Quote from: NazgulCause everyone likes King Arthur?

The lady of the lake only grants the blessing to those who complete the grail quest. Questing for the grail is a major challenge.

After serving as a squire you become a Knights Errant. After doing that for a while you become a Questing Knight. IF you can manage to complete that Quest,(and it's not easy, many don't) Then you become a Grail Knight.

It takes years of training and 'proving yourself worthy' to become a Grail Knight.

You have to earn it.

Some watery tart does not throw a scimitar at you.... um, yea....

Exactly. Arthur the squire pulls the sword from the stone; he didn't do anything to earn it. Yet no one objects to Arthur because he was chosen.

QuoteBut seriously, a Grail Knight earns it. Not some deer just poking you in the head with it's antlers.

Also, the Lady doesn't choose the King(unless they changed something in the editions since I've read it), she just chooses all the Questing Knights who are worthy to become Grail Knights.

She may not choose the King, but she hand selects all the candidates. It's effectively the same thing.

Quote from: WarthurIt's the way the portrayal of the former's (the Magic Deer) effect on the latter (Aldis) which people object to in Blue Rose. Blue Rose more-or-less states outright that the Magic Deer is a Very Good Thing, and that part of the reason the setting has so many shiny happy people is because the Magic Deer is there. As far as I know, the Bretonnia supplement in WFRP doesn't say anything about whether the Lady's shenanigans are good or bad: it's just a thing that happens, and whether it's actually helped or hindered the lot of the common man in Bretonnia is debatable.

Personally, the type of utopia presented in Blue Rose is something which I struggle to get my head around. The idea of a fluffy, liberal, tolerant society with progressive and open-minded 21st century attitudes about race, gender, sexuality and whatnot arising from what is essentially the Divine Right of Kings is something I find bizarre.

What I would find bizarre is the idea that an iron age agricultural society could be a "progressive utopia" without divine intervention.

Quote from: SpikeThat was some awfully simplistic math, Apparation.  

IF you accept the constant of 'supernatural agency' as neither good nor bad, then the variable nature of the society that forms from it MUST be taken in consideration, not ignored outright.

What I'm saying is that what's important is the "variable nature of the society" (the setting as a whole), and not the "supernatural agency". How you respond to the supernatural agency is entirely dependent on how you respond to the setting, and therefore the "supernatural agency" can be ignored outright. Aldis would be just as offensive without the magic deer.

This is pretty much what jhkim also said.

Now if you want some actual simplistic math:

Chaos = physical manifestation of "evil" = corruption,
Chaos wastes (north) = geographic reservoir of "evil" = Kern (north),
The Empire = Fundamentalist state obsessed with preventing corruption = Jarzon,
Bretonnia = comparatively peaceful, "ideal" monarchy with "magic deer" = Aldis (-sexism),
therefore,
WFRP = Blue Rose.

Quote from: SpikeJhkim:

My specific point was to address the wonky math used by Apparition, where he subtracted the 'Magic deer' from each setting, but handwaved away the actual setting to come to his 'conclusion'.

If you subtract away the "magic deer", all you have left as the determining factor to reach your evaluation is the setting.

QuoteThe presence, or lack, of a magic deer does not make a setting good or bad in and of itself.

I agree, which is why I wonder why there was all this complaining about the "magic deer" in Blue Rose.

Quote from: apparition13I agree, which is why I wonder why there was all this complaining about the "magic deer" in Blue Rose.

Ah, but I suspect the use of the Magic Deer to insult Blue Rose was merely a shorthand for everything that was wrong.

And I find it hard to believe that you think a five line 'this=that' to be 'simple math.

Quote from: jhkimI am skeptical that the supernatural agency has anything to do with the expressed dislike of the setting.  If Aldis had had the same tone and culture but different politics, would the same critics really have changed their mind?  My impression is that if it had instead been a political democracy, the same would blast it for being anachronistic / revisionist.  If it had been a hereditary monarchy, then the critics would be calling it a cliched, childish fairy tale.

Personally, for my part I would be more interested in Blue Rose if the Magic Deer were taken out but the tone were left the same. Not much more - the romantic fantasy genre doesn't especially appeal to me - but at least it wouldn't hurt my suspension of disbelief as much as it does.

Any of two approaches would have worked for me:

- Making Aldis a classic hereditary monarchy with a Good and Wise King and emphasising the fairytale-like aspects of the romantic fantasy genre. The Zorcerer of Zo gets plenty of kudos after all...

- Making Aldis a democracy and coming up with a decent reason for that to be the case. The idea of democracy is far older than the Middle Ages and at the time various Italian city states flirted with it.

As it is, though, the Blue Rose designers seem to have decided that they want to have a king and queen and princes and princesses who are active in society, but at the same time want a progressive and vaguely egalitarian society, and at the same time want to come up with an in-setting rationale as to why this is the case rather than throwing their hands up in the air and saying "It's a cultural thing. This is how Aldis is. It's a fragile eggshell and that's why the PCs need to protect these values with their utmost." I am not sure all three of those goals could be achieved at once.

Y'know I get the same facepalm when I think of how the Queen of Naboo is democratically elected, and they selected a 14 year old for the job, even with two four year terms as the limit.

Dude. If you want a young queen, make her a god damn queen, if you want democratic values, make a fucking democratic state.  

Aldis: egalitarian monarchy by way of venison.

Buh?

Quote from: WarthurPersonally, for my part I would be more interested in Blue Rose if the Magic Deer were taken out but the tone were left the same. Not much more - the romantic fantasy genre doesn't especially appeal to me - but at least it wouldn't hurt my suspension of disbelief as much as it does.

Any of two approaches would have worked for me:

- Making Aldis a classic hereditary monarchy with a Good and Wise King and emphasising the fairytale-like aspects of the romantic fantasy genre. The Zorcerer of Zo gets plenty of kudos after all...

How does the Sorcerer of Zo do this?

Quote- Making Aldis a democracy and coming up with a decent reason for that to be the case. The idea of democracy is far older than the Middle Ages and at the time various Italian city states flirted with it.

There have been good and wise kings in history, sometimes even a series of them, but you inevitably have a loser and things go to hell. Divine intervention means you always start out with a good and wise king, though given the Hart had to depose a couple of them it doesn't mean you'll end up with one.

With the exception of the Roman Republic, which proved fragile and was replaced by the Empire, historic democracies have overwhelmingly been city-states (as was Rome prior to its expansion). It isn't until modern times, with market economies, oceanic trade and industrialization that large-scale democracies have become common.

QuoteAs it is, though, the Blue Rose designers seem to have decided that they want to have a king and queen and princes and princesses who are active in society, but at the same time want a progressive and vaguely egalitarian society, and at the same time want to come up with an in-setting rationale as to why this is the case rather than throwing their hands up in the air and saying "It's a cultural thing. This is how Aldis is. It's a fragile eggshell and that's why the PCs need to protect these values with their utmost." I am not sure all three of those goals could be achieved at once.

I think the "fragile eggshell" idea makes the setting more interesting from a gaming standpoint. "What do the PCs do?" is answered by setting, namely protect the "fragile eggshell" from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

(Re: Naboo. I'm with ya Spike, I didn't get that at all.)

EDIT:  Hot damn but I am a pissy drunk.

Not to mention that if you think there hasnt been a protest about Brettonia's current incarnation, you haven't been looking hard enough.  Go read the Brettonia entry in the original 1st ed WFRP.  Then Go read 2nd Ed. Brettonia. They're two completely different countries!!

And let me tell you, 1st ed Brettonia is about 2000 times cooler. WFRP fans were EXTREMELY pissed about the whole "Lady of the Lake/Knights of the Grail" bullshit, its just that the whole fight over this happened BEFORE 2e came out, because it was actually WF Battles that changed the whole Brettonia thing (so they could sell more little knight figures, I guess).

The original Brettonia is more like corrupt, dirty and decadent france on the verge of the Revolution, than a medieval ultracatholic Malloryesque France.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditNot to mention that if you think there hasnt been a protest about Brettonia's current incarnation, you haven't been looking hard enough.  Go read the Brettonia entry in the original 1st ed WFRP.  Then Go read 2nd Ed. Brettonia. They're two completely different countries!!

And let me tell you, 1st ed Brettonia is about 2000 times cooler. WFRP fans were EXTREMELY pissed about the whole "Lady of the Lake/Knights of the Grail" bullshit, its just that the whole fight over this happened BEFORE 2e came out, because it was actually WF Battles that changed the whole Brettonia thing (so they could sell more little knight figures, I guess).

The original Brettonia is more like corrupt, dirty and decadent france on the verge of the Revolution, than a medieval ultracatholic Malloryesque France.

RPGPundit

Actually, Pundit has a point here, I had forgotten but there was a hell of a lot of complaint about the changes to Brettonia.

Quote from: apparition13How does the Sorcerer of Zo do this?

Off the top of my head, I'm not sure since I've not read it; I just used it as an example of an RPG which draws heavily on fairytales for children whilst at the same time getting plenty of props (from what I've seen online).

QuoteThere have been good and wise kings in history, sometimes even a series of them, but you inevitably have a loser and things go to hell. Divine intervention means you always start out with a good and wise king, though given the Hart had to depose a couple of them it doesn't mean you'll end up with one.

However, this also robs the player characters of a fascinating adventure opportunity. As I understand it, Blue Rose is set up such that player characters are going to be fighting to protect the progressive and enlightened values of Aldis from dark forces, whether these be foreign powers or enemies within. A bad king comes to the throne? Wonderful! That means the PCs get a chance to strut their stuff and battle to get a righteous leader onto the throne and save the values they hold dear. Except wait, oh shit, the Deer has just done that for them.

Part of the reason I object to the Deer is that it's doing something in the setting which, really, ought to be left up to player characters to succeed or fail at as they may.

QuoteWith the exception of the Roman Republic, which proved fragile and was replaced by the Empire, historic democracies have overwhelmingly been city-states (as was Rome prior to its expansion). It isn't until modern times, with market economies, oceanic trade and industrialization that large-scale democracies have become common.

Historically speaking, yes, but magic - and especially magical means of communication - could make a larger democracy viable in a fantasy setting.

Here's an idea: Vote Spheres. Magic spheres which get distributed to all the towns and villages come election day. You go in the voting booth, picture an image of the person you want to vote for in your head, the image appears in the Vote Sphere to note that your vote has been registered and then the sphere clouds up again, ready for the next person. The spheres are all attuned to a central sphere, which at the end of election day displays an image of the person who won the election.

Not exactly flavourful, my idea, but it's one way a viable democracy could be set up in a fantasy world.

QuoteI think the "fragile eggshell" idea makes the setting more interesting from a gaming standpoint. "What do the PCs do?" is answered by setting, namely protect the "fragile eggshell" from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Exactly! Like I said, the Magic Deer acting as protector of the values of the realm is filling a niche which PCs really should be able to fill themselves.

My objection to magic deer etc. is that it denies people an effective voice in how they are led. The magic deer selects the leader, and the people have to accept that choice. We are a social species, we need to communicate with others. We need to let people know how we're doing, where things are going good, and where things are going badly. We need to have a say in how things are done. Most of the time we'll go along with whatever our leaders want to do. But, it all goes better when we can have our say. We don't get our say, even when what we have to say can be only advisory, things don't go as well as they otherwise could. Magic deer mean we have no input on how things are done, not in any real sense. Better we make our own mistakes than live perfect lives with no way to infuence how our leaders act.

Quote from: mythusmageMy objection to magic deer etc. is that it denies people an effective voice in how they are led. The magic deer selects the leader, and the people have to accept that choice. We are a social species, we need to communicate with others. We need to let people know how we're doing, where things are going good, and where things are going badly. We need to have a say in how things are done. Most of the time we'll go along with whatever our leaders want to do. But, it all goes better when we can have our say. We don't get our say, even when what we have to say can be only advisory, things don't go as well as they otherwise could. Magic deer mean we have no input on how things are done, not in any real sense. Better we make our own mistakes than live perfect lives with no way to infuence how our leaders act.

It is startling to me that people are so picky about the politics in a game world.  

You really can't fight bad guys unless it's for a participatory democracy or equivalent where your character has his fair share of input in the governmental system?  

It just seems bizarre to me.  I mean, sure, in the real world I believe in democracy and individual freedom.  I'm a card-carrying ACLU member.  However, in a game I'm perfectly capable of playing a paladin where the rules of his order are handed down by the gods and he has no say in them.

Quote from: jhkimIt is startling to me that people are so picky about the politics in a game world.  

You really can't fight bad guys unless it's for a participatory democracy or equivalent where your character has his fair share of input in the governmental system?  

It just seems bizarre to me.  I mean, sure, in the real world I believe in democracy and individual freedom.  I'm a card-carrying ACLU member.  However, in a game I'm perfectly capable of playing a paladin where the rules of his order are handed down by the gods and he has no say in them.

What if the gods reliably and predictably step in to resolve the situation if things get too bad though? Wouldn't it suddenly become less fun for a great many people to play paladins if the paladins had supernatural nannies making sure that the consequences of failure were never too bad?

Quote from: WarthurWhat if the gods reliably and predictably step in to resolve the situation if things get too bad though? Wouldn't it suddenly become less fun for a great many people to play paladins if the paladins had supernatural nannies making sure that the consequences of failure were never too bad?

Well, what's the point of that hypothetical?  My point was a comparison to the politics of Aldis in Blue Rose.  

Aldis doesn't have any sort of supernatural agency which resolves any situations, much less doing so reliably and predictably.  It has the Golden Hart -- but the Golden Hart only intervenes once every few dozen years, and only does a single thing -- mark a chosen person, whom the people by tradition recognize as sovereign.  By comparison, D&D gods invest hundreds of clerics, provide them with power, and constantly police all of them for alignment shift, which is far more interventionist.

Maybe the Imperium will show up and Virus Bomb Aldis and save us all the trouble.