Amber Law

Play by post Amber game, now in progress
User avatar
Joshua
Gibbering
Posts: 2987
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 11:59 pm

Amber Law

Post by Joshua »

Dworkin
To date, no one has attempted to impersonate Dworkin. Most assume the universe would smite them.
  • Considered a divine messenger.
  • His word is absolute law.
  • Due to his eccentricity, it's a debate as to where the line between "word" and "rambling" is.
  • It is clear that Dworkin wants order in Amber. Disobeying an order is much more likely to be overlooked if it creates order.
  • And yes, that is order. Not good or evil. Dworkin would side with Prince Jon over Robin Hood.
  • It is rumored that the weather and even the laws of physics obey Dworkin's decree.
The Pattern
It is up for debate if Dworkin or the Pattern is considered "higher" in Amber law. Since the Pattern is an inanimate object, it is unlikely this question need ever be answered.
  • Condemned prisoners and traitors can ask to walk the pattern. If they survive, they are given full rights as an Amberite and all crimes are forgiven.
  • Non-condemned citizens may petition to walk the pattern. As this is more-or-less voluntary suicide, few are given permission.
  • Walking the Pattern is considered more than just a test of endurance. It is assumed you are judged by the pattern when you walk it. Dworkin is believed to be able to predict who will survive with fairly strong accuracy.
Amberites
That is anyone who has walked the pattern, and anyone Dworkin has made a trump card of. While not current practice, ownership fo a trump card bearing your likeness will become seen as proof you are a noble.
  • You may create a law by declaring it publicly.
  • In an argument between you and anyone else, you are considered right.
  • You may execute anyone, for any reason. (Including if they say the sky is blue when you just said it was green.)
  • You have the right to be armed anywhere.
  • You may demand any tribute or tax from anyone in the city.
  • Arguments between Amberites often are resolved through duels, but can be done using any agreed upon contest. They are not allowed to be to the death.
  • You have all other rights as befitting a divinely chosen ruler.
    (Seriously, if you want to do right of First Night, you can. Though there are lots of PCs who'd lynch you for that.)
Nobles
Nobles are landowners and those with lots of money. They have a good amount of political power.
  • Nobles have power similar to an Amberite in their domain. Basically, anything they can get away with.
  • Nobles can execute peasants but need a reason to execute skilled workers.
  • Dispute between nobles are resolved either with duels or by petitioning an Amberite.
Merchants
And other skilled workers. Can own land.
  • Have a lot more right to live, work and survive due to their valuable skills.
  • Unless they are a police force, have no right to kill anyone.
  • Police may execute criminals in accordance with local laws. (Local laws vary from neighborhood to neighborhood.)
  • Truly wealthy merchants blur the line between Merchant and Noble.
Peasants
And unskilled laborers.
  • Only have rights if given to them by a noble or Amberite.
  • Merely knowing an Amberite offers some level of protection and prestige.
  • Most are little better than indentured servants.
Slaves
Dworkin does not like his subjects owning slaves.
User avatar
Sadie
Lunatic
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:24 am

Re: Amber Law

Post by Sadie »

I would argue that thing about Prince John and Robin. Prince John was taxing people to the point livelihood was threatened forcing them to have no choice but to rebel. His taxation was causing the nation to crumble and fall apart around him. Even without Robin Hood his kingdom would have fallen into disarray. Robin was a white blood cell to the disease created by John's selfish and short sighted policies. Even without Robin others would have eventually rebelled as they'd have no choice. In addition to this, his policies was weakening a nation that he didn't even rightfully rule, as he was supposed to be watching and maintaining it, while instead he used his position for personal gain, abusing his power and weakening the nation. If Dworkin is against chaos and disorder, then he knows the kind of chaos and disorder that is sewn by a foolish, arrogant, or self centered and short sighted ruler.

Being a ruler carries with it certain responsibilities and duties, all of which John ignored for his own personal gain. He was breaking the rules long before Robin even entered the picture. John was the criminal a bringer of chaos and disorder. The nation was fine until John entered the picture, and started falling apart long before Robin was around to try and fix John's mess. Remember in the end Robin swears fealty to the true ruler and takes up a place at his side not that he ever broke fealty in the first placed. Robin was trying to regain and maintain the order John wrongfully destroyed. People talk about Robin as a figure to represent chaos but really he isn't, he was always loyal to the real ruler and simply was trying to save and protect the home and people he loved while John spat in the face of the citizens and was running the nation into the ground with shortsighted greed.

As an OOC addendum, I'd also say reading these laws that Dworken being lawful neutral is being rather nice as a claim, as I've not seen a more Lawful Evil rule system in my life and there's definite emphasis on the evil more than the law... This law system is outright built for evil rulers to do and get away with anything and be lawfully within their right to do so, so long as the person being done to is decided by those in charge (see the problem here) to be a lesser being undeserving of any rights. The law is there not to preserve order or even create order but gives rights to the few and powerful without restriction over those of lesser stature. Not only that, but due to the dual system, even if an evil ruler is confronted, they say, my bad, and that's it, just say, "Yep I'm an ass, I relent, you're right." not even dual and get away with it scott free with little more punishment than a slap on the wrist. I mean seriously, you say "don't claim right of first night" because of what other pcs might do, but really, the "right of first night" is legal, while the most another pc can do legally is declare a unlethal dual, which means ultimate you're safe from any real retribution, and legally you were in the right anyway. In fact by law they don't even have a good cause to declare a dual unless it was one of their subjects you did it to. If you share subjects the most the dual can be over is to change the law. By legality there should be no punishment for the acts before the law became contested...

Oh boy... Sadie is in for a nightmare, and so am I... this is a serious headache of a law system...

BTW slaves is a loaded term in this system, as you could hold most subjects in this legal systems to the same standard you do slaves. Only difference is the word isn't used, and the citizens are owned at any time by any one of us that happens to be there and decide, "I own you for a few minutes" so long as they don't actually say I own you slave.
Sadie - "You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law..."
misfit
Raving Mad
Posts: 651
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 5:13 pm

Re: Amber Law

Post by misfit »

Just to throw in my two cents (or perhaps more than that), I'll point out a few things.

First, in the Prince John/Robin Hood scenario, I think Joshua was trying to make the point that Prince John represents the established order while Robin was a rebel. Dworkin doesn't like the thought of rebellions...they get messy. And not trying to start an argument, but in most versions of the legends Robin was pure as the driven snow either. In many versions he became an outlaw for killing a deer on royal land...not because he needed the food but to show off his skill with a bow. His actions after that could be viewed several different ways. Any way you look at it though he opposed the established order, and that's what Dworkin doesn't approve of.

I'll grant you that the system sounds ugly, but look at most of human history...isn't that the way most (if not all) cultures have functioned? Even in our modern democracy we claim everyone is equal, but reality shows us otherwise. The rich and powerful can sweep things under the rug with a combination of bribery, lawyers and political pressure. Look at what Lindsey Lohan got away because she's rich and famous. Do you think a judge would have treated me the same way?

Another thing to consider is this: it's a new society that is still forming. Things will settle into place. And look at the Amberites so far...the PCs plus Oberon, Quinn, and Morgana. Do any of these people look like they are going to abuse the system? Right now we have a group trying to make trade more fair and to better protect the common people in the streets. And honestly I think if one did try to really abuse things the rest would jump all over them.

Also, a division in power is unavoidable. The Amberites are just so much more powerful than the common folk. Any one of them could walk into the city and kill everyone there and the common folk couldn't stop them, try as they might. As Osmund has pointed out, the Amberites are gods among mortals...you can't really expect the same rules to apply.

Lastly, it's just a game. It's supposed to be fun. Relax and enjoy the ride. Have your character try to change things you don't like, but don't let it make you angry.
User avatar
coldcandor
Missing Some Marbles
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 8:26 pm

Re: Amber Law

Post by coldcandor »

Oh boy, this is going to get ugly indeed. I won't jump into the Robin Hood analogy, but the system presented here is itself in fact lawful neutral. It certainly allows for lawful evil people to flourish in it, but the system itself works either way. This is a fine system to be presented in a game like this, so the PCs have free reign over, well, reigning. They can setup people under them in a fully democratic system if they want, or they can become the archvillan.

This is also the way human societies have been set up from the get-go for most of history, as misfit says. First comes efficiency and order (dictatorship), then, usually due to the influence of another established civilization (that usually wants to gain control or significant favor), they progress to more distributed governments. Or at least they claim to, since democracies usually have Executive Order type powers as well.

Of course, that's not to say that Sadie, coming from a modern democratic society, wouldn't see it as a horrible system. Just that it's quite historically accurate and not evil in and of itself.
Solten
User avatar
Sadie
Lunatic
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:24 am

Re: Amber Law

Post by Sadie »

Yes this system of law has been in place for most of human history. Have you looked at most of human history though? We're living like kings comparatively to most people back then. I'm also not angry and am merely speaking philosophy.

I personally don't believe in democracy ooc either and especially not capitalism. I believe societal evolution still has a way to go, and we're making a mistake thinking our current system of government's even close to the right one. Is still superior to totalitarianism. And yes the balance of power is off, but our president couldn't walk into a school and shoot a bunch of school children in the head and just get away with it. He'd at minimum lose his position as president if not a lot more.

The purpose of government is to protect the people and serve their best interests. This system could care less about the people and even less about their interests.

This system is lawful evil because it dehumanizes and reduces those it governs to a position of inferiority and insignificance to the point no wrong against them can be considered wrong because there are no rights to be wronged. Just because a person chooses not to abuse the system does not change the facts of what the system is.

The people in this game are lucky that the current rulers are at least mostly decent people, but that's all they are, lucky. The system does not promote or encourage anything for the benefit of the people, it does not do it's job as a system of government. The only protections the people have are those given to them by the ruler themselves on a arbitrary bases. This is not the system doing it's job it's the ruler happening to be a nice guy.

Oh and just because in history something was done and accepted for a long time (even most of it) does not make it not wrong. We still have governments like this today. See how the people in those nations are faring...
Sadie - "You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law..."
User avatar
coldcandor
Missing Some Marbles
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 8:26 pm

Re: Amber Law

Post by coldcandor »

Oh I completely agree with that. I wasn't arguing the rightness of the system in game or in history. We have very far from a perfect system today, in any country. In my opinion, there is no perfect system except for the one that happens to have a perfect leader at a given time. I was simply seconding that it is by far the most likely system to be in place in a place like Amber, and that the system itself isn't evil; it just allows people to be evil.
Solten
User avatar
Joshua
Gibbering
Posts: 2987
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 11:59 pm

Re: Amber Law

Post by Joshua »

So, just a few historical (in the game) notes:

Amber has this kind of dictatorship, thus this is what occurs naturally in more shadows. (Yes, they happen in shadow more often because it exists in Amber.) This is not a well-known fact.

Dworkin treats the castle like disposable minions. He treats them well (like expensive, disposable minions), makes sure they're taken care of, but he is a god and they are mortals. The system is setup to cause interesting role-playing opportunities. (Ironically, and impossible to determine in character, this was Dworkin's goal as well. It is a rumor however.)

There was at least one attempt to overthrow Dworkin. It was mercilessly beat down, and the leaders were allowed to walk the pattern. Similar to keelhauling (or vaccing*) anyone who survives the pattern is considered to have had the right to revolt and is forgiven all offenses. I'll add a bit of the role of the Pattern in the law tonight.

* Vaccing is a practice some space ships use. The accused is tethered to the ship's airlock, the airlock is depressurized, and after the accused hits the end of the tether, he is hauled back in. If they survive, all crimes are forgiven.
User avatar
Sadie
Lunatic
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:24 am

Re: Amber Law

Post by Sadie »

Is it even possible to survive vaccing, and if you do, is there any way to lead a meaningful life afterwords? At minimum I believe you're blind...
Sadie - "You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law..."
Wyvern
Prismatic Pangolin
Posts: 2283
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 8:50 pm

Re: Amber Law

Post by Wyvern »

I guess that depends on the available medical technology?
User avatar
Joshua
Gibbering
Posts: 2987
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 11:59 pm

Re: Amber Law

Post by Joshua »

Actually, once you make sure your lungs don't explode, it takes a bit for enough of your body liquids to boil off to be utterly irreparable.

So, I refer to GURPS compendium II, which has perhaps the most extensive rules for this:

Vacuum
The good Lord must like vacuum . . . so say Spacers. After all, He made an awful lot of it. Vacuum in itself is not deadly, so ship crewmen may survive briefly without air. They may even deliberately enter vacuum without protection or air if they have to.

You can't hold your breath in vacuum, and you might rupture your lungs if you try. The only safe way to enter vacuum is to exhale and leave your mouth open. You can then operate on the oxygen in your blood for (HT) turns if active, (HTx4) turns if moving slowly, or (HTxl0) turns if passively waiting. Double these times if you hyperventilate first; quadruple them if you used pure oxygen. Halve these times if you were caught by surprise and didn't even have time for one deep breath. Once out of breath, one fatigue is lost per turn; when ST reaches 0, the victim falls unconscious. Four minutes later, he dies. There is a chance of brain damage (permanent -1 to IQ) if the victim is saved after more than two minutes without air; roll vs. HT to avoid this.

Explosive Decompression
"Blowout," or explosive decompression, happens when an area suddenly goes from normal pressure to little or none. This could occur, for instance, when a ship loses all its air to a meteor strike, or when someone is tossed out the airlock. Fifty years of pulp fiction to the contrary, explosive decompression does not turn its victims inside-out and quick-freeze them. What does happen is that the body fluids begin to boil away. Small blood vessels rupture, and the mucous membranes dry out. The eardrums pop violently. The victim takes 1d of damage, but does not die until he runs out of breath, as described above. However, if rescued, he must make separate rolls, as follows, or suffer permanent ill effects as follows:
  • HT+2 for each eye, to avoid blindness.
  • HT to avoid -1 DX due to "bends" (see p. 132) from boiling blood.
  • HT-1 to avoid permanent Hard of Hearing disadvantage.
If the victim is not rescued, his body's liquid will boil off to Space within a few hours. The remaining fragile, powdery husk will weigh only a few pounds. Memories and personality cannot be recovered from the dehydrated brain, though DNA (for a clone) could be saved if a sample were taken within a few minutes of death and kept frozen.
Post Reply