Ordinarily Guy should be able to compel the porter to help him (since there is a 6 point difference in their respective social ranks), but because the Duke has told his staff that he is "not at home" to callers, the porter resists Guy with Bellegarde's (SR 15) and easily puts Guy off. If Guy was acting on the orders of King Louis XIII, say to arrest the Duke, Guy could demand entry in the King's name and use the King's (SR 20) and would probably (though not automatically) gain access.

Though strictly speaking one can sometimes compel behavior and social rank acts as modifier to persuasion and other social interactions, the target may resent the usage, demand or expect a favor in return, or even become an enemy.

I'm trying something new, for this reply; your'e in italics, I'm in plain text.

Why didn't you talk to him sternly, being the Referee? I mean, that goes against the setting's principles.

I did; three times. My normal rule is 'three times and you're out', but the players quit right about the same time I cut them from the group.

Also, I've ran Flashing Blades, too. Unlike Bren, who took the social rank system and used Honor+Intrigue, I even ran it RAW.
Good games are good games, whether you're born in the 60ies or in the 80ies.

Well, I think so too. Mark Pettigrew did a lot of stuff for us, over the years, and I still use it in my games.

It will be interesting to hear what Gronan has to say. I'm reading him to mean that both Dave and Gary had a pre-existing setting, so there was a there there. It just paid as little attention to "can it exist on its own" question as Hollywood does.

Yes, I'd say that that was true. We did a lot of 'Hollywood history', back then, as it was about as much background as we needed for games. I did 'Humphrey-Bogart-defends-the-oasis', for example, in a WWII game. Phil was particularly fond of those 'Hollywood Aegyptus' potboilers, where the hapless slaves building the pyramid were trapped inside by the fiendishly clever pitfalls and secret doors. All wonderfully lurid and complicated, but lots of fun to play.

It worked likewise in Europe. As Flashing Blades noted in the 80ies, you can make any halfway reasonable demand if there is a 6-points difference in your Social Ranks. So, a free peasant will give food and shelter to the Baron who walked to his house. Since it's about being reasonable, some arguing can let you get away with a whole lot regarding people you outclass socially.

Agreed!

As in all geek communities, the more info there is about the setting, any setting, the likelier it is to attract "setting purists" that know the canon forwards and backwards. Some of them try to get OOC benefits out of it.

Oh, mercy, yes. I'd never seen 'setting snobs' until this point, but Tekumel certainly has them in droves.

We'lll try that again. Comments? It does make it easlier for me.

So something like in naval (including "space navy") TV shows/movies, then, where the captain says, "hard to port", then the first officer says, "hard to port", and then a couple other guys say, "hard to port", and then the helmsman finally actually does something, even though they're all on the same bridge and every one of them could hear everyone else?

Yes, with a short note. On ships, the captain and first officer may not be actually steering the ship; there's usually an 'officer of the watch' who's actually in command of the ship, and quite often a second officer - 'officer of the deck' who's actually driving the boat. (The actual terms vary quite a bit, though.) The watch officer controls everything up to the rails of the ship, and the deck officer is in charge of getting the boat from place to place. This officer 'has the conn', and you'll often hear the phrase "I have the conn" when somebody takes command. When the officer in command gives a rudder or engine order, the watch-stander running that control repeats the order back to let the officer know that it's been done.

This is all from our man in the Navy, who used to game with Gronan and I: Lt. Cdr. Lawrence Bond, USN (Ret.), usually known in gaming circles as Larry Bond. (Things like "Harpoon"; he also used to collaborate with Tom Clancy.)

As an example, when I'm afloat on my little galley, I never order the steersman to do something. I mention to the captain that I'd like to do something, and they tell the bo'sun, who tells the steersman. Now, I own the galley, but I do not command her; that's the captain's job.

"Kiya, I'd like to have a look at that island off to our left."
"Yes, sir. Bo'sun, take us inshore, please."
"Yes, Captain! Steersman, three points to port!"
"Three points to port, aye, aye!"

And as you point out, we're all standing within ten feet of each other. It's all about chain of command.

I'm extremely jealous of Phil's having been able to continue working with a single world long enough to reach that point. I still hope to one day have a world that I've been running in for multiple decades, but, with the general culture of "gamer ADD", it seems unlikely to come to pass, even if I can avoid having my own gamer ADD ruin it for me.

Understood. It's all about sticking with it, and taking notes. Phil always wrote things down, for 'later'

What were some of the cues you'd rely on? The way that other NPCs treated them? Rumors (or recon) heard about the characters prior to meeting them? Player knowledge of Tekumeli heraldry?

Yes, to all of the above. It also helped that we had literally dozens of drawings to hand; Phil had been drawing his world since the 1940s, and then again in 1974 for the miniatures line. All this stuff was to hand in the game room - my job was to organize it, and pull it out for people to look at as needed. In many cases, we knew what somebody looked like and now they dressed, and as time went on and more artwork was created for our publications, we had even more information to hand. People wear 'broad collars', similar to the Ancient Egyptian ones, and this has all sorts of useful information in the colors, trims, insignia, and glyphs. You can pretty much tell everything you need to know about somebody by simply looking at them, and then when you start talking to them is becomes very clear who everyone is and their relative status.

I'm assuming from your phrasing that it wasn't just a matter of Phil directly stating, "You can tell from his dress that he belongs to a high-status clan, but comes from a low lineage, and has these accomplishments..."

Correct. Phil very rarely, if ever, did this. You, the player, were supposed to be able to see from how they dressed and acted who they were - he'd give you a very full and correct description of them, but only if you asked. We learned to ask. Very, very quickly.

Yes, definitely! I feel like I'm at least starting to get it, and perhaps there may not be as much to get as I'd expected.

Understood - it's all about the play style, I think. We usually just 'role-played', and didn't worry too much about game mechanics.

Oof! Yeah... I don't see how you could reasonably pack all that into a single number, or even three numbers (Bethorm's Clan Status/Professional Status/Prestige).

Agreed. I do think Bethorm's system does help, though.

All true, but what I keep reading is that it's much more rigid and stratified in Tekumel than in the modern world or in typical RPG settings. In the real world, the prisoner can try to make an appointment with the governor, or call out to either governor or president if they happen to walk by. In Tekumel, I get the impression that even attempting to speak directly to someone that far above his station might lead to impalement, or at least having his tongue cut out.

Agreed. It's Mughal India all over, as Phil said on several occasions, and the place works in a very different manner to what we 'Westerners' are used to.

(And, just to be clear, I'm not saying it's a bad thing if my impression is accurate. That would be a fairly major way in which the setting impacted the style of actual play, which is precisely the sort of thing I'm trying to identify here.)

Yes, very much so; Tekumel is a world-setting, not a set of rules. You, the GM, are the one who is working up the rules for how to play in that world-setting. That, I think, is the crucial difference.

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

Thanks!

And in terms of social interactions with NPCs, remember we were also ALL "Diplomacy" players, and thus used to doing negotiations.

You're welcome!

I don't think I personally played much "Diplomacy", but I and we played a whole lot of "Kingmaker" - with just as much negotiation needed. (I had a bad habit of getting the Captaincy of Calais, and then 'inviting' as many heirs from both sides as I could to reside in the town. One then was able to play all sides of the fence. One should also get control of the fleet, to really make this work.)

Originally Posted by Bren

Good point. FB (and my campaign) does something similar. When acting for someone else one may be able to use the social rank of the superior instead of one's own social rank. Typically, a difference of 6 social ranks is sufficient for the higher ranked person to compel a favor from the lower ranked person (bribes, gifts, tips, or return favors are still in order).

Though strictly speaking one can sometimes compel behavior and social rank acts as modifier to persuasion and other social interactions, the target may resent the usage, demand or expect a favor in return, or even become an enemy.

Oh, yes, very much so!

I forgot to mention the 'civil' aspect - posting after I get home from work, sorry. In my post as a Governor, I had civil control of the city and province (and the Chaigari Protectorate, but let's keep it simple) but not any Imperial forces in the area. I could make 'suggestions' to the general commanding, but their chain of command went straight back to Bey Sy and Avanthar. I commanded my own city guards, and that was about it.

Our time in Hekellu was a bit of an oddity; I was originally appointed Deputy Governor for Military Affairs, which was a rare office that goes back to Engsvanyali times. This was to make up for a very nasty lack of troops on the ground - "Send ba Kal; he'll fix it." And, to be polite about it, Governor Takodai was not known for his military skills.

Functionally, I commanded our little army; Takodai would tell me what he wanted us to do, and I'd try to make it happen.