Thread: Questioning chirine ba kal

Originally Posted by Shemek hiTankolel

What about Canadians? Did you find that they were "ok" with it given Canada's traditional ties to the UK, and its multicultural nature.

Shemek

No data, sorry; you are the first Canadian RPG gamer I've ever talked to.

Originally Posted by CRKrueger

Looking at Man of Gold, it depicts people who are willing to...

• assassinate anyone who gets in their way
• pursue personal gain at the expense of others
• commit poisonings, torture, and human sacrifice on a large scale if need be
• consort with demons and creatures of the dark

...yet not be the kind of lower, brutish evildoer who gets off on hurting or belittling others as a way of ingratiating themselves, in fact such people seem to be looked on with disdain.

Very well put!!! I think this is very accurate, myself.

If I may offer a story as an aside on this, I was once at an early Gen Con getting ragged on by some D&D players for being an 'Evil High Priest', and doing all of the stuff that you so neatly listed above. A guy at the next table was listening in on the conversation, and finally interrupted to say that in his estimation, Chirine is a paladin, and one of the very best kind as Chirine was doing exactly what his faith and temple asked of him. The D&D players were horrified by this statement, and immediately jumped on the guy and demanded to know by what right he could say such a terrible thing. He simply smiled, and held out a hand in greeting: "I'm Gary Gygax; pleasure to meet you!"

Originally Posted by ArrozConLeche

Chirine:

I saw it mentioned that you had a Tekumel movie list, and it seemed that you used one movie to get players into the spirit of it. Would you mind sharing that list at some point?

gracias

I do; it got started when I was talking to Phil aeons ago about the movies he'd seen as a kid that had influenced him and later ones that he'd liked. A sample selection:

"Thief of Baghdad" - 1924
"Sign of the Cross" - 1932
"Cleopatra" - 1934
"Thief of Baghdad" - 1940
The "Flash Gordon" and "Buck Rogers" serials
"Ben-Hur" - 1929
"Ben-Hur" - 1959
"Spartacus" - 1960

He also liked HBO's "Rome" series, as well.

Originally Posted by Greentongue

If Evil has redeeming qualities, how do you kill them just for experience points?

Run characters who are scoundrels and swashbucklers rather than romantic heroes.

A caricature is easy to relate to and grasp in the short time of most encounters.

I was referencing film. In Dune (book or film), Baron Harkonnen is hardly a one-time, brief encounter. Less time spent picking at his pustules, cackling, and flying about the room and a bit more time developing Baron H's character was what I was hoping for. Instead we got Eraserhead in space!!!

Originally Posted by CRKrueger

Looking at Man of Gold, it depicts people who are willing to...

• assassinate anyone who gets in their way
• pursue personal gain at the expense of others
• commit poisonings, torture, and human sacrifice on a large scale if need be
• consort with demons and creatures of the dark

...yet not be the kind of lower, brutish evildoer who gets off on hurting or belittling others as a way of ingratiating themselves, in fact such people seem to be looked on with disdain.

Exactly. Dichune is willing to do horrible things to Harsan because it will get Dichune something of great value, not for shits and giggles.

Originally Posted by Greentongue

If Evil has redeeming qualities, how do you kill them just for experience points?
A caricature is easy to relate to and grasp in the short time of most encounters.
Remember, in the original rules only killing and gold gain experience. Anything additional was "house rules".
=

So?

The Yan Koryani soldiers were not evil, but they were a great source of XP. War is war.

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

Exactly. Dichune is willing to do horrible things to Harsan because it will get Dichune something of great value, not for shits and giggles.

Even as an Imperial Prince, Dichune seems bound by personal honor, the Concordat, and political repercussions. However, it seems pretty clear the reason he entered that cabal was to gain their help against his siblings in the rites of secession which he was sure to lose. So he's more than willing to cheat in perhaps the greatest test of his life. What isn't clear though, is how accepted this is. It could be that the capacity for cheating during the rites of secession and not getting caught is as much of a test as the official rites, we don't get enough of the viewpoints of the other princes to know, but based on Eselne, I kind of doubt it.

Question for Gronan and Chirine - if the Emperor had found out everything about Dichune's machinations, but they remained secret to the rest of society, what would likely be the result?

Second question - Does the OAL have authority over the Princes?

I'm not sure. I suspect the succession is rather like in Neil Gaiman's "Stardust." But I couldn't say for sure... I stayed as far the hell away from Imperial politics as I could.

Originally Posted by CRKrueger

Even as an Imperial Prince, Dichune seems bound by personal honor, the Concordat, and political repercussions. However, it seems pretty clear the reason he entered that cabal was to gain their help against his siblings in the rites of secession which he was sure to lose. So he's more than willing to cheat in perhaps the greatest test of his life. What isn't clear though, is how accepted this is. It could be that the capacity for cheating during the rites of secession and not getting caught is as much of a test as the official rites, we don't get enough of the viewpoints of the other princes to know, but based on Eselne, I kind of doubt it.

Question for Gronan and Chirine - if the Emperor had found out everything about Dichune's machinations, but they remained secret to the rest of society, what would likely be the result?

Second question - Does the OAL have authority over the Princes?

As the game of Imperial politics is played, he wasn't cheating. It's 'winner take all', as the Tsolyani take a very long-term view of history. Some of the most successful rulers have also been really nasty people who took the Petal Throne by sheer force. (See also "Deeds of the Ever-Glorious", and ninety-minute audio-taped interview with the Professor on the Kolumeljalim, the Choosing of the Emperor, in my files.)

Question #1: One dead Prince. They play very, very hardball in Avanthar, and they play for keeps. (See also Gronan's comment, above.) They react very violently to threats to the dynasty, too.

Question #2: Yes, but only to a limited degree. Each Imperial sibling usually has the backing of a faction inside the OAL, as 'younger' officers try to second-guess the Kolumeljalim and align themselves with the next ruler. The 'older' ones tend to be the supporters of the current incumbent. The ruler can give orders regarding his children, but usually the OAL treads pretty carefully when dealing with them. The one exception are violations of the Great Concordat - those get dealt with in a quite summary faction, as it's about the only thing that the Imperial siblings can agree on.

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

Exactly. Dichune is willing to do horrible things to Harsan because it will get Dichune something of great value, not for shits and giggles.

"It's business, not personal." - Don Vito Corleone