So, in your campaigns, what's the correct line of succession, pre first series, and post first-series?
RPGPundit
Whoever wins won by right of inheritance. The patriarchal / matriarchal / bastard stuff is just rationalization.
A line of succession only truly matters when there is some kind of authority to appeal to. In medieval Europe, the Church held a great deal of power to enthrone and dethrone monarchs, especially in the smaller countries.
Despite Corwin's musings, I really don't think it applies to Amber. Bleys tried to take the throne even though he was way down the list compared to Eric and Corwin.
Post-patternfall, Random intends to live forever.
Aye, but he'll bore of the throne pretty soon. In some ways, Random is the most "Oberon-like" of the princes. Even if he lives and reigns forever, it is bound to be some kind of conflict about him not being there, or not caring. After all, he's not the kind of chap to stay in one place for too long. That opens, IMO, a whole lot of possibilities for a post-second series campaign, were the line of succession is not so very clear.
Well in that case you're not talking about succession you're talking about usurpation.
All lines of succession should start with ME. It is difficult for most characters to concede that anyone else has a worthwhile claim to the throne, although there will be a number of political characters who like Fiona stand back and let the others slug it out and eliminate themselves first.
Having said that the books make it clear that Corwin believes the order of birth is significant in the line of succession, although he is quite prepared to ignore it so that he can promote himself.
Gavin
Actually, I think the number of canon characters who are interested in the throne is fairly small, but maybe that's because the lesser lights know that they'd get plowed under if they tried.
Gavken, does he really?
Or does he use it as an excuse? Clearly Bleys could care less about it.
The excuses are important. Maybe a better way of expressing the original post would be to say: how can each branch of the family justify their own succession, and simultaneously downplay the claims of any of the others?
I think there's a few things to consider here: first, there's age and seniority.
Second, is legitimacy imparted by Oberon.
And post-patternfall, there's the religious question of the Unicorn's selection of Random.
RPGPundit
That's a much better question. How does each person view the succession?
In my current game, Eithne views herself as queen, when Tir-na Nog'th has never really needed one and never had any kind of enduring authority.
I'm waiting, right now, for the other PC's to either acknowledge her authority or challenge it. That's dramatic.
Quote from: RPGPunditThe excuses are important. Maybe a better way of expressing the original post would be to say: how can each branch of the family justify their own succession, and simultaneously downplay the claims of any of the others?
Yup, I always tried to do things like this in my various Throne wars: The first born would be an illegitimate bastard who was never recognized, another would have been born later, illegimitate also, but were recognized, yet another was the firstborn to oberon's first official wife, but was destituted...
So each player could conceivably claim to have a right to the throne greater than the others.
I notice that sometimes, when RPGPundit starts a tread it seems SOME replies are nothing more than an attempt to pick apart the logic of his questions rather than give a true reply to advance the thread.
WTF???
I thought it a good question.
My answer is I go along with Corwin's explanation given to Ganelon in SotU.
However, here is an excerpt from RZ in the forward to the book Black Road War
(this is merely additional info for whoever wants - it IS a tough book to track down for a fair price.)
RZ SAYS;
*
Mother............................. Offspring
Moins............................... Llewella
Rilga.................................Caine , Julian, Gerard
(Aged more rapidly than many; retired to a Shrine of the Unicorn and spent her final yrs. as something of a recluse.)
Paulette...........................Random, Mirelle
(High-strung; a suicide; possibly from our shadow Earth)
Dybele.............................Flora
(Died in childbirth)
Lora...............................Sand, Delwin
(Oberon married her in another shadow while Rilga was still living @ her shrine; different time stream, though; tricky to date)
Kinta.............................Coral
Deela the Desacratrix.......Dalt
(Died leading her troops into battle)
Harla............................None known
(Didn't work out, and they separated by mutual consent; no record of divorce or annulment; no record of marriage either; peculiar, as Oberon did for a time refer to her as his wife.)
Questions of sequence do arise with respect to various Shadow-Paradoxes, to which Merlin refers later in the series when thinking upon the ease with which interpretations of birth precedence could be challenged. This has mainly to do with the fact that some of the Amberites were born in Shadows possessed of radically different time streams.*
*Written by Roger Zelazny and Taken from "the Black Road War" by Neil Randall
Doesn't he say in the Merlin Chronicles that Harla was Delwin and Sand's mother?
Remind me, WHO says?
Shadow Knight says Harla is Sand's mummy.
I'd have to scour my novels for further info.
What I wrote was excerpted from a novel 'which way' adventure, and the written forward was by Roger Zelazny, and that is what he wrote. (I believe it was written at the time the 2nd or 3rd Merlin book was out.)
copyright 1988
Quote from: gabriel_ss4uRemind me, WHO says?
The guy that wrote the Merlin Chronicles, smartass. :p
QuoteWhat I wrote was excerpted from a novel 'which way' adventure, and the written forward was by Roger Zelazny, and that is what he wrote. (I believe it was written at the time the 2nd or 3rd Merlin book was out.)
copyright 1988
I'm aware. And I'm rereading the Merlin Chronicles now and in
Blood of Amber (page 115 of the first edition Avon paperback if you want to be pedantic) Zelazny specifically states that Harla is Delwin and Sand's mother.
Quote from: RPGPunditAnd post-patternfall, there's the religious question of the Unicorn's selection of Random.
RPGPundit
Ah yes, the magic deer... :D
-clash
Quote from: flyingmiceAh yes, the magic deer... :D
-clash
Shhhh! Don't tell Pundit or he'll never play Amber again :D
OK, then! Let's just keep it between the two of us! :D
-clash
Quote from: Uncle TwitchyThe guy that wrote the Merlin Chronicles, smartass. :p
I'm aware. And I'm rereading the Merlin Chronicles now and in Blood of Amber (page 115 of the first edition Avon paperback if you want to be pedantic) Zelazny specifically states that Harla is Delwin and Sand's mother.
Duly noted....
but remember, it may have been Zelazny that wrote it, but who said it? Merlin?
And where did he get his info from????
So, as we can't take it up w/RZ, I suppose it is up to you to decide, Merlin's words, or Roger's.
(Personally, I don't trust Merlin, those spikards changed him)
Right, but remember also that he didn't get changed by the spikards until much later. This was still early on in the story.
For myself, I'll accept stuff from the main ten books before I trust any of Zelazny's forwards to stuff other people wrote.
The comment on the spikards was jokingly, and didn't have anything to do with my wonder if Merlin knew what he was talking about in the parentage of Amberites he's never met up to that point.
I'll trust RZ before I trust any Amberite, he is, after all, more human. :)
and the ultimate originator of the story.
His forward was directed to us, the readers, in trying to clarify the parentage of the 1st Gen. Amberites, in response to letters and inquiries by readers who were confused about it.
So, if you don't take into account what he has to say, why listen to 1st person (people known for secrecy & lies) accounts by Amberites in his story?
flawed logic....
Because a lot of the stuff he told us directly in non-fictional contexts he would later contradict in the books. I mean, he endorsed the Visual Guide to Castle Amber, and a lot of that information was later contradicted by events in the final two Merlin books.
And yes, I realize that both Corwin and Merlin are lying or misrepresenting the truth on a number of occasions. In fact, that might be a good thread topic -- where have we caught Corwin and Merlin lying in the narrative? -- but for me, ultimately, those are what count.
understood, but RZ didn't WRITE the visual guide....
I guess ya gotta get the Neil Randall book to see for yourself.
Was there a thread on narrators lying yet?
good suggestion.