So, questions about feudalism and chivalry have come up, and this blog gives me the perfect space to answer them. Sometimes, the wiki isn't the best place for information, but a properly tagged blog can give you access to the "gee-whiz" information.
That said, on this specific question, your intrepid story-teller has to talk about something not on the wiki.
Namely, you won't find the word "knight" anywhere... at least nowhere in the setting information.
That's because there are no knights. There are no fiefs, either (although there are lords and vassals). You see no mention of feudalism. The reason? All of these things are anachronistic, and far more dangerous to the campaign than the pictures of castles players choose for their character's homes.
We have a lot of anachronisms in the game. I'm generally 100% cool with these, because they don't really affect the story, and we're not going into meticulous detail on the exact time period. In a thousand years, there might be people on a holodeck playing a game set in the 1980s... complete with iPhones and the internet. It would hard to realize it's an anachronism. Real quick... how many people can tell me when men started wearing wrist watches regularly? While some might argue every vampire character who has a pocket watch should know this, but the level of detail is unnecessary (we don't want to go Diana Warrior Princess style, but that's another story).
However, while technology anachronisms don't bother me... value anachronisms do, because we're trying to emulate a specific mindset. And one sure way to undermine the setting is by adding the values of courtly love, chivalry, and "knights in shining armor."
Chivalry is a particular warrior's code, but not the one that would fit in Beowulf. For one, Chivalry seeks to limit the knight... it is a collection of prohibitions and motivations that explain why this rich, heavily armored warrior with a small army of thugs should chastely love a lady at a tourney, as opposed to what typically happens when you have a small army of thugs and nigh invulnerability when on a battlefield. It emphasizes obedience to your lord, for example, which fits into the monarchist world-view that looked back upon previous eras and defined "chivalry." In actuality, the power of a king was much less than what we might think, and depended largely on his or her power or personal charisma. So chivalry was a control... a moral code that told knights it was wrong to use their superpowers of armor and horses and money for their own personal gain.
The warrior code of the North is far different. In this society, the characters are not superheroes, they're flawed human beings in a dangerous society, and constantly faced with choices between what is safe and comfortable, and what is dangerous and "right."
That said, on this specific question, your intrepid story-teller has to talk about something not on the wiki.
Namely, you won't find the word "knight" anywhere... at least nowhere in the setting information.
That's because there are no knights. There are no fiefs, either (although there are lords and vassals). You see no mention of feudalism. The reason? All of these things are anachronistic, and far more dangerous to the campaign than the pictures of castles players choose for their character's homes.
We have a lot of anachronisms in the game. I'm generally 100% cool with these, because they don't really affect the story, and we're not going into meticulous detail on the exact time period. In a thousand years, there might be people on a holodeck playing a game set in the 1980s... complete with iPhones and the internet. It would hard to realize it's an anachronism. Real quick... how many people can tell me when men started wearing wrist watches regularly? While some might argue every vampire character who has a pocket watch should know this, but the level of detail is unnecessary (we don't want to go Diana Warrior Princess style, but that's another story).
However, while technology anachronisms don't bother me... value anachronisms do, because we're trying to emulate a specific mindset. And one sure way to undermine the setting is by adding the values of courtly love, chivalry, and "knights in shining armor."
Chivalry is a particular warrior's code, but not the one that would fit in Beowulf. For one, Chivalry seeks to limit the knight... it is a collection of prohibitions and motivations that explain why this rich, heavily armored warrior with a small army of thugs should chastely love a lady at a tourney, as opposed to what typically happens when you have a small army of thugs and nigh invulnerability when on a battlefield. It emphasizes obedience to your lord, for example, which fits into the monarchist world-view that looked back upon previous eras and defined "chivalry." In actuality, the power of a king was much less than what we might think, and depended largely on his or her power or personal charisma. So chivalry was a control... a moral code that told knights it was wrong to use their superpowers of armor and horses and money for their own personal gain.
The warrior code of the North is far different. In this society, the characters are not superheroes, they're flawed human beings in a dangerous society, and constantly faced with choices between what is safe and comfortable, and what is dangerous and "right."
I would love for you to expand on the warrior code of the North, even if it was a comparison post showing how it was different from chivalry.
ReplyDeleteDone! Got more questions? Just comment on that thread.
DeleteI just followed the link about Princess Diana. What the fuck did I just read?
ReplyDelete