I agree on the first part, but much less convinced of the second. I urge you to consider that the first part of your sentence can be true without requiring the second, and it might be more fun if that is the case.
>If you don't use the Brithini caste system, then there are likely a
>lot of spells that Zzabur created that you can't use. But that
>doesn't mean people couldn't figure out how to create the same
>effect with a different spell - it just means that those millenia
>worth of Brithini intellectual endeavors are of limited use.
And I kind of think the opposite - that the Brithini spells, while intended to be cast only by zzaburi, are more concerned directly with elements and powers and pure abstractions than spells derived only from the carefully restricted, and heavily socially mediated, lessons of the Abiding Book.
The whole point of the Abiding Book is that restricts itself to what is right. While Zzabur created caste, he was rather the pragmatist.
>
>> And pointless, because it doesn't solve the problem - the issue of
>> 'why don't zzaburi overthrow the talars?' then becomes 'why don't the
>> clever zzaburi cleverly redefine the caste rules to enable them to
>> overthrow the talars?' - and given that zzaburi have done so at least
>> once (Valkaro) it is clearly possible, which just gets us back to the
>> starting point.
>
>Let's be more precise in our terminology. Why don't the Brithini
>Zzaburi overthrow the Talars? Then they wouldn't be Zzaburi anymore,
>simple as that. Everyone understands that.
Yes. No one doubts that the Brithini are a special case. As far as we can tell, immmortality depends on caste - and I think that this is the result of Brithini magical rites etc that depend on proper following of caste rules to be effective. So the Brithini have an incredibly strong incentive to obey their caste rules.
(as far as I know it has never been made clear whether Brithini perform specific magical rites to maintain their immortality, or whether it is more intrinsic to Brithini life, but not sure it is relevant to the point here - in either case, immortality depends on caste)
But the question is whether modern Rokari could do the same. THe Rokari aren't immortal anyway, so the reasons why they follow caste are different.
>One by-product of this is it creates a confusion between zzaburi
>(sorcery specialist) and zzaburi (the caste). Hrestoli believed it
>was possible to be a zzaburi (sorcery specialist) without keeping
>the restrictions of zzaburi (the caste). The Brithini disagree. Many
>ancient Brithini spells contained restrictions like: "this spell
>enables the zzaburi to enhance the Death nature of a weapon wielded
>by a horali."
I think I am a whole lot less convinced that the zzaburi spells include that sort of restriction intrinsic to the spell.
For one thing, it seems to be undermine the whole conception of Brithini sorcery being very pure, and very based on Elements and Powers. 'horali' and 'zzaburi' are not elements or powers!
For another, it just isn't as interesting, essentially sucking all the interesting drama out of the Brithini. I'd much rather that Brithini Zzaburites are fully capable of violating caste restrictions with their spells, and must spend millenia carefully avoiding doing so. Much as the talars can given orders to do the wrong thing, it seems right that zzaburites can choose to cast the wrong spells at any point (paying a heavy cost to do so, of course).
For another, it doesn't seem to mesh well with what we know of Zzaburs creation of said magic. Zzabur is said to have invented combat magic in order to defeat a foe in hand to hand combat. Of course, Zzabur himself is a both a special case personally (as an Eranschula) and not above a little bit of 'do as I say, not as I do', but still - it seems suggestive that his magic was designed to be usable on the caster at its creation.
And it doesn't mesh with what we know of Brithini magic. We know the Brithini have combat magic that works to violate caste restrictions - the Forbidden Spell of Urostio (hoping I have the right name there) that is used to cause Dronars to ignore caste restrictions and fight berserkerly. Of course, you could argue that it is a special case and all - but even so, its existence implies that if there are caste restrictions in built to Brithini magic, they don't go that deep, and that Brithini are perfectly capable of casting magic that violates caste rules (and simply don't choose to do so, because it has terrible consequences).
And it doesn't seem to mesh well at all with the way magical knowledge is shared back and forth between the Enrovalini, Waertagi, Vadeli, Tadeniti, Mostali etc in early Danmalastan history. Despite Zzaburs claims, Brithini magic is not pure Enrovalini magic created by Zzabur, so why should it all embody Zzaburs ideas about caste?
And for a last thing - it would straight out be less useful. You'd have to add a lot of restrictions (to what is basic Elemental/Power magic) in order to make it magic that you couldn't use on potential allies. Zzabur collaborates with other powers fairly often (and of course the Vadeli, and probably Kachasti, etc do so frequently). Why make magic that doesn't work on your allies?
So we have two options here:
- that the Brithini combat magic has caste restrictions 'baked in' to
magic otherwise concerned with Elements and Powers etc, Zzabur having
altered his original magic to add this, and then certain spells that
violated those restrictions were created, even though forbidden
- or the Brithini combat magic is inherently somewhat flexible, but
their caste rules (which are also important magically, for
immortality in particular) strongly restrict the ways they can be
used.
>If the local community doesn't have a restricted group of sorcery
>specialists that follow enough of the caste restrictions to meet the
>ancient Brithini definition of zzaburi, they can't use the spell.
On a strict interpretation of caste restrictions, of course no non-Brithini community meets those restrictions. That is why they aren't immortal.
So we know that the definitions are not the strict Brithini ones. And I don't think that the restrictions really have much to do with whether the individual in question is in a caste called zzaburi or a caste called horali, but rather are much more specific.
For example, I think the idea of blood leading to ritual impurity is a good one. I think there are many examples - particular metals that certain castes can touch, a rule against talars or zzabur covering their hands in earth, places only certain castes can walk, etc. In the centuries since, perhaps other societies have changed those rules or relaxed them, and the rules followed by modern castes are different - sufficient to caste their own grimoires (obviously, you wouldn't even write a spell into a grimoire if you couldn't) but perhaps not Brithini ones (at least without a lot of study).
> If they don't have a group of military specialists that can meet
>the definition of horali, they don't have anyone they can cast the
>spell for. Have fun trying to figure out by trial and error what
>works.
I think designing your spells to work this way makes just about as much sense as making offensive fireballs that only work on opposing horali. It violates both Occams Razor (if we can design a working society/magic system that doesn't need that sort of rule, it is better) and common sense (why make your spells less useful?).
(of course, there is the possibility that the Vadeli not crafting their spells with this sort of nonsense is why they were able to effectively create alliances and thus consistently defeat the Enrovalini again and again until Zzabur was forced to blow up a chunk of the world again, but that would imply that the Enrovalini were pretty stupid)
>The God Learner era grimoires are remarkable for their scientific
>approach. The best likely read like something from Aristotle. They
>were detailed, logical, and covered a remarkable amount of ground
>(as much as could be expected from about 500 years of remarkable
>intellectual ferment). Of course, most of that knowledge was lost in
>the horrendous downfall of the MSE, the destruction of the God
>Learners' centers of learning, and the general reaction against
>anything God Learn for the last 600 years.
I agree that the God Learners have many years of magical experimentation to learn things that the Brithini didn't.
But I think this mostly means they know far more about the other Otherworlds, and experimental sorcery, and sorcerous techniques from other cultures.
The Brithini have spent the same centuries carefully refining their own magical techniques that are caste allowed. Barmalan combat magic is Zzabur endorsed Zzaburite magic.
So, while I think that in general the God Learners are more effective magicians, with a far wider range of techniques, and often able to combine those techniques in interesting ways, and in general more effective at magic - that doesn't mean that the God Learners are also better at plain old combat sorcery.
In particular, I think the whole argument that the Brithini are simply unable to adapt the magic they invented to avoid the caste restrictions they built in to them, but the God Learners (with centuries of separation from the original designers, etc) understand them better, is pretty hard to swallow. The God Learners overall know a lot more about magic than the Enrovalini. But I don't think that means the God Learners knew more about Enrovalini magic than the Enrovalini.
And it works the other way too - modern Malkioni are the heirs to centuries of magical experimentation that the Brithini would not have contemplated. But modern Malkioni are also heirs to centuries of wars over faith, theological debate, struggles for control over the direction of faith - things alien to Brithini, who rigid faith needs mostly only the most simple and effective means to keep it pure (loss of immortality is a very big stick to wield). I think modern Malkioni are far better at keeping tight control over what spells are castable by their wizards, and writing restrictions on hehaviour into their very grimoires, than the Brithini are. That is exactly why there are different versions of the Abiding Book, because each one is carefully crafted to define what exactly is right thought, and what spells are written therein.
>So how does this all help me in my Western games? First, it means
>that it is really up to the players and the Narrator whether the
>wizard's grimoire requires strict adherence to caste or not. If it
>does, the wizard better belong to a Rokari or other Brithini wannabe
>community (or at least act like it). It not, then maybe it is an Old
>or New Hrestoli grimoire, or maybe one of those rare (and usually
>forbidden) God Learner or Autarchy grimoires.
Odd as it may seem, when it comes to actual application in game, I don't think we differ that much. I think that the Brithini may have a very good idea what works and what doesn't, and it will be a lot more specific than simply what caste is what - but they don't necessarily write it in every grimoire, rather they write their grimoires for an intended audience of zzaburi who have been studying it for centuries and leave out a lot of details. So if you aren't an immortal sorcerer and expert in Brithini magic, it might not work for you, and the easiest way to try to make it work is to behave as much like the intended caster and target as possible and hope.
In short, I think that when spells 'require correct caste behaviour', mostly that is an abstraction - actually the spells in question require quite specific things, a very specific set of things, that happens to align with caste behaviour in that particular case.
But I also think most Brithini magic is probably fairly pure, and not overly concerned with caste rules. Most of it is Elemental or Power based, predicated on fairly deep abstract ideas about the world. If anything, I think most Brithini magic is less caste restricted than those that follow. So, in short, I probably am looking for a lot of the same tropes to use in my games - but I tend to cast Brithini Grimoires in a different role. If we want a grimoire usable only by arch conservatives, we already have the Sharp Abiding Book (and potential associated works, and saints, etc).
This doesn't mean I think Brithini are less caste restricted - the need to maintain immortality ensures that they are very caste restricted. Rather, I think quite often a Hrestoli who knew enough to learn magic from a Brithini grimoire could pretty much immediately apply it in ways that would give a Brithini the horrors (such as casting a spell on their own sword and using it to chop a troll in two, splattering themselves with impure troll blood).
>Run with the roleplaying consequences of the nature of the grimoire.
>There are plenty of plot twists that can come from a character
>needing to follow strict caste restrictions if his magic is going to
>work. Similarly, there are plenty of plots twists that can develop
>if the character's main grimoire is something considered abjectly
>evil by just about every Western society.
Absolutely. But we don't need to assume that caste restrictions are bakedinto the spells directly to get that consequences.
>
>> In addition, I think the whole idea of a bonus for correct
>> application undermines the whole idea of sorcery being very specific
>> and exact. It should work, or not. A sorcery spell should be 'bless
>> weapon' or 'bless horali weapon' not 'bless weapon but that works
>> particulary well if the weapon happens to be held by a horal'.
>
>Yes that is correct.
Which I am taking that you don't much like Peters proposed idea of spells that work a bit better if caste restrictions are followed any more than I do, but for the opposite reason? (I don't think caste restrictions should be mixed in with combat magic, you think it it should and it should be absolute working or not?)
Cheers
David
Powered by hypermail