> What you could do is have a number of codes of practice for
> each caste. A knight is expected to act like Hrestol, brave
> and chivalrous. Since the ideal man is expected to rise
> through the ranks, the code will barely exist for commoners,
> be somewhat noticable for knights and an immense duty
> for Lords.
Humm... I was thinking about a sort of accumulation, but I'm not sure about it:
-Commoners must be obedient, loyal, religious, hardworking, VERY
happy, etc.
-Knights also must have these virtues, but the meaning of obedience,
loyalty, etc. varies. And moreover, they have to be brave, just,
defender of the powerless, etc.
-Wizards have to gather these virtues (which changes in the
meaning), and also they have to be wise, rational, ascetic. I would
say they are not allowed to look for pleasures in the material
world, so It's possible that they avoid sex, wine and good meat for
avoiding material pleasures and temptations.
-Lords must gather all the virtues in a superlative grade. In fact,
I would say that they are suppossed not to pursue any individual or
personal pleasure. Their pleasure must be the material and spiritual
welfare of people.
I'm also interested in women's situation. I'm not sure if they can theoretically be knights, wizards or lords by her own merits or their always remain in her husband's or father's class. Glorantha: Introduction to the Hero Wars presents a very sexist society (IMO), but in Trostky's webpage the situation seems to be more flexible. I'm not sure what is the MGF por female PC's and female players. IMO sexism is an interesting conflict for stories and a way to deal with the conflict between tradition and the reality than the players suggested, but too much oppresion would have difficult to generate female heroic PC's. Also, it's probably better make up a initiallysypathetic loskalmi society and later show its contradictions.
Regards,
Antonio
Powered by hypermail