I tried to argue with David Hall over this, but he stopped me short when he said that he had written that mainly to make the caste committee in How the West Was One interesting. (It was...)
The 17 "castes" David mentioned in the Aeolian Church write-up for HtWW1 (and put on Loren's website) refer to the 17 professions of the Heortlings, in King of Sartar. Myself, I was content to identify thane=noble=talar, weaponthane/carl=knight=horal, priest=wizard=zzabur, and cottar=serf=dromal. (I used the = in the sense of rough correspondence...)
The real difficulty is the role of the carl, since it has no real equivalent in Western society. There are no voting grand farmers in Western society, that's the point in (at least the Seshnegi form of) Malkioni feudalism. Farmers are there to be ruled, not unruly. Orlanthi society is built upon the carl as the backbone of the chain of responsibilities, and IMO the Aeolian church does acknowledge this to some extent. Not enough for many of the later Sartarite immigrants, though - they saw their freedom and rights reduced when the fanatical Aeolian kings of Heortland (after Belintar's take-over) impressed their ways of feudalism (and taxation) onto the land. Many of the lowland people who disagreed left their steads, selling them off under price if they were lucky, or having them confiscated by upstart Aeolian knights. The early tales of Theya Twomother (aka Pam Carlson) detail this conflict (check David Dunham's web-page, which ought to have these).
In general, the Brithini model of four castes is somewhat common to the Malkioni. However, the Old Hrestoli way was to have four castes - noble, priest/wizard, defender, and farmer - with the knights as not a caste, but a corps of people uniting all the land's virtues in themselves. According to Nick Brooke's Castle Coast write-up, the stuck-ups there still do, although in a somewhat debased form.
>Most of the Sects allow some sort of intercaste movement,
>if the person shows that ability or capacity.
Most noteworthy the Rokari sect, which seems to have rules for lesser branches of noble families to be demoted to mere knight or wizard caste. "Upward" mobility usually is the issue, even though most sects claim that all castes are equal in worth within the sect.
>However, it doesn't really talk about caste restrictions.
>Will most of these be as strict as the rokari?
That really depends on how you see them, and what you want of them. The multitude of Ralian sects will have all forms of caste mobility/immobility, paired with most other imaginable deviations. In HtWW1 the Syanorans are obsessed with marital fidelity rather than caste restrictions.
>Would they allow a person who switch from the Knight caste to the
>Priest caste use their former weapon skills?
I find it hard to prevent them other than forbid priests in general to carry (certain, if you want equivalents of Bishop Odo at Hastings, aka AD&D 1st ed. clerics) weapons. If they have the weapon at hand and come to blows, they will use their skill...
If you regard the Loskalmi Hrestoli as the victims of a large-scale social experiment during the Syndics Ban (and continuing, as does the HtWW1 description, also in Tales 13), their way will be extremist, and unlikely to be encountered outside of their sphere of power. Most other sects stem from the Old Hrestoli, but have been reformed by the God Learners, and later by the Rokari conversion movement in the 1430ies reaching into the more remote parts of southern Genertela. Zzabur's 1st Age Brithini model remains the main source of inspiration. Earlier models had other sons and grandsons of Malkion in different role-defining positions, too. Like Yingar the Messenger, mentioned in Glorantha Book of the Genertela Box. Arkat grew up under Zzabur's model, so many of the Stygian sects will follow it. Arkat left that model, so many of the Stygians won't follow it.
When- and wherever in Glorantha you play, you will have to decide the locally active sects' official lines on castes, and their internal lines. Leave it be at two or three differences, anything else will confuse you and your players. Use your imagination, or read up the collections of sects on Loren's webpages, or Tales 13, or the freeform materials for HtWW1 and Rise of Ralios.
Paolo Guccione on Rokari peasants and weapon restrictions:
Jose Ramos:
>> In
>> that case you have a nucleus of cavalry (who will consider themselves
>> knight caste, and are indeed mostly poor knights and social climbers)
>Rokari peasants are forbidden to ride horses, so they have got to be
>knights (or Henotheists, but are we sure they can ride?).
Genertela Book tells us that the Rokari have invented "sergeants", i.e. peasants trained in the use of real weapons, who serve as men-at-arms with the knights, and have a similar though mostly poorer equipment. I'm fairly certain that some of these do fight mounted. Think of them as peasants in a special form of vassalage, and with a dispense for doing so.
>> So what do you prefer? Historical parallel with
>> professional crossbowmen (and some longbowmen) or historical variance.
To my profound distress (as an archer) there are no traditions of the longbow in Genertelan human warfare. Specialists may have one, but you won't get full units armed with them.
>Again, Rokari peasants are prohibited to use crossbows.
And knights are unlikely to. Leaving the sergeants, once again...
>If we assume that most mercenaries are peasants,
I find it quite safe to assume that up to 50% of the mercenaries are younger sons of knights who did not find service with a noble. Ronin, if you prefer a Japanese parallel.
>the Safelstran equivalent of the
>Japanese ashigaru, this leaves out all mercenaries belonging to Rokari
>and Rokari-derived churches if they do not want to risk excommunication.
The Rokari are way too practical in such matters. They offer limited exceptions from the general rule where needed. This creates very much an ashigaru-like subcaste... and if these guys make it into a mercenary company into the Manirian wildlands, they might promote themselves to full knights. Read MOB's Wyrm's Hold scenario in Tales 13 for examples.
>Although many of them may not care, I tend to prefer a different
>approach. I assume most infantrymen are armored spearmen or bowmen with
>some sword training.
Likely short sword, or "knife" as in Crocodile Dundee. Bowmen's sidearms included all kind of utensiles to hit, historically. If I recall correctly, hammers were much en vogue at Agincourt (the same ones used to drive the stakes into the terrain - if you have to carry the darn things around, you can well use them as tin openers as well).
>I leave fancy-style polearms such as glaives as high-tech
>goodies (dwarf-made?) not generally available. Maybe you must go to Bad
>Deal to get some, not mentioning the price.
They came up as complimentary weapons for pike formations, to dismount the few knights who made it past the pikes. Any pole with some hitting object on the top will do, as will great axes (like those used by the Anglo-Saxon housecarls). The latter should be available from Orlanthi mercenaries...
I doubt that Ralios has the Swiss pike formations. Safelster is horse territory, so the specialist pikes-only tactics of the early Swiss wouldn't have succeeded that well. Besides, we already have phalanx style warfare, in Peloria and Prax. No need to introduce it over and over again.
>Two-handed swords may be
>landsknecht (?) greatswords rather than claymores, and I assume they are
>the province of Henotheist Humakti (Humathi IMG), which may well be the
>core mercenary units.
My impression, too. Note that in the 30-years war the most notable wielders of greatswords were the Finnish knights in the Swedish host. People from back of the woods... Hakka Paeaetae!
End of Glorantha Digest V4 #174
WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html
Powered by hypermail