Morien
08-19-2010, 07:49 PM
Hi all,
I'd appreciate the thoughts on the issue of hostages and imprisoning ladies in the context of Pendragon. Now, let me start by saying that I would imagine that King Arthur would take a dim view on this, but lets forget about him for a moment.
The Book of Knight stated that the ransom of ladies and children is the same as the knight husband. This implies to me that they are captured and ransomed at least occasionally. In the stories, the damosels are imprisoned all the time, although mostly by dastardly villains.
The situation in my campaign is analogous to the Anarchy: Earl is dead, the succession bit iffy, the higher authority is missing. The PKs are in revolt against the Regent (of Salisbury), who is the grandfather (maternal side) of the yet unborn heir of the Earl. The PKs have a reason to believe that the baby's father is NOT the deceased Earl, but this 'fact' has not been publicized in Salisbury. This information surfaced (to the PKs) after the knights of Salisbury, them included, had agreed to vest the Regent with the regency of his unborn grandchild. As the result, the PKs are now backing the Earl's younger sister, who is still 14.
Now, the wives (and children) of most of the PKs are held as hostages in Sarum while the Regent is trying to negotiate a settlement with the rebels. In short, he wishes them to come back to Sarum, say they are sorry, and swear allegiance to the Regent. In return, the Regent will return their lands (confiscated at the start of the rebellion) and families.
My reading of the situation so far is that this is analogous to war, and the Regent is not beholden to restore the families to the rebellious knights simply because they say so. While executing the ladies is out of the question, I would assume that he would be able to make the terms of imprisonment less comfortable: instead of a house arrest and relative freedom, being locked up in a room, that sort of thing. Now while this is certainly not chivalrous behavior, would it be roundly condemned by the rest of the society, or considered normal?
Naturally the social connections of the knights and their wives plays a role. Unfortunately for two wives, they are foreigners (one even an commoner) without family around. One of the wives is from a good family in Salisbury, so I would assume that the Regent would treat her better, not wanting to alienate her cousins/brothers.
Thoughts?
I'd appreciate the thoughts on the issue of hostages and imprisoning ladies in the context of Pendragon. Now, let me start by saying that I would imagine that King Arthur would take a dim view on this, but lets forget about him for a moment.
The Book of Knight stated that the ransom of ladies and children is the same as the knight husband. This implies to me that they are captured and ransomed at least occasionally. In the stories, the damosels are imprisoned all the time, although mostly by dastardly villains.
The situation in my campaign is analogous to the Anarchy: Earl is dead, the succession bit iffy, the higher authority is missing. The PKs are in revolt against the Regent (of Salisbury), who is the grandfather (maternal side) of the yet unborn heir of the Earl. The PKs have a reason to believe that the baby's father is NOT the deceased Earl, but this 'fact' has not been publicized in Salisbury. This information surfaced (to the PKs) after the knights of Salisbury, them included, had agreed to vest the Regent with the regency of his unborn grandchild. As the result, the PKs are now backing the Earl's younger sister, who is still 14.
Now, the wives (and children) of most of the PKs are held as hostages in Sarum while the Regent is trying to negotiate a settlement with the rebels. In short, he wishes them to come back to Sarum, say they are sorry, and swear allegiance to the Regent. In return, the Regent will return their lands (confiscated at the start of the rebellion) and families.
My reading of the situation so far is that this is analogous to war, and the Regent is not beholden to restore the families to the rebellious knights simply because they say so. While executing the ladies is out of the question, I would assume that he would be able to make the terms of imprisonment less comfortable: instead of a house arrest and relative freedom, being locked up in a room, that sort of thing. Now while this is certainly not chivalrous behavior, would it be roundly condemned by the rest of the society, or considered normal?
Naturally the social connections of the knights and their wives plays a role. Unfortunately for two wives, they are foreigners (one even an commoner) without family around. One of the wives is from a good family in Salisbury, so I would assume that the Regent would treat her better, not wanting to alienate her cousins/brothers.
Thoughts?