Re: Raiding question

From: Ian Cooper <ian_hammond_cooper_at_...>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:26:05 -0000


Peter Larsen wrote:
> -- lawsuits and/or feuds begin when someone is killed or maimed<

Compensation compicates this. A lot of the time when there is an 'accident' you can redress the balance by paying compensation. You don't have to go to court for this, it is handled by the jurors or by the offender offering self-judgement to the wronged party . The balance is redressed, everyone goes home. When you are raiding friendly or neutral clans, and you injure someone who is then unable to provide, compensation will settle the matter. Even a death may be compensated this way when the victim was unlucky, follish, or just disliked.

Of course by your actions you may have established a bit of a reputation as a hothead, everyone will be wathching you and if you continue to inflict damage compensation may be come harder as the relations between your two clans worsen. Remember the clan is responsible for the actions of all its members. we don;t care if Braggi is a hothead, keep him under control, becuase he has put to many of our herders flat onteir back for a week and used up a lot of healing.

A lot of Icelandic saga are like this. Everyone tries to get on with the troublemaker of reform him at first but over time the situation deteriorates.

When you raid a hostile clan, your already at a bad point. The cattle raid is a chance to show them up, but it also likely to lead to inceased violence and deaths.This time the deaths won't be compensated with anything othert than blood. And blood leads to blood.

>This sort of "friendly" raiding can be contrasted with the behavior
of War Clans and especially the Tarsh Exiles (yea, Unspoken Word!) who raid as an important part of their economy... These clans are more likely to ignore lawsuits, kill on raids, and generally behave badly<

Though like all raiders there is a cost-reward equation. If I can intimidate you into giving me tribute instead of killing you I gain what I want at a lower cost, and increase the chance you will be around to provide again next year. Think Magnificent Seven or Vikings and you'll ge the picture.

But yes, I'm less likely to compensate you if I beleive that you have little chance of harming me in a feud.

Also remember that one aspect of a feud is attrition. Because feuds tend to be a cycle of killings and counter-killings the team playing defense has to keep up an increased watch, at a increased cost. The team on the offense, just needs to muster enough troops for one raid. Eventually clans with crops or herds need to settle feuds because being on a war ffooting for half the year is draining.

Ian Cooper

Powered by hypermail