Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6016905" data-attributes="member: 42582">What range of games have you got in mind?In Traveller, a PC can start with a Social Standing of up to 15 (Duke/Duchess), and does not need any special dispensation from the GM to do so. The game assumes, I think, that the GM will take this into account as appropriate in play.And in Burning Wheel, a player can build a PC who is a noble without needing the GM's permission anymore than a player who builds a PC who is a villager or a merchant. It is a clearly expressed assumption of the game both that (i) their will be a high degree of collaboration between and among players and the GM in conceiving the gameworld, the PCs, their starting situation, etc, and (ii) that once the players have built their PCs, the GM's role is then to frame situations that reflect these character-building choices.The only exception to the above is if a player wants his/her PC to be a Prince of the Royal Line - which requires the express permission of the GM and every other player. Of course, no game rules can control how a group approaches PC building and setting up a game! As I read it, in the broader context of the rulebooks, the point that BW is making via this special rule for Royal Princes is that while the details of a PC are, in general, something for the player concerned to work out, in this one case the consequences for the game will be so marked that everyone should be consulted for buy-in.Neither Traveller nor BW lets a PC start as a king. But I don't see any inprinciple reason why a game could not be like that.I also don't see why being a noble is inherently more problematic than being a priest or paladin - both of which are also very significant social statuses, at least in the typical mediaeval fantasy world, and both which have long been permissible choices in D&D.</blockquote>

Verification