[DitV] Non-pathetic Stewards
Motipha:
I'm not sure if this is within the power of the Steward, but excommunication? Especially in small and isolated communities, being cast out, even just on a spiritual basis, is pretty heavy. Being declared no longer on of the true faith is definitely going to rock the boat, but good. Your neighbours will no longer speak to you, your FAMILY no longer will speak to you, you can't get any help from anyone, you're being treated like a perversion of nature.
If this is something that the Steward can do, then this is definitely Big Guns. But perhaps I am ascribing the Steward too much power. This could very easily be something that is beyond their scope. If it is, the lesser is still possible: being kept isolated, like you have a contagious disease, could have much the same effect. And as Shawn I said, if it doesn't work, then you have a town that needs some intervention but bad.
Noclue:
So, there are two assumptions in this thread that I find interesting and which I essentially reject. The first is that if a Steward is competent he wouldn't need the Dogs to fix his problems, which implies that a competent person is one who behaves like a Dog. I don't necessarily equate the ability to impose order and compliance with competent governance.
The second assumption is that there is some objective criteria by which the players can define the Dog's authority and the Steward's authority such that they overlap and any particular situation will by definition fall within one or the other's purview. Again, if this becomes important in your game, I think it is something that the characters should have opinions about and express them through raises and sees at the table.
Noclue:
That should have read "such that they DON'T overlap"
Neil the Wimp:
Shawn, Motipha,
Thanks for the suggestions. They're good ones. Interestingly, if the branch Steward bring social pressure from the community to bear on the sinner, that makes the problem spread out from the one family to affect the congregation as a whole. That brings it into the remit of the Dogs.
James,
Thanks for articulating the assumptions. That's what I'm trying to figure out. I don't think that Stewards have to behave like Dogs; what I'm trying to figure out is how they should behave in extremis. As for overlapping stewardship, the reason for making a fuss about it in this discussion is to concentrate on what the Steward should do, rather than having the Stewards simply pass the buck to the Dogs. I agree that, in a game, the lines should be unclear and subject to possible conflicts.
I think that the conclusion we've come to is that the Branch Steward can persuade, cajole, and influence the families in his Branch to make them change their ways. If that's not enough to make the really recalcitrant, the Steward much continue to try, but the Dogs may intervene and take more drastic action.
Neil.
Neil.
lumpley:
So the thing to do now is to take it to the town creation rules, right? Create a town with a competent, on-the-ball steward that nevertheless goes to hate and murder. If you fell like posting it here for us, do!
-Vincent
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page