Sounds good. Perhaps, to break away from Hindu associations, look to mediaeval European history?
In social situations, even a very minor noble will usually outrank a commoner, and have access to people and places as a consequence - and because of who they are related to, etc. But not always. A Master Craftsman who is a Guild Member will outrank a Baron's son within the Guild; a Baron's son from one Earldom may be outranked by a Baron's son in another Earldom when travelling (though treated as a Baron's son, his fealty runs through a different Earl)
In military situations, a sergeant or corporal may have greater authority than the Baron's son (unless daddy bought him a commission as a second lieutenant).
A commoner could always be elevated to nobility through recognition of their deeds by their liegelord or king.
This system is more structured than ones I have used in the past: and most players tend to structure their character/stats around the profession/class of their choosing (or best fits their abysmal dice rolls >.<)
I like the idea of access to different skills/knowledge prior to campaign based upon social origin. A baker's son would know and do different things from a farmer's daughter, or a Baron's grandson.
A gemcutter's son becoming a thief or a fence makes sense as a background *and* as a set of starting skills.
In many parts of Europe, the daughter of a herbalist was pretty much expected to follow mummy into the business: through access and opportunity of learning, but also because the 'power' was through to run in one's blood. It is also possible for someone to exhibit a talent for healing/magic and thus transition out of their 'birth' 'caste' and into their 'true' caste of sorcerer.
Perhaps you may also have a culture that values some traits differently: priests may be cha, nobles int-oriented? Which might cause some subtle confusions - especially amongst members of the 'appropriate' caste as they/others travel?
I like the notion that opportunities are costed differently for different castes: 'basics' for a noble did cost more than those for a peasant - the expectation on the quality being different. And a peasant would have access to different skills - some beneath the noble, others would be out of their reach for the same reason. And some would be beyond them only because of lack of opportunities. A farmer would be unlikely to learn gemcutting, but could learn basic stonemasonry for building walls and the like.
Perhaps a starting dicepool of points, say 6d6, to buy skills? with in-caste cheaper than out-of caste? With some skills denied to (not available), or 'forbidden' (at an even greater cost) for their caste?
And perhaps instead of calling it 'caste' you could refer to the primary trait as 'path' or similar? after all, someone may roll an int-oriented character, but argue for a noble heritage ... and their path/campaign may be a journey to discover their true place in society? Not everyone is naturally in their 'best' profession/occupation at 14-16 (or 26-46) :D
Alternatively, 'caste' and 'path' could be two different things: one may be born into a caste, but have none of the talents for it - instead, be better suited to very different work: which could be a reason for travelling, etc?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2011-10-18 12:41 am (UTC)In social situations, even a very minor noble will usually outrank a commoner, and have access to people and places as a consequence - and because of who they are related to, etc. But not always. A Master Craftsman who is a Guild Member will outrank a Baron's son within the Guild; a Baron's son from one Earldom may be outranked by a Baron's son in another Earldom when travelling (though treated as a Baron's son, his fealty runs through a different Earl)
In military situations, a sergeant or corporal may have greater authority than the Baron's son (unless daddy bought him a commission as a second lieutenant).
A commoner could always be elevated to nobility through recognition of their deeds by their liegelord or king.
This system is more structured than ones I have used in the past: and most players tend to structure their character/stats around the profession/class of their choosing (or best fits their abysmal dice rolls >.<)
I like the idea of access to different skills/knowledge prior to campaign based upon social origin. A baker's son would know and do different things from a farmer's daughter, or a Baron's grandson.
A gemcutter's son becoming a thief or a fence makes sense as a background *and* as a set of starting skills.
In many parts of Europe, the daughter of a herbalist was pretty much expected to follow mummy into the business: through access and opportunity of learning, but also because the 'power' was through to run in one's blood. It is also possible for someone to exhibit a talent for healing/magic and thus transition out of their 'birth' 'caste' and into their 'true' caste of sorcerer.
Perhaps you may also have a culture that values some traits differently: priests may be cha, nobles int-oriented? Which might cause some subtle confusions - especially amongst members of the 'appropriate' caste as they/others travel?
I like the notion that opportunities are costed differently for different castes: 'basics' for a noble did cost more than those for a peasant - the expectation on the quality being different. And a peasant would have access to different skills - some beneath the noble, others would be out of their reach for the same reason. And some would be beyond them only because of lack of opportunities. A farmer would be unlikely to learn gemcutting, but could learn basic stonemasonry for building walls and the like.
Perhaps a starting dicepool of points, say 6d6, to buy skills? with in-caste cheaper than out-of caste? With some skills denied to (not available), or 'forbidden' (at an even greater cost) for their caste?
And perhaps instead of calling it 'caste' you could refer to the primary trait as 'path' or similar? after all, someone may roll an int-oriented character, but argue for a noble heritage ... and their path/campaign may be a journey to discover their true place in society? Not everyone is naturally in their 'best' profession/occupation at 14-16 (or 26-46) :D
Alternatively, 'caste' and 'path' could be two different things: one may be born into a caste, but have none of the talents for it - instead, be better suited to very different work: which could be a reason for travelling, etc?