Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GoldenIslandsonYouTube

If I ever acquire enough money to buy Warhammer this is how I would change Warhammer Fantasy.

Recommended Posts

 

I'm glad you liked it. :)

 

In regards to the Lady of the Lake I haven't made up my mind yet. I'm thinking of it either being Wood Elf shenanigans, an actual goddess/spirit - could be one who is otherwise forgotten, an aspect of

another goddess, something else or different things. If its different things then it would be many different factions trying to get a piece of the "Lady of the Lake" business going on. So essentially it could be a actual goddess that showed herself to Gilles and his companions, the Asrai have figured out that they can use this religion to manipulate the Bretonnians without them having some kind of tabs on the goddess herself and so on. I haven't really decided to for sure how I intend to run this and how prominent damsels and the Lady will be in the center of the campaign.

 

Yes, in general peasants are very, very oppressed. An example would be this.

 

"Noble X travels through Noble Y's land. At an inn a peasant laughs so loud that Noble X is bothered and so tells his men-at-arms to knock out the peasant's teeth so that he will stop laughing. A fight ensures when a peasant urges the others to fights and not just take it. In the end one of Noble X's men-at-arms and four peasants are dead on the floor, with a couple more bleeding. The result of this is that Noble Y forbidds Noble X to enter his lands and demands compansation for the peasants killed, the inn keeper is given crippling fine for the sake of owning the location where the fight broke out and the peasant who urged the others to fight is hanged and his family is thrown off Noble Y's lands."

 

No side systematically treats the peasants better than the other. It comes down to individual nobles and often individual peasants. A noble might think that this peasant's grandfather saved my father's life during a skirmish with some Greenskins, so now I'll give him a more favorable treatment. Or this peasants (also known as a merchant) provides the money so that I can live a noble lifestyle despite the wasteland that is my fief. Or this inn keeper has a really good stew and is all polite to me so whenver I visit I give maybe twice or thrice more than the actual price for lodgings and food for me and my men. That kind of stuff.

 

Magic is the same as usual. The damsels wields the magic and magicians from outside Bretonnia will do well to watch themselves very, very closely when in the country.

 

No gunpowder in Bretonnia. Using or even carrying a gunpowder weapon is a sign of either dishonor or rebellious activites or intentions that will likely get you into trouble.

 

Foreign diplomacy is as current except that both the Empire and also Estalia took a serious beating, far worse in the case of the empire, than in the canon Storm of Chaos, so the Empire still haven't recovered or re-populated much of the northern parts of the country. 

 

 

 

In my mind a "good" god or even neutral would never accept or bestow powers on such corrput beings as the knights of bretonnia so therefore they either need to be the real deal, or it has to be some other force, for example the elven god using the humans as meat shields.

 

As I read the 6th edition and onward lore of bretonnia there is no way a peasant could ever go to an inn the 9/10th tax system means he needs to work every waking hour and can do nothing more, there is no spare time, there is nothing but work, eat, ****. sleep and die.

 

For me in my mind there would a be a huge advantage in treating the peasants better, if there wasn't the oppression and the 90% tax system then the peasants would have more money over to reinvest into his "business" thereby increasing it thereby giving larger "profits" which would mean a larger population which means more money and more soldiers to draw on.

 

Both magic and gunpowder would give what ever noble a huge advantage over his neighbours in my mind. Magic being more risky.

 

Anyway good stuff =)

Edited by GoldenIslandsonYouTube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm glad you liked it. :)

 

In regards to the Lady of the Lake I haven't made up my mind yet. I'm thinking of it either being Wood Elf shenanigans, an actual goddess/spirit - could be one who is otherwise forgotten, an aspect of

another goddess, something else or different things. If its different things then it would be many different factions trying to get a piece of the "Lady of the Lake" business going on. So essentially it could be a actual goddess that showed herself to Gilles and his companions, the Asrai have figured out that they can use this religion to manipulate the Bretonnians without them having some kind of tabs on the goddess herself and so on. I haven't really decided to for sure how I intend to run this and how prominent damsels and the Lady will be in the center of the campaign.

 

Yes, in general peasants are very, very oppressed. An example would be this.

 

"Noble X travels through Noble Y's land. At an inn a peasant laughs so loud that Noble X is bothered and so tells his men-at-arms to knock out the peasant's teeth so that he will stop laughing. A fight ensures when a peasant urges the others to fights and not just take it. In the end one of Noble X's men-at-arms and four peasants are dead on the floor, with a couple more bleeding. The result of this is that Noble Y forbidds Noble X to enter his lands and demands compansation for the peasants killed, the inn keeper is given crippling fine for the sake of owning the location where the fight broke out and the peasant who urged the others to fight is hanged and his family is thrown off Noble Y's lands."

 

No side systematically treats the peasants better than the other. It comes down to individual nobles and often individual peasants. A noble might think that this peasant's grandfather saved my father's life during a skirmish with some Greenskins, so now I'll give him a more favorable treatment. Or this peasants (also known as a merchant) provides the money so that I can live a noble lifestyle despite the wasteland that is my fief. Or this inn keeper has a really good stew and is all polite to me so whenver I visit I give maybe twice or thrice more than the actual price for lodgings and food for me and my men. That kind of stuff.

 

Magic is the same as usual. The damsels wields the magic and magicians from outside Bretonnia will do well to watch themselves very, very closely when in the country.

 

No gunpowder in Bretonnia. Using or even carrying a gunpowder weapon is a sign of either dishonor or rebellious activites or intentions that will likely get you into trouble.

 

Foreign diplomacy is as current except that both the Empire and also Estalia took a serious beating, far worse in the case of the empire, than in the canon Storm of Chaos, so the Empire still haven't recovered or re-populated much of the northern parts of the country. 

 

 

 

In my mind a "good" god or even neutral would never accept or bestow powers on such corrput beings as the knights of bretonnia so therefore they either need to be the real deal, or it has to be some other force, for example the elven god using the humans as meat shields.

 

As I read the 6th edition and onward lore of bretonnia there is no way a peasant could ever go to an inn the 9/10th tax system means he needs to work every waking hour and can do nothing more, there is no spare time, there is nothing but work, eat, ****. sleep and die.

 

For me in my mind there would a be a huge advantage in treating the peasants better, if there wasn't the oppression and the 90% tax system then the peasants would have more money over to reinvest into his "business" thereby increasing it thereby giving larger "profits" which would mean a larger population which means more money and more soldiers to draw on.

 

Both magic and gunpowder would give what ever noble a huge advantage over his neighbours in my mind. Magic being more risky.

 

Anyway good stuff =)

 

 

Thank you for the comments! :)

 

As I see it...

 

In my mind a god adhering to 21st century morality would absolutely not support the Bretonnian nobility. But then again the Old World does not have 21st century morality and so a goddess that opposes Chaos could absolutely support the order imposed by the Bretonnian nobility.

 

In regards to taxation I agree that 90% tax is insane and would never work, and that's something I will change. However also remember that Bretonnian is not an actual representation of either the Middle Ages or Medieval France. Its essentially a caricature or satire on those things. But the core thing, that is an oppressive class society with stricts borders between classes, is something that should be preserved to keep Warhammer, well, Warhammer. So essentially while some modifications can be made, we must not lose sight of the grimdark core of the setting.

 

Problem is that a stronger peasant class will lead to more push from them against the nobles and eventually pushing back feudalism or severely undermine the nobility's authority. So as I see it, the nobility would have a passing advantage from treating the peasants better, but a permanent shift in power away from themselves, and probably produce either a situation like the Empire where the nobility are losing out to the urban elites, or more and stronger peasant rebellions against the nobility's authority by a growing and more powerful peasantry.

 

Also in regards to magic, the damsels are kind of similar to the Empire in that magic is controlled and managed and not everyone can get their own magician to cause havoc all over the country. And with gunpowder, sure in the short term it can give individual nobles an advantage, but soon everyone left will have them and its only a matter of (a short) time before gunpowder weapons comes into the hands of the peasants and so erodes the nobility's position and make rebellions more difficult to put down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Thank you for the comments! :)

 

As I see it...

 

In my mind a god adhering to 21st century morality would absolutely not support the Bretonnian nobility. But then again the Old World does not have 21st century morality and so a goddess that opposes Chaos could absolutely support the order imposed by the Bretonnian nobility.

 

In regards to taxation I agree that 90% tax is insane and would never work, and that's something I will change. However also remember that Bretonnian is not an actual representation of either the Middle Ages or Medieval France. Its essentially a caricature or satire on those things. But the core thing, that is an oppressive class society with stricts borders between classes, is something that should be preserved to keep Warhammer, well, Warhammer. So essentially while some modifications can be made, we must not lose sight of the grimdark core of the setting.

 

Problem is that a stronger peasant class will lead to more push from them against the nobles and eventually pushing back feudalism or severely undermine the nobility's authority. So as I see it, the nobility would have a passing advantage from treating the peasants better, but a permanent shift in power away from themselves, and probably produce either a situation like the Empire where the nobility are losing out to the urban elites, or more and stronger peasant rebellions against the nobility's authority by a growing and more powerful peasantry.

 

Also in regards to magic, the damsels are kind of similar to the Empire in that magic is controlled and managed and not everyone can get their own magician to cause havoc all over the country. And with gunpowder, sure in the short term it can give individual nobles an advantage, but soon everyone left will have them and its only a matter of (a short) time before gunpowder weapons comes into the hands of the peasants and so erodes the nobility's position and make rebellions more difficult to put down.

 

 

 

21st century morality?

 

No ALL human morality, no one wants to be oppressed, you yourself admit it yourself but do not see it, you write how nobles would worry about peasant revolutions, why would they worry if it was 21st century morality ?

 

No one wants to be oppressed

 

Also on a small side not, it is interesting how you so easily think out ways to oppress people and how to prevent the oppressed for raising up. But of course your avatar is that of a Chaos worshipper so...

 

Yes the brets in 6th edition and onward were of course a satire of the French, and yes the 90% is a twist of the historical 1/10th. 

 

But "we" do not agree on the grimdark. I do not like it at all, for me it could never work, but of course in your version you can have it all you like ;)

 

Your mind is tilted towards oppression you have trouble imagining anything else. If peasants were treated fairly they wouldn't revolt, because for the very reason they were treated fairly. Also from my point of view, the better peasants are treated the stronger and richer that noble would be, he would have far more subjects to call on, a greater "industrial base" more food more money more everything.

 

In the official warhammer lore about the brets and magic, the lady of the lake controls all magic in Bretonnia through the Fay Enchantress, all males magically gifted are as children taken away to serve as slaves for the wood elves.

 

The way you want things which is close to the way GW changed Bretonnia in the 6th edition. And as I have written in my big thing, it would not work.

 

The lady of the lake would only be worshipped by the oppressive nobles, and no "good" god would allow or tolerate the oppression so therefore the god must be either evil or another god masquerading as the lady for example the Elven god using the humans as meatshields.

 

 

The peasants would not worship her, they would worship something else which means this something else would have the power of that worship, and would want to protect its worshippers.

 

In the warhammer world there is Verena the goddess of knowledge, law and order and is interested what is "fair". Verena is married to the god of Death, Morr, they have 2 daughters, Myrmidia the goddess of military strategy and tactics, and Shallya the goddess of healing and mercy.

 

In the official version of warhammer some do worship Verena in Bretonnia. And they would of course probably do it in your version to.

 

NOW! 

 

If a noble worships Verena then that noble would install "fair" laws and promote knowledge and learning both magical and scientifically, because the laws are "fair" the peasants would grow healthy and numerous, and they would like living there because the laws were "fair". In that nobles land there would be gunpowder and there would be magic and that noble would have a huge advantage over his neighbours. That noble would also most likely have Priests of Myrmidia, giving the noble access to good strategic and military thinking and have Priests of Shallya increasing the lifespan of the nobles subjects and their quality of life, in addition there would be priests of Morr giving a level of protection against the undead. All of this combined would make that noble a formidable player and if the noble is smart and does not actively provoke anyone but just sticks to thing happening inside the nobles domain, then sooner or later, assuming the whole family for generations continue the worship of Verena, sooner or later that noble /s(family) would be the most powerful one in all of Bretonnia. And if the noble never attacks anyone and only defends, then those who do attack they will lose their lands to the noble allowing the nobles domain to grow and eventually rule all of Bretonnia.

 

Anyway those are my thoughts

 

And again, interesting that you so naturally know how to oppress people and think like an oppressor, it comes to you like breathing :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Thank you for the comments! :)

 

As I see it...

 

In my mind a god adhering to 21st century morality would absolutely not support the Bretonnian nobility. But then again the Old World does not have 21st century morality and so a goddess that opposes Chaos could absolutely support the order imposed by the Bretonnian nobility.

 

In regards to taxation I agree that 90% tax is insane and would never work, and that's something I will change. However also remember that Bretonnian is not an actual representation of either the Middle Ages or Medieval France. Its essentially a caricature or satire on those things. But the core thing, that is an oppressive class society with stricts borders between classes, is something that should be preserved to keep Warhammer, well, Warhammer. So essentially while some modifications can be made, we must not lose sight of the grimdark core of the setting.

 

Problem is that a stronger peasant class will lead to more push from them against the nobles and eventually pushing back feudalism or severely undermine the nobility's authority. So as I see it, the nobility would have a passing advantage from treating the peasants better, but a permanent shift in power away from themselves, and probably produce either a situation like the Empire where the nobility are losing out to the urban elites, or more and stronger peasant rebellions against the nobility's authority by a growing and more powerful peasantry.

 

Also in regards to magic, the damsels are kind of similar to the Empire in that magic is controlled and managed and not everyone can get their own magician to cause havoc all over the country. And with gunpowder, sure in the short term it can give individual nobles an advantage, but soon everyone left will have them and its only a matter of (a short) time before gunpowder weapons comes into the hands of the peasants and so erodes the nobility's position and make rebellions more difficult to put down.

 

 

 

21st century morality?

 

No ALL human morality, no one wants to be oppressed, you yourself admit it yourself but do not see it, you write how nobles would worry about peasant revolutions, why would they worry if it was 21st century morality ?

 

No one wants to be oppressed

 

Also on a small side not, it is interesting how you so easily think out ways to oppress people and how to prevent the oppressed for raising up. But of course your avatar is that of a Chaos worshipper so...

 

Yes the brets in 6th edition and onward were of course a satire of the French, and yes the 90% is a twist of the historical 1/10th. 

 

But "we" do not agree on the grimdark. I do not like it at all, for me it could never work, but of course in your version you can have it all you like ;)

 

Your mind is tilted towards oppression you have trouble imagining anything else. If peasants were treated fairly they wouldn't revolt, because for the very reason they were treated fairly. Also from my point of view, the better peasants are treated the stronger and richer that noble would be, he would have far more subjects to call on, a greater "industrial base" more food more money more everything.

 

In the official warhammer lore about the brets and magic, the lady of the lake controls all magic in Bretonnia through the Fay Enchantress, all males magically gifted are as children taken away to serve as slaves for the wood elves.

 

The way you want things which is close to the way GW changed Bretonnia in the 6th edition. And as I have written in my big thing, it would not work.

 

The lady of the lake would only be worshipped by the oppressive nobles, and no "good" god would allow or tolerate the oppression so therefore the god must be either evil or another god masquerading as the lady for example the Elven god using the humans as meatshields.

 

 

The peasants would not worship her, they would worship something else which means this something else would have the power of that worship, and would want to protect its worshippers.

 

In the warhammer world there is Verena the goddess of knowledge, law and order and is interested what is "fair". Verena is married to the god of Death, Morr, they have 2 daughters, Myrmidia the goddess of military strategy and tactics, and Shallya the goddess of healing and mercy.

 

In the official version of warhammer some do worship Verena in Bretonnia. And they would of course probably do it in your version to.

 

NOW! 

 

If a noble worships Verena then that noble would install "fair" laws and promote knowledge and learning both magical and scientifically, because the laws are "fair" the peasants would grow healthy and numerous, and they would like living there because the laws were "fair". In that nobles land there would be gunpowder and there would be magic and that noble would have a huge advantage over his neighbours. That noble would also most likely have Priests of Myrmidia, giving the noble access to good strategic and military thinking and have Priests of Shallya increasing the lifespan of the nobles subjects and their quality of life, in addition there would be priests of Morr giving a level of protection against the undead. All of this combined would make that noble a formidable player and if the noble is smart and does not actively provoke anyone but just sticks to thing happening inside the nobles domain, then sooner or later, assuming the whole family for generations continue the worship of Verena, sooner or later that noble /s(family) would be the most powerful one in all of Bretonnia. And if the noble never attacks anyone and only defends, then those who do attack they will lose their lands to the noble allowing the nobles domain to grow and eventually rule all of Bretonnia.

 

Anyway those are my thoughts

 

And again, interesting that you so naturally know how to oppress people and think like an oppressor, it comes to you like breathing :P

 

 

Yes, I'd say that belief that all oppression is wrong is essentially a 21st century morality in that oppression of "them" would be a bad thing. The American revolutionaries were ok with oppressing Blacks and Natives, the French revolutionaries were ok with oppressing everyone who didn't buy their take on liberty and so on. You are right that no one wants to be repressed but historically that has not been translated into it being wrong for "us" to oppress "them".

 

The reason I know a bit about oppression is that I am interesting in history, and since most of history have features oppression, I have read some of it.

 

I am happy we agree to disagree. :)

 

Problem is that for the first part what is "treated fair"? The Bretonnian nobility certainly thinks they are treating the peasants fairly. But you are wrong in that a stronger peasantry would be beneficient for the noble in the long run. Because in the long run a stronger peasantry would gain the strength to abolish the artistocracy, fair or not.

 

Well, I do try to keep myself close to the canon Bretonnia because otherwise I would have a rebellion on my hands from my players. And the Lady can certainly be good, to the Bretonnian nobility. Must gods do try to be good to their followers and not always very nice to the rest who are not their followers.

 

The issue with Verena being worshipped is that like everything in Bretonnia, it depends on class. So while Verena is worshipped, she is worshipped by the peasants while the nobility turn to the Lady of the Lake. But in my mind your argument for this Verena worshipping Bretonnoan noble does not seem to take reality into accord. A noble that does things like that will challenge the social, political and economic order of Bretonnia and so would end up with the noble being outcast, isolated and probably enjoy the censure of the damsals at which point his neighbors will band together to destroy him with overwhelming power, long before he can reap the full benefits of his progressive thinking.

 

Understanding how historically oppression has worked comes from reading history, which is littered with oppression from start to finish. ;)

 

And to make a point; I do not support oppression based on class, religion, sexuality, race, political belief or anything else. Everyone should just try to get along.

 

EDITED: Clarified a Point or two.

Edited by Gurkhal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GoldenIslandsonYouTube really seems to have an issue with oppression... almost bordering on a personal attack there against poor Gurhkal. I think I'm now starting to understand the reasons behind all the suggested lore changes ;)

 

In anyhow, you said "No one wants to be oppressed" Island... I would argue you're wrong. Not everything is so black and white as you seem to be making out, and the degree of oppression is a factor in this. It's a very idealistic viewpoint that you're taking that doesn't really apply to medieval terms.

 

Some elements of the lower classes appreciate law and order to the point that removing the establishment would be, in their eyes, detrimental to their livelihood. Tyranny is not so easy to analyze to the point that saying 'everyone' would rise up in rebellion. It really depends on how well the people are treated. Even living under a harsh tyrant, you'll get some peasants enjoying the current status quo. Because removing that status quo means anarchy. People are afraid of anarchy, and the uncertainty of what follows after it.

 

You got to look at it from a psychological viewpoint, specifically from the viewpoint of the working man. Rebellions mean war. War means strife, disease, hunger and huge resources of spent manpower. Not to mention roving bands of criminals doing as they please. Rebellions remove law and order of the establishment, or at least, in attempting to do so they put it under great stress. From the perspective of 'some' families, who enjoy the establishment despite whatever harsh conditions that befall them, fear what war might bring.

 

A tyrant who overtaxes his subjects will be unpopular, no doubt. But what of the other aspects? Does the tyrant provide adequate protection? Is he just in his dealings with criminals? Does the taxes go towards building institutions? My point; every tyrant has his supporters, even among his oppressed subjects.

 

When you remove that system, you remove meaning for the average peasant. Freedom is an alien concept to most medieval mindsets and usually only ever truly grasped by some unique individuals in history who get the ball rolling in rebellious movements. You may be surprised to know that in those times, people liked being 'led'.

 

I want to reiterate that I'm not saying that a blood thirsty hateful bastard of a tyrant is going to be loved by one and all; just that the idea of being universally hated is not true, as it doesn't exist. It's mathematically impossible.

 

And I believe Goldenisland that you disregard the symbiosis relationship that the peasantry and the nobility have.

 

To give a rather hazy example from true history; one of the Byzantine Emperors (I couldn't remember which one exactly although it may be Basil I) was renowned for being far too humble for his own good, which would prove disastrous for his popularity. There was a particular story connected to him in relation to how he saw himself as an 'equal' to the lower classes. Naturally this did not sit well with his court, the nobility, and surprisingly, the peasantry. I believe he was popular in the social reforms he conducted and such, but casting himself as equal with the common man did not sit well. His title was divine, given to him by right of god... so when he decided to climb down the social class and demanded that he not be bowed to by the common folk, this upset the establishment and the belief that their ruler was divine. T

 

That's removing a very comfortable belief and replacing it with an uncomfortable concept for the peasantry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Yes, I'd say that belief that all oppression is wrong is essentially a 21st century morality in that oppression of "them" would be a bad thing. The American revolutionaries were ok with oppressing Blacks and Natives, the French revolutionaries were ok with oppressing everyone who didn't buy their take on liberty and so on. You are right that no one wants to be repressed but historically that has not been translated into it being wrong for "us" to oppress "them".

 

The reason I know a bit about oppression is that I am interesting in history, and since most of history have features oppression, I have read some of it.

 

I am happy we agree to disagree. :)

 

Problem is that for the first part what is "treated fair"? The Bretonnian nobility certainly thinks they are treating the peasants fairly. But you are wrong in that a stronger peasantry would be beneficient for the noble in the long run. Because in the long run a stronger peasantry would gain the strength to abolish the artistocracy, fair or not.

 

Well, I do try to keep myself close to the canon Bretonnia because otherwise I would have a rebellion on my hands from my players. And the Lady can certainly be good, to the Bretonnian nobility. Must gods do try to be good to their followers and not always very nice to the rest who are not their followers.

 

The issue with Verena being worshipped is that like everything in Bretonnia, it depends on class. So while Verena is worshipped, she is worshipped by the peasants while the nobility turn to the Lady of the Lake. But in my mind your argument for this Verena worshipping Bretonnoan noble does not seem to take reality into accord. A noble that does things like that will challenge the social, political and economic order of Bretonnia and so would end up with the noble being outcast, isolated and probably enjoy the censure of the damsals at which point his neighbors will band together to destroy him with overwhelming power, long before he can reap the full benefits of his progressive thinking.

 

Understanding how historically oppression has worked comes from reading history, which is littered with oppression from start to finish. ;)

 

And to make a point; I do not support oppression based on class, religion, sexuality, race, political belief or anything else. Everyone should just try to get along.

 

EDITED: Clarified a Point or two.

 

 

No person irregardless in what age they were born would ok with being put in chains and branded, you would not. It has always been morally wrong, it was done before because people could get away with it. You yourself would of course object if someone put you in chains and branded you, you yourself would not be happy about that. It is not 21st century morality but human morality since the beginning of humanity, people who are enslaved will try to escape, will try to hit back, if possible but they will not think it is totally ok and be happy with it.

 

The nobles in Bretonnia are corrupt in the 6th edition and onwards, 

 

A noble would get a huge benefit from treating his peasants better because there would be healthier peasants, more money more peasants and more soldiers, there would be higher quality of skilled labour available which all translates into concrete military advantages. A good ruler would not be overthrown because the rule was fair, there would be no need to do it.

 

The lady can be good to the nobles yes but that does not mean the Lady is good, if anything in the 6th edition and onwards she can basically be seen as some half chaos god. To allow such oppression and give her blessing to the oppressors means that she is indeed evil.

 

About the 1 noble who follows Verena, your assumption about the neighbours rising up I believe is wrong. 

 

How would they know, news travel very slowly, it would take years before anything is known and even then it would only be rumours, and even if something gets out at most it would be how peasants are treated a bit better. It would be very difficult indeed for any other noble to find out what is going on and have the full picture.

 

Knights rarely meet, and often only in battle defending against some enemy. If the noble does not invite another noble into the nobles domain then any type of interaction is unlikely.

 

The first to react, if it were ever to happen would be the intimidate neighbours and they might simply not care and even if they did to the point of an attack, for every year that goes by the Verena noble gets stronger and stronger.

 

The warhammer world is not the real world, in the warhammer world there are gods that can give people power, there is magic, that changes all the calculations.

 

As I have written, a person who oppress others would surly have no problem following chaos and would be very susceptible to chaos.

 

A person who is oppressed would seek divine aid to stop the oppression upon oneself and ones family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GoldenIslandsonYouTube really seems to have an issue with oppression... almost bordering on a personal attack there against poor Gurhkal. I think I'm now starting to understand the reasons behind all the suggested lore changes ;)

 

In anyhow, you said "No one wants to be oppressed" Island... I would argue you're wrong. Not everything is so black and white as you seem to be making out, and the degree of oppression is a factor in this. It's a very idealistic viewpoint that you're taking that doesn't really apply to medieval terms.

 

Some elements of the lower classes appreciate law and order to the point that removing the establishment would be, in their eyes, detrimental to their livelihood. Tyranny is not so easy to analyze to the point that saying 'everyone' would rise up in rebellion. It really depends on how well the people are treated. Even living under a harsh tyrant, you'll get some peasants enjoying the current status quo. Because removing that status quo means anarchy. People are afraid of anarchy, and the uncertainty of what follows after it.

 

You got to look at it from a psychological viewpoint, specifically from the viewpoint of the working man. Rebellions mean war. War means strife, disease, hunger and huge resources of spent manpower. Not to mention roving bands of criminals doing as they please. Rebellions remove law and order of the establishment, or at least, in attempting to do so they put it under great stress. From the perspective of 'some' families, who enjoy the establishment despite whatever harsh conditions that befall them, fear what war might bring.

 

A tyrant who overtaxes his subjects will be unpopular, no doubt. But what of the other aspects? Does the tyrant provide adequate protection? Is he just in his dealings with criminals? Does the taxes go towards building institutions? My point; every tyrant has his supporters, even among his oppressed subjects.

 

When you remove that system, you remove meaning for the average peasant. Freedom is an alien concept to most medieval mindsets and usually only ever truly grasped by some unique individuals in history who get the ball rolling in rebellious movements. You may be surprised to know that in those times, people liked being 'led'.

 

I want to reiterate that I'm not saying that a blood thirsty hateful bastard of a tyrant is going to be loved by one and all; just that the idea of being universally hated is not true, as it doesn't exist. It's mathematically impossible.

 

And I believe Goldenisland that you disregard the symbiosis relationship that the peasantry and the nobility have.

 

To give a rather hazy example from true history; one of the Byzantine Emperors (I couldn't remember which one exactly although it may be Basil I) was renowned for being far too humble for his own good, which would prove disastrous for his popularity. There was a particular story connected to him in relation to how he saw himself as an 'equal' to the lower classes. Naturally this did not sit well with his court, the nobility, and surprisingly, the peasantry. I believe he was popular in the social reforms he conducted and such, but casting himself as equal with the common man did not sit well. His title was divine, given to him by right of god... so when he decided to climb down the social class and demanded that he not be bowed to by the common folk, this upset the establishment and the belief that their ruler was divine. T

 

That's removing a very comfortable belief and replacing it with an uncomfortable concept for the peasantry.

 

No one wants to be oppressed

 

Just because you remove a tyrant does not mean there must be anarchy, law and order does not mean there has to be a tyrant just look at the world today, there is far less crime in less tyrannical countries than in countries where there are actual dictators. People from all those tyrannical countries would move if they could, just look at the emigration waves, people flee from tyrant countries to other countries, the only thing holding them back is money and not a lack of desire, they would move it the could but they can't.

 

In the warhammer world there are gods you can worship, there are gods of law and order Verena, gods of civilization, Verena and Myrmida and gods of Justice Verena

 

Your whole assumptions rests upon if a tyrant is removed there must be chaos and crime. I say no.

 

Especially in the warhammer world with many gods to worship. Just as I have described

 

In Bretonnia there is a 90% tax all of it goes to the noble to support his lifestyle.

Edited by GoldenIslandsonYouTube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
just look at the world today, there is far less crime in less tyrannical countries than in countries where there are actual dictators. People from all those tyrannical countries would move if they could, just look at the emigration waves, people flee from tyrant countries to other countries, the only thing holding them back is money and not a lack of desire, they would move it the could but they can't.

 

 

And thus, we come full circle, and back to the point I was making; you are comparing today's world and making a case for it against the medieval mindset. You simply cannot compare 21st century mentality with medieval/dark age mentality. They are incompatible. If you grasp that concept then you'll see where your argument falls apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Yes, I'd say that belief that all oppression is wrong is essentially a 21st century morality in that oppression of "them" would be a bad thing. The American revolutionaries were ok with oppressing Blacks and Natives, the French revolutionaries were ok with oppressing everyone who didn't buy their take on liberty and so on. You are right that no one wants to be repressed but historically that has not been translated into it being wrong for "us" to oppress "them".

 

The reason I know a bit about oppression is that I am interesting in history, and since most of history have features oppression, I have read some of it.

 

I am happy we agree to disagree. :)

 

Problem is that for the first part what is "treated fair"? The Bretonnian nobility certainly thinks they are treating the peasants fairly. But you are wrong in that a stronger peasantry would be beneficient for the noble in the long run. Because in the long run a stronger peasantry would gain the strength to abolish the artistocracy, fair or not.

 

Well, I do try to keep myself close to the canon Bretonnia because otherwise I would have a rebellion on my hands from my players. And the Lady can certainly be good, to the Bretonnian nobility. Must gods do try to be good to their followers and not always very nice to the rest who are not their followers.

 

The issue with Verena being worshipped is that like everything in Bretonnia, it depends on class. So while Verena is worshipped, she is worshipped by the peasants while the nobility turn to the Lady of the Lake. But in my mind your argument for this Verena worshipping Bretonnoan noble does not seem to take reality into accord. A noble that does things like that will challenge the social, political and economic order of Bretonnia and so would end up with the noble being outcast, isolated and probably enjoy the censure of the damsals at which point his neighbors will band together to destroy him with overwhelming power, long before he can reap the full benefits of his progressive thinking.

 

Understanding how historically oppression has worked comes from reading history, which is littered with oppression from start to finish. ;)

 

And to make a point; I do not support oppression based on class, religion, sexuality, race, political belief or anything else. Everyone should just try to get along.

 

EDITED: Clarified a Point or two.

 

 

No person irregardless in what age they were born would ok with being put in chains and branded, you would not. It has always been morally wrong, it was done before because people could get away with it. You yourself would of course object if someone put you in chains and branded you, you yourself would not be happy about that. It is not 21st century morality but human morality since the beginning of humanity, people who are enslaved will try to escape, will try to hit back, if possible but they will not think it is totally ok and be happy with it.

 

The nobles in Bretonnia are corrupt in the 6th edition and onwards, 

 

A noble would get a huge benefit from treating his peasants better because there would be healthier peasants, more money more peasants and more soldiers, there would be higher quality of skilled labour available which all translates into concrete military advantages. A good ruler would not be overthrown because the rule was fair, there would be no need to do it.

 

The lady can be good to the nobles yes but that does not mean the Lady is good, if anything in the 6th edition and onwards she can basically be seen as some half chaos god. To allow such oppression and give her blessing to the oppressors means that she is indeed evil.

 

About the 1 noble who follows Verena, your assumption about the neighbours rising up I believe is wrong. 

 

How would they know, news travel very slowly, it would take years before anything is known and even then it would only be rumours, and even if something gets out at most it would be how peasants are treated a bit better. It would be very difficult indeed for any other noble to find out what is going on and have the full picture.

 

Knights rarely meet, and often only in battle defending against some enemy. If the noble does not invite another noble into the nobles domain then any type of interaction is unlikely.

 

The first to react, if it were ever to happen would be the intimidate neighbours and they might simply not care and even if they did to the point of an attack, for every year that goes by the Verena noble gets stronger and stronger.

 

The warhammer world is not the real world, in the warhammer world there are gods that can give people power, there is magic, that changes all the calculations.

 

As I have written, a person who oppress others would surly have no problem following chaos and would be very susceptible to chaos.

 

A person who is oppressed would seek divine aid to stop the oppression upon oneself and ones family.

 

 

To start with the definition of slavery an freedom has always changed across the ages. In some parts it has been a matter of freedom to wage armed feuds between families, but today its not a sign of freedom. Also I feel that you make some very, to my mind, strange conclusions. The people you mentioned as not wanting to be branded and put in chains will resent it happening to them, but odds are that they will be perfectly happy to do the very same to other people for their own benefit.

 

The Bretonnian nobility is not corrupt. Its oppressive but not corrupt.

 

A noble would start down the road to his own abolishment if he started to improve the collective lot of the peasants. The Magna Carta was not a step to make the king more powerful by granting stuff to his servants, it was a serious blow to his power. Same with the Pentition of Rights, and were part of erroding the king's power. And the problem is also that Bretonnian works on dynastic principle. What if the lord's grandson can't handle the situation? In that case he'll be overthrown by the empowered peasantry and the fruits of all that labor will fall to someone else.

 

The Lady can be argued to be evil, I dare say that she is not more evil than Ulric or Sigmar, and she is just as little a Chaos god as Sigmar is. The thing is that Chaos isn't "the Evil". Greenskins are evil, or at least I think they are "a" evil, same with Dark Elves, but neither of these are Chaos. Gunndred is an evil god but he isn't a Chaos god, same with Khaine. Thus even if the Lady would be evil, which she isn't, she still wouldn't be a Chaos god or anything close to it.

 

The problem with your defense for the Verena worshipping noble is that to bring anything into his lands, that stuff would need to travel across other noble's lands to reach him or use a port under the control of other nobles. Secondly knights are nobles and they socialize primarily with their fellow nobles. Thus noble of yours will need to be an utter shut-in to not come into contact with other knights and nobles and at any time some friend or relative could come on a visit or ask them to join in some social event, or even forbids, he's got a family that wants to meet other people than their own family. But if words goes out that strange things are afoot odds are that a damsel will make a visit and then all hell will break out for this noble. Provided that the damsels don't see his scheme coming with the help of their magic. And to this the Bretonnian nobility is well aware of how and empowered peasantry can undermine the nobility by looking at the world around them, where exactly that is happening, and so keep themselves on guard against similar developments in their own territory.

 

I agree that magic can change the calculations and the magic that the damsels will wield is by far superior to whatever hedge wizard or reject from the collage of magic in the Empire that this noble can recruit.

 

A person that oppress others will have less and less reason to follow Chaos the more institutionalized the oppression is. And in Bretonnia this oppression is the core of the social order and following or promoting Chaos undermines that very order that keeps the nobility on the top. Sure there are selfish and stupid nobles who wants more and more and more and who could fall to Chaos because of it, but the idea that oppression in itself is a path to Chaos lacks basis in the Warhammer setting.

 

Someone who is oppressed could absolutely seek divine favor, but so could the oppressor and at the end of the day, odds will stay in the oppressor's favor due to various factors.

 

EDITED: Fixed som issues with the language

Edited by Gurkhal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

To start with the definition of slavery an freedom has always changed across the ages. In some parts it has been a matter of freedom to wage armed feuds between families, but today its not a sign of freedom. Also I feel that you make some very, to my mind, strange conclusions. The people you mentioned as not wanting to be branded and put in chains will resent it happening to them, but odds are that they will be perfectly happy to do the very same to other people for their own benefit.

 

The Bretonnian nobility is not corrupt. Its oppressive but not corrupt.

 

A noble would start down the road to his own abolishment if he started to improve the collective lot of the peasants. The Magna Carta was not a step to make the king more powerful by granting stuff to his servants, it was a serious blow to his power. Same with the Pentition of Rights, and were part of erroding the king's power. And the problem is also that Bretonnian works on dynastic principle. What if the lord's grandson can't handle the situation? In that case he'll be overthrown by the empowered peasantry and the fruits of all that labor will fall to someone else.

 

The Lady can be argued to be evil, I dare say that she is not more evil than Ulric or Sigmar, and she is just as little a Chaos god as Sigmar is. The thing is that Chaos isn't "the Evil". Greenskins are evil, or at least I think they are "a" evil, same with Dark Elves, but neither of these are Chaos. Gunndred is an evil god but he isn't a Chaos god, same with Khaine. Thus even if the Lady would be evil, which she isn't, she still wouldn't be a Chaos god or anything close to it.

 

The problem with your defense for the Verena worshipping noble is that to bring anything into his lands, that stuff would need to travel across other noble's lands to reach him or use a port under the control of other nobles. Secondly knights are nobles and they socialize primarily with their fellow nobles. Thus noble of yours will need to be an utter shut-in to not come into contact with other knights and nobles and at any time some friend or relative could come on a visit or ask them to join in some social event, or even forbids, he's got a family that wants to meet other people than their own family. But if words goes out that strange things are afoot odds are that a damsel will make a visit and then all hell will break out for this noble. Provided that the damsels don't see his scheme coming with the help of their magic. And to this the Bretonnian nobility is well aware of how and empowered peasantry can undermine the nobility by looking at the world around them, where exactly that is happening, and so keep themselves on guard against similar developments in their own territory.

 

I agree that magic can change the calculations and the magic that the damsels will wield is by far superior to whatever hedge wizard or reject from the collage of magic in the Empire that this noble can recruit.

 

A person that oppress others will have less and less reason to follow Chaos the more institutionalized the oppression is. And in Bretonnia this oppression is the core of the social order and following or promoting Chaos undermines that very order that keeps the nobility on the top. Sure there are selfish and stupid nobles who wants more and more and more and who could fall to Chaos because of it, but the idea that oppression in itself is a path to Chaos lacks basis in the Warhammer setting.

 

Someone who is oppressed could absolutely seek divine favor, but so could the oppressor and at the end of the day, odds will stay in the oppressor's favor due to various factors.

 

EDITED: Fixed som issues with the language

 

 

 

Yes you simply do not get it.

 

If a person does not want something done to them selves then obviously it is wrong to do it on others, very simple. Has always been like this. And of course if someone were to brand YOU and put YOU in chains and if you complained they would say it is 21st century morality and they have all the right in the world to do so, YOU would not be happy.

 

Yes you are unable to see how a noble would benefit, yes it is so. For me it is obvious, for you it is impossible to see. For me Napoleon is a perfect example, the French peasants were treated a splash better than the other nations peasants and Napoleon was able to conquer most of Europe.

 

Also my examples, at least to me make it obvious, that the noble would be richer, the lands more prosperous there would be healthier and stronger subjects and they would be more numerous. There would be more craftsman which would mean better weapons and fortifications.

 

Again you assumptions are wrong. Why would anything need to travel anywhere at any time. Almost everything is internal. And the changes would happen gradual over several decades if not generations.

 

In Bretonnia there are Vampires in the nobility and that has been so for many years. Yet you are unable to see a non evil noble anywhere because "all hell would break out"

 

Who says knights cant visit, are the knights going to go around and ask every single peasant how they live and then because they live a bit better declare war on the noble?

 

Knights would rarely if ever at all have any idea how the peasants live or care. Even less than YOU specifically you care about how farmers live in your country. You specifically you are of course more busy about your own life, the same goes for the knights but multiplied many times over, they wouldn't simply care it would be a non factor in their minds.

 

If vampires can hide in the nobility a Verena noble is not a far stretch at all.

 

Magic would be one of the last things the noble installs, again Verena the goddess of knowledge and learning.

 

All of these things would have many years between changes and would happen gradually.

 

For example

 

Step 1 would be decrease the taxes.

 

Step 2 would be install more fair laws guided by the priests of Verena.

 

Step 3 would be increasing the amount of teaching that goes on, so that the peasantry become more productive.

 

Step 4 would be increasing the amount of teaching yet again so that knowledge of craftsmanship increases.

 

And so on and so forth.

 

All of this over time would translate into a wealthier noble family who because of their money would be allowed more and more rights and oversights in relation to their neighbours.

 

 

 

A person who oppresses other would in my mind easily be susceptible to chaos because of who that person is at the core, it is who they are.

 

A person who is oppressed would pray to all the gods who would hear his pleas and depending on the person would pray to different gods, some of them being chaos.

 

By the power gained it would be difficult to keep the oppression.

 

For example if Khorne bestows power on the oppressed peasant, then that peasant could possibly get into the castle because of normal business or what ever and once there fight his way to the oppressor and kill him, or go into the woods and rally beastmen around him and launch an attack when the noble is most unprepared, or any type of variation.

 

Or as in the example of Myrmidia or Verena, peasants could in their own community secretly and over time build up enough strength to resist the noble and/or pay him off.

 

There are many possible variation people could get revenge or freedom but I understand that you are unable to see any of them

 

That is how I see it, but you do not.

 

Also this is why I wanted you to create a topic of your own, so that my topic would mine about my ideas and people could respond to my ideas how I would change warhammer, and your topic would be yours about your ideas so that people could respond to you and how you would change warhammer. Now it is all mixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

just look at the world today, there is far less crime in less tyrannical countries than in countries where there are actual dictators. People from all those tyrannical countries would move if they could, just look at the emigration waves, people flee from tyrant countries to other countries, the only thing holding them back is money and not a lack of desire, they would move it the could but they can't.

 

 

And thus, we come full circle, and back to the point I was making; you are comparing today's world and making a case for it against the medieval mindset. You simply cannot compare 21st century mentality with medieval/dark age mentality. They are incompatible. If you grasp that concept then you'll see where your argument falls apart.

 

 

Let me repeat what I wrote

 

If a Tyrant is removed then that doesn't automatically lead into anarchy and crime

 

In the Warhammer world if a Tyrant is removed and replaced by the people who worship the goddess of law order and justice (Verena), then that would not lead to anarchy or crime as you seem to think and imply.

 

People do not want to live under a Tyrant and will move away if possible or change the situation if they can. You are unable to see this even though you yourself would most likely try and move or change the situation if you yourself were oppressed. If you grasp that concept you will see how your argument falls apart.

Edited by GoldenIslandsonYouTube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also this is why I wanted you to create a topic of your own, so that my topic would mine about my ideas and people could respond to my ideas how I would change warhammer, and your topic would be yours about your ideas so that people could respond to you and how you would change warhammer. Now it is all mixed.

 

 

We can talk some more about your ideas if you like. What part of it do you want to talk about?

Edited by Gurkhal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Also this is why I wanted you to create a topic of your own, so that my topic would mine about my ideas and people could respond to my ideas how I would change warhammer, and your topic would be yours about your ideas so that people could respond to you and how you would change warhammer. Now it is all mixed.

 

 

We can talk some more about your ideas if you like. What part of it do you want to talk about?

 

 

Oh for goodness sake please don't humour him any more Gurkhal. This has to be the singularly most narcissistic thread i've ever read in the history of forums. GolenislandYoututbe in a thread ALL ABOUT YOU, full of reams and reams of pages ABOUT YOU AND YOUR VISION (a vision which it seems would make the world all shiny and warm and full of hope and to my mind goes against the very nature of Warhammer) you accuse the only person engaging you on the topic of derailing your thread. 

 

"My game is great and i've got all the answers and will argue vehemently with anyone who tries to question my viewpoint" is not the basis for a thread that people want to engage in full discussion with. Have you not noticed you don't have a single like to suggest anyone agrees with you?

 

Your comment:   "But "we" do not agree on the grimdark. I do not like it at all, for me it could never work. "

suggests that you don't understand WFRP. It certainly seems you don't understand how a forum works. This forum is so sparsely frequented these days that I tend to read pretty much all of what is posted but I may have suddenly found a reason to make an exception. 

 

All I can say is "Thank Sigmar you don't have the money to buy Warhammer"

 

Is there an ignore feature in this forum?

Edited by Noelyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You know it occurred to me that we might not have the same starting view point about Bretonnia

 

The Warhammer fantasy roleplay books 2nd edition has a supplement called "Knights of the Grail" It describes the whole Bretonnian society, not just about knights but the whole Bretonnian country.

 

Have you read it, if so re-read it

 

If not then get it

 

You can if you like get it from this link here, the whole package is huge but you dont need the whole thing if you dont want to, just the Knights of The Grail, also the whole package stops at 99.9% no one has 100% so just remove it once you have reached the "max"

 

https://www.idope.se/torrent/warhammer%20fantasy%20rpg/23621660dd924ca2c6f923ac8e040a9c183b33c3/

 

After you have read it you will see that the people at the RPG department remade the Brets and made it a bit more workable than the fantasy battle books would imply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You know it occurred to me that we might not have the same starting view point about Bretonnia

 

The Warhammer fantasy roleplay books 2nd edition has a supplement called "Knights of the Grail" It describes the whole Bretonnian society, not just about knights but the whole Bretonnian country.

 

Have you read it, if so re-read it

 

If not then get it

 

You can if you like get it from this link here, the whole package is huge but you dont need the whole thing if you dont want to, just the Knights of The Grail, also the whole package stops at 99.9% no one has 100% so just remove it once you have reached the "max"

 

https://www.idope.se/torrent/warhammer%20fantasy%20rpg/23621660dd924ca2c6f923ac8e040a9c183b33c3/

 

After you have read it you will see that the people at the RPG department remade the Brets and made it a bit more workable than the fantasy battle books would imply

 

Actually I have read Knights of the Grail and I base my view of Bretonnia on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Also this is why I wanted you to create a topic of your own, so that my topic would mine about my ideas and people could respond to my ideas how I would change warhammer, and your topic would be yours about your ideas so that people could respond to you and how you would change warhammer. Now it is all mixed.

 

 

We can talk some more about your ideas if you like. What part of it do you want to talk about?

 

 

Oh for goodness sake please don't humour him any more Gurkhal. This has to be the singularly most narcissistic thread i've ever read in the history of forums. GolenislandYoututbe in a thread ALL ABOUT YOU, full of reams and reams of pages ABOUT YOU AND YOUR VISION (a vision which it seems would make the world all shiny and warm and full of hope and to my mind goes against the very nature of Warhammer) you accuse the only person engaging you on the topic of derailing your thread. 

 

"My game is great and i've got all the answers and will argue vehemently with anyone who tries to question my viewpoint" is not the basis for a thread that people want to engage in full discussion with. Have you not noticed you don't have a single like to suggest anyone agrees with you?

 

Your comment:   "But "we" do not agree on the grimdark. I do not like it at all, for me it could never work. "

suggests that you don't understand WFRP. It certainly seems you don't understand how a forum works. This forum is so sparsely frequented these days that I tend to read pretty much all of what is posted but I may have suddenly found a reason to make an exception. 

 

All I can say is "Thank Sigmar you don't have the money to buy Warhammer"

 

Is there an ignore feature in this forum?

 

 

Having some light in the world, instead of having everything dark, does not mean everything is light.

 

Having multiple threads in a forum is perfectly normal, instead of having one big thread with everything inside it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I have read Knights of the Grail and I base my view of Bretonnia on it.

 

 

 

So you have it, great :)

 

Take a look at page 29 on the top right part:

 

”In normal times, the Ruinous Power often find the subjects of brutal nobles to be the most receptive to the lures of Chaos.

 

That sentences seems a bit similar to what I have been writing. - People who oppress others would surely be tempted by chaos and many of those who are oppressed would turn to chaos to gain power so to strike down their oppressors.

 

 

Page 34 states under Criminal intent that 

 

"Corrupt or Powerful lords nobles or significant Chaos cults are declared outlaws when discovered."

 

This does somewhat imply the possibility of there being chaos worshipping nobles.

 

 

 

Before we get into the Verena noble discussion here is a small (interesting) side note

 

The book states that Shallya is the largest religion in the land by far, since most peasants worship her, and the peasant class is by far the largest. Which would mean that Bretonnia is actually the country of Shallya :P And not the lady of the lake.

 

 

 

Now For the noble / noble family / noble house who worship Verena.

 

Page 40 says that some scholars, man village elders and a few merry men worship Verena, which means it is quite possible a Noble would too.

 

In Bretonnia there are lords who are vampires and lords who worship chaos, and they can stay in power for a long time without being discovered.

 

Page 31 under Law and Justice says ”A noble with a corrupt, or corruptible, lord can get away with almost any atrocity.”

 

So, in my mind, very few know or care what lords do in their own domain, as long as the deliver soldiers when asked. And a Verena worshipping noble would be able to deliver more soldiers in relation to the nobles domain than other nobles of similar size, which would make his liege more happy and/or allow the Verena noble to keep a number of soldiers even when the liege asked for soldiers, thereby preventing a neighbours attack.

 

Page 25 says that unless it is the Lords own land under attack then a lord can only hold the levy together for 40 days.

 

So even if attacked the Verena noble "only" needs to hold out for 40 days before he can counter attack, with the superior system the noble would be able to absorb the attack and then counter attack thereby expanding the nobles domain.

 

Page 27 describes how the merchant club ”the Rooster and the Kettle” imports firearms mostly from the empire but some of Dwarf-make.

 

Which means firearms are traded int he land and the Verena noble would be allowed to equip his non-knightly soldiers with those weapons, giving them an advantage over any neihbour

 

Page 26 explains how problems are solved between lords, basically they can fight each other if they feel like it be saying they are reclaiming old lands or that they have been insulted, and of course if one servers chaos or allies with greenskins.

 

So basically even if somehow someway a neighbour plans something , the noble can launch a preemptive strike, with the superior forces chances of victory are high.

 

Page 26 also explains that many lords are poor and that merchants are sometimes much much richer and that they ”bribe” their local lord with gifts that they the next day buy back.

 

So the Verena noble, in my mind, would actually be much richer than any neighbour because of market mechanics of allowing the peasants to reinvest into their land and into themselves, in addition Verena priests can tell if someone is lying so that would cut down on almost all "real" crime, and almost no one who is innocent would be falsely convicted.

 

Page 34 describe the Herrimaults ”outlaws” who fight against the oppression in Bretonnia.

 

In my mind many of those who find out about the Verena noble, through other peasants, would go to his lands and join him, thereby increasing the size of his military and total population.

 

 

Now with all of this presented I stand by my original reasoning. A Verena noble/ family/ house would have a huge advantage over all other in Bretonnia and over time would become the most powerful, same goes for every country in the old world. 

Page 40 says that some scholars, man village elders and a few merry men worship Verena, which means

Page 34 states under Criminal intent that 

 

"Corrupt or Powerful lords nobles or significant Chaos cults are declared outlaws when discovered."

 

This does somewhat imply the possibility of there being chaos worshipping nobles.

Edited by GoldenIslandsonYouTube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Quote: So you have it, great :)

 

Take a look at page 29 on the top right part:

 

”In normal times, the Ruinous Power often find the subjects of brutal nobles to be the most receptive to the lures of Chaos.

 

That sentences seems a bit similar to what I have been writing. - People who oppress others would surely be tempted by chaos and many of those who are oppressed would turn to chaos to gain power so to strike down their oppressors.:End of quote

 

It don't really say that those who are oppressing would be more open to Chaos. Only that those who are oppressed may well be more open to Chaos. That's only half right and I think it the lesser part, as the whole argument was that oppressive nobility would be Chaos-aligned where the quote says that its the oppressed peasantry that is has an easier time to align with Chaos.

 

Page 34 states under Criminal intent that 

 

"Corrupt or Powerful lords nobles or significant Chaos cults are declared outlaws when discovered."

 

This does somewhat imply the possibility of there being chaos worshipping nobles.

 

 

I agree that there are nobles in Bretonnia who follow Chaos. The rot of Chaos finds its way everywhere and no nation, class or community is safe from it. Yet also note that the routine actions is to outlaw Chaos cultists, which hints that the tolerance for Chaos is very low among the Bretonnian nobility.

 

 

Before we get into the Verena noble discussion here is a small (interesting) side note

 

The book states that Shallya is the largest religion in the land by far, since most peasants worship her, and the peasant class is by far the largest. Which would mean that Bretonnia is actually the country of Shallya :P And not the lady of the lake

 

.

In that way, yes, its a Shallyan stronghold, but the problem is that the priesthood there has even less to say than in the Empire due to the nobles who hold all the power being focued on the Lady of the Lake. So while Shallya has numbers, the Lady of the Lake holds the people wielding power.

 

Now For the noble / noble family / noble house who worship Verena.

 

Page 40 says that some scholars, man village elders and a few merry men worship Verena, which means it is quite possible a Noble would too.

 

In Bretonnia there are lords who are vampires and lords who worship chaos, and they can stay in power for a long time without being discovered.

 

 

It really sounds to me like Verena is a kind of peasantry thing and it dont say that knights or nobles worship Verena. Also note that to my understanding the vampires who have the easiest time in Bretonnia are the Blood Dragons and Lamiah because they can generally make a seemless fit with the masculine and feminine gender roles in Bretonnia, and thus melt in among the rest and behave like a man or woman are suppsed to behave by Bretonnian standards. Also note that a Chaos following noble only stays in power for as long as he don't draw attention to himself but remain silent and quiet. That's the kind of opposite behavior you want from your example noble.

 

 

Quote: Page 31 under Law and Justice says ”A noble with a corrupt, or corruptible, lord can get away with almost any atrocity.”So, in my mind, very few know or care what lords do in their own domain, as long as the deliver soldiers when asked. And a Verena worshipping noble would be able to deliver more soldiers in relation to the nobles domain than other nobles of similar size, which would make his liege more happy and/or allow the Verena noble to keep a number of soldiers even when the liege asked for soldiers, thereby preventing a neighbours attack.

 

And if you look at what writen you'll see that's not what it says. It specifically states that the liege must be corrupt or corruptible for it to work. When a new heir comes to power who isn't as corrupt or corruptible as his predecessor then the game is up. And if the new lord is a Grail Knight, the Verena worshiping nobled is really screwed.

 

Page 25 says that unless it is the Lords own land under attack then a lord can only hold the levy together for 40 days.

 

So even if attacked the Verena noble "only" needs to hold out for 40 days before he can counter attack, with the superior system the noble would be able to absorb the attack and then counter attack thereby expanding the nobles domain.

 

 

Some problem with this. For the first part, ALOT of things can happen in 40 days of war. Enough for your noble to see his land reduced to a desert if the land is minor or see his seat taken by the enemy and many other things. And also note that when your noble counter attacks, he's on a time limit while his enemy is not as things are turned around and the enemy is defending his own lands.

 

Page 27 describes how the merchant club ”the Rooster and the Kettle” imports firearms mostly from the empire but some of Dwarf-make.

 

Which means firearms are traded int he land and the Verena noble would be allowed to equip his non-knightly soldiers with those weapons, giving them an advantage over any neihbour

 

 

And as you may have also noted, that will work for a single campaign, and after that the word will spread and noble opinion turns against this noble. Not a good thing in a country where a morale opinion is best expressed with a "mace to the face". I can totally see this noble get declared and outlaw for the sheer ignobility of employing gunpowder weapons.

 

Page 26 explains how problems are solved between lords, basically they can fight each other if they feel like it be saying they are reclaiming old lands or that they have been insulted, and of course if one servers chaos or allies with greenskins.

 

So basically even if somehow someway a neighbour plans something , the noble can launch a preemptive strike, with the superior forces chances of victory are high.

 

 

Unless the other sides ot the same with a superior force. What makes you think that 1. an army getting ready for war will not be on high alert and, you know, getting ready for war. 2. That your example noble will have superior forces or even know that he's the supposed target? That will require contacts, friends and spies to find and convey this information to him in time, and isolating oneself in one's estate is NOT a good way to make contacts or friends, and even less so to know if the information given by the spies is accurate or if they make stuff up to get a paycheckPage 26 also explains that many lords are poor and that merchants are sometimes much much richer and that they ”bribe” their local lord with gifts that they the next day buy back.

 

Quote: So the Verena noble, in my mind, would actually be much richer than any neighbour because of market mechanics of allowing the peasants to reinvest into their land and into themselves, in addition Verena priests can tell if someone is lying so that would cut down on almost all "real" crime, and almost no one who is innocent would be falsely convicted.

 

Make sense that he would be able to turn a profit over others by a more relaxed taxation.

 

Page 34 describe the Herrimaults ”outlaws” who fight against the oppression in Bretonnia.

 

In my mind many of those who find out about the Verena noble, through other peasants, would go to his lands and join him, thereby increasing the size of his military and total population.

 

 

And when all these outlaws comes gathering beneath his banners, how long before the lord is declared and outlaw? But otherwise I agree that the Herrmiauld can be a great asset to the noble IF the noble can control a group dedicated to essentially overthrowing the structure that holds him to his position.

 

Now with all of this presented I stand by my original reasoning. A Verena noble/ family/ house would have a huge advantage over all other in Bretonnia and over time would become the most powerful, same goes for every country in the old world. 

Page 40 says that some scholars, man village elders and a few merry men worship Verena, which means

Page 34 states under Criminal intent that 

 

"Corrupt or Powerful lords nobles or significant Chaos cults are declared outlaws when discovered."

 

This does somewhat imply the possibility of there being chaos worshipping nobles.

 

 

 

And I stand by mine. Unless massive structural changes are done the idea of a noble abandoning the Bretonnian noble life-style and forsake the Lady of the Lake in favor of Verena and employ dischivalrous means of warfare, that guys lives on borrowed time. And unless his heirs continue with the work and they have generations of corrupte and disinterested lieges, then it will come to naught regardless of early successes. Bretonnia is just a bit to militant in its reactionary attitudes.

 

PS: Seems I had to many quote blocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Having some light in the world, instead of having everything dark, does not mean everything is light.

 

 

At the end of the day you just dont' get warhammer. Warhammer emphasises the dark for sure but there is light to be found in the world. The difference is that the game was written with a very definite aim for the light to be found not in lots of hope for the downtrodden in society. No the light is found in the humour of the books. The ratcatcher with his rat on a stick, Fear the Wurst with it's human sausages, the silly european names like Von Saponatheim. This is the light relief to be found in Warhammer. The Bretonnians are how they are in Warhammer not because of reasons of fairness and equality. They're like that because it's funny. Humour is all relative of course and i can't vouch for your sense of humour or even if you have one. But not recognising that is why you don't get warhammer. I dread to think how you would rewrite Monty Python's Holy Grail if you were allowed carte blanche.

 

 

"Having multiple threads in a forum is perfectly normal, instead of having one big thread with everything inside it."

 

 

 

Yes you're quite correct but attempting to send anyone who disagrees with your vision of warhammer to 'start their own thread' is not perfectly normal. 

Edited by Noelyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I stand by mine. Unless massive structural changes are done the idea of a noble abandoning the Bretonnian noble life-style and forsake the Lady of the Lake in favor of Verena and employ dischivalrous means of warfare, that guys lives on borrowed time. And unless his heirs continue with the work and they have generations of corrupte and disinterested lieges, then it will come to naught regardless of early successes. Bretonnia is just a bit to militant in its reactionary attitudes.

 

 

PS: Seems I had to many quote blocks.

 

 

Haha! I read your comments, It seems that we can not agree at all haha!

I stand by my original comments as I have written them. I think our minds are too different haha!

 

I do not agree with any of your comments they seem simply completely wrong to me :P

For me it would be obvious that a person who is able to build up a non criminal non corrupt area with the help of a god of law, order and justice would have a huge advantage.

 

I copied the sentence as I had written it to show that I hade written it before and it was part of my thing. The book says that those oppressed turn to chaos,oppress. for me this is obvious and even the book says it.

 

It is equally obvious to me that an oppressor would easily fall to chaos. The same personality that thinks it is ok to oppress others that very same personality is exactly the type of person who would be "drafted" by chaos. 

 

Which goes back to my original comment of that the Warhammer world as it is described can not exist. Those who do not oppress others would have a tactical and strategic advantage thereby either being completely exterminated by chaops or they would be able to develop their own realms, for example those I describe in my original post.

 

 

 

About Shallya not that she would rule Bretonnia just that she is the biggest in Bretonnia was my point. Even on such small details we seem to be on different wave lengths :P

 

About as I have written. The Noble / noble family would slowly makes changes over a long period of time and if a vampire can get away with it so can the noble / family.

 

I am not talking about anyone tolerating chaos, just the fact that there are chaos nobles, if there is a possibility of a chaos noble then there is a possibility of a Taal or Rhya noble or a Verena noble etc etc etc.

 

 

About gunpowder, you again make assumptions that I can not agree with. The book itself points out that gunpowder is not covered in the rules of chivalry because gunpowder is a new invention. Therefore it is not illegal to use by non knights.

Since there is a merchant club trading in it there must be a market, the market most likely has several nobles buying the product.

Also you then assume that only other Bretonnians will attack the noble, again this whole assumption that such a thing would happen to me is completely wrong. But you forget that the noble can suffer an attack from greenskins skaven beastmen etc etc. Because his troops are equipped with gunpowder he would suffer less losses than another noble facing the same situation with an non gunpowder force of the same size therefore the Verena noble would have more soldiers at the end of the conflict than a comparative other noble therefore the Verena noble would be more powerful.

 

About the Herrimaults, again you assume that others know who they are. No they do not. The Herrimaults would join him because he is a fair and stable ruler and he would simply have more troops, no one would know who they are or where they came from. As little as currently a nobles know where the other nobles soldiers came from. There is no DNA testing before battle to see who is who. And no one would control anyone, again you seem to be unable to think outside oppression, no one is controlling anything. The Herrimaults joined the noble because he is fair and stable, the fight for him because of that, they do not try and overthrow him. He gains more soldiers and more farmers the other nobles lose farmers and soldiers.

 

And yes his forces are superior because of the system. The farmers can reinvest more of their profits into their fields which gives larger yields which makes the peasants healthier which gives stronger soldiers and smarter soldiers. He also gains a larger population base to draw upon. I have written this all before. He also have better trained soldiers because of Verena sharing knowledge and his farmers farm better because of Verena temples sharing knowledge. He is also richer etc etc etc. So yes his system is superior.

 

And an attack on him can be visible without spies or anything like that. For example when the attacking nobles begins to call in his troops and knights. And many other ways. An attack would take months of preparations if not years and could possibly not even be carried out by his neighbours but require someone higher up the hierarchy to do simply because of the resources required. The siege equipment needed the men needed to take a defended castle, etc etc.

 

It is interesting that you can point out the difficulty of knowing if someone is planing an attack, but at the same time have no difficulty thinking that the second a noble lowers his taxes and only punishes the guilty that all other nobles will immediately find out and because of that declare war on him.

 

40 days a lot can happen yes but in the medieval world it is hardly enough time to lay siege to an castle and win, and after 40 days the enemy is significantly at an disadvantage. So if the attacker fails then he also loses his own castle because the Verena noble counter attacks and take it over because of his superior system. That is assuming an attack will happen which I doubt and that the attacker would even alst 40 days which I doubt.

 

You seem to, from how I read it, think that everyone has internet connection and satellite surveillance over every inch of Bretonnia. As I have written very few Nobles, in my mind, would care or have knowledge of what was happening outside their own domain, even outside their own castle.

 

All my changes seems very plausible to me, and no one would find out anything and they wouldn't simply care. As I read it, you seem to think that the second he makes any changes a light speed broadcast to everyone's smartphone goes out telling all the nobles everywhere what is going on. All your assumptions are based on that, that they immediately find out and that they would care that he lowers the taxes from 90% to something way more reasonable and actually only punishes the guilty, then you assume that if he is not oppressing the peasants that the peasants will somehow overthrow him even though he is fair and a stable leader who works with the village elders, and he would hardly at all bother the peasants. I say that that there can be a noble and at the same time non oppressed peasants.

 

No one out of the Bretonnian nobility would know, and no one out of the nobility would care. If anything the lord above him would be happy because when the lord calls open the noble for units his units fight better and perform better than other nobles units of similar size. Also the noble, because of his superior system, would have more soldiers in total thereby being able to leave more soldiers behind to guard his land when his lords calls for men, than other nobles of similar size.

 

Anyway we simply disagree :D

 

Edited by GoldenIslandsonYouTube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

At the end of the day you just dont' get warhammer. Warhammer emphasises the dark for sure but there is light to be found in the world. The difference is that the game was written with a very definite aim for the light to be found not in lots of hope for the downtrodden in society. No the light is found in the humour of the books. The ratcatcher with his rat on a stick, Fear the Wurst with it's human sausages, the silly european names like Von Saponatheim. This is the light relief to be found in Warhammer. The Bretonnians are how they are in Warhammer not because of reasons of fairness and equality. They're like that because it's funny. Humour is all relative of course and i can't vouch for your sense of humour or even if you have one. But not recognising that is why you don't get warhammer. I dread to think how you would rewrite Monty Python's Holy Grail if you were allowed carte blanche.

 

 

Yes you're quite correct but attempting to send anyone who disagrees with your vision of warhammer to 'start their own thread' is not perfectly normal. 

 

 

 

 

As I have written there would be some light and some dark, that there can be both.

 

 

 

My suggestion was that Gorkhal open his own thread about his subject which is civil war in Bretonnia

 

It has nothing to do with agreement or disparagement, but has to do with that it is 2 different subjects.

 

Subject 1 how I would change all of Warhammer

 

Subject 2 civil war in Bretonnia.

 

2 different subjects and each can have their own threads. 

Edited by GoldenIslandsonYouTube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's leave the final word to the godfather of the sword and sorcery genre. R.E. Howard:

 

“It is the individual mainly which draws me—the struggling, blundering, passionate insect vainly striving against the river of Life and seeking to divert the channel of events to suit himself—breaking his fangs on the iron collar of Fate and sinking into final defeat with the froth of a curse on his lips,” R. E. Howard

 

Not a lot of hope to be found in R.E. Howards fantasy vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this all sounds like is the proverbial American v. British/European argument.

Why else do you all think that those Disney movies do not look at all like the Grimm/Andersen/whomever stories they are "based" upon?

 

Having studied, taught and lived history through a goodly portion of the 20th and all of the 21st so far, I find GoldenIslandsonYouTube to very 21st Century American in his(?) view.

On the flip side, many of the others that have posted go for the neo-sophist, almost neo-Calvinist, attitudes of the European way of thinking over the last 20 years.

It is obvious why most Europeans and Americans get along like wet cats; their life philosophies have almost no common ground.

 

Personally, I am in between the two, probably because I have had to live in both worlds most of the decades of my life.

Born American from a very serious Welsh House and boisterous Scots Clan.

No, I will not build up any more ire with my kinsmen by identifying my bloodlines.

 

Now, why would anyone adventure where there is no way to get ahead in the life?

If light has no chance of success, why would anyone strive?

How did Job's wife put it?

"Dost thou still retain thine integrity? curse God, and die."

If all there is darkness, death, destruction, depravity and disease, why do anything beyond the basic minimum to get through the day?

Adventuring is far more than the minimum.

 

On the other hand, people, with no power beyond the ends of their fingers will live in oppression for generations without doing anything real about it as obviously shown by tableau of history because they have been able to scratch out a bearable life despite those who take advantage of them.

 

Remember, at the start, nearly all of the American revolutionary/rebel (which term for which side of the Pond you are on) leaders were quite rich men.

The main folks thrusting the French Revolution forward were also rich men just with little-to-no noble blood.

Only prosperous men seem to have the available resources and the discretionary time to plot revolution.

Gee, sounds like the Burghers of Marienberg, yes?

 

Pollyanna.

That is what GoldenIslandsonYouTube's Warhammer world reminds me of.

Sorry GoldenIslandsonYouTube, your world got so cloying, I could not read any your complete postings.

Yes, the sun will rise tomorrow boyo, but it will do so on the good and the evil.

 

I agree GoldenIslandsonYouTube, the Warhammer world needs some, and I only mean some, brightening up.

But I feel it has more to do with the strength and intellect of a man to make more of his life than to make the world around him more idyllic.

Basically, a more real or down-to-earth version of the Horatio Alger stories is the requirement.

That is the quality, the why, that so many people found appealing in Bill King's Warhammer novels.

One can do more than just one was born into.

 

Why I am commenting at all here is that no one seems to understand that GoldenIslandsonYouTube cannot understand you darker people at all, and you darker people, who are happy with your less than happy view/experience/whatever of real life, are unable to see the "higher" joys that GoldenIslandsonYouTube strives for in both his play life and his real life.

GoldenIslandsonYouTube might as well be writing in a foreign tongue for how little some of you can comprehend what he is writing.

On the other hand, GoldenIslandsonYouTube simply has not had the life experience in the same way some of you have had to understand at all how you are happy with the Olde Worlde as it was before The End Times.

 

Personally, if I had the money, (not sure if it, in fact, would require a time machine before the money), Age of Sigmar, with all of its negative baggage along with the damned Wardian doctrine, would be out the nearest Chaos portal and WFB would go to a revised Fifth, but not in the direction Sixth took it.

More the tone of First thru Third, but with the more uniform playing rules of Fifth would be my ideal version.

Also, a notice to the sculptors that we are trying to sell quality toy soldiers of a set scale, not small form art pieces of varying scales.

I am all for fine detailed toy soldiers, but too many of GW's offerings of today are no longer toy soldiers, but rather some odd person's many-replicated pipe dreams of art.

Nagash and his Mortarchs are the perfect examples of what went wrong.

http://www.solegends.com/citcat1996usfb/c1996usfbp0155-02.htm

vs.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Deathlords-Nagash

 

http://www.solegends.com/citcat1996usfb/c1996usfbp0153-02.htm

vs.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Deathlords-Mortarchs-Arkhan

 

and so forth.

Wargamers need toy soldiers that can fall over on the tabletop a couple or more times and not shatter into unusable shards like I have seen some of these modern pieces do.

 

Furthermore, I would bring back the Chaos Dwarf army (leaving them as just Chaos's prime artillerists is disrespectful) in WFB.

Moreover, the Squats would return in Sci-Fi!

Now, I am a real renegade! :D

 

I can go on, but I have said my piece.

Let the duelling now begin!

Edited by The Horseman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...