*Queer Emperor Probelm

[The Glyphstone]

And besides, His Immortal Imperial Highness is a title just about any self-respecting emperor in a magical world who wants to be assassinated should strive for.

Corrected - in a magical world rife with murderhobos and genuine nastiness, taking a title like that is epic-level shmuck bait. Heck, all it takes to foil a Clone spell is a Thinaun weapon in the hands of the assassin...so if the ruler's anti-assassin defenses aren't sufficient in the first place, their contingencies won't matter. Declaring yourself to be immortal/unkillable/perpetual just raises the caliber of challengers.

[Sartharina]

Corrected - in a magical world rife with murderhobos and genuine nastiness, taking a title like that is epic-level shmuck bait. Heck, all it takes to foil a Clone spell is a Thinaun weapon in the hands of the assassin...so if the ruler's anti-assassin defenses aren't sufficient in the first place, their contingencies won't matter. Declaring yourself to be immortal/unkillable/perpetual just raises the caliber of challengers.

The Golden Toilet Still Flushes Chaos Away.

[Erik Vale]

Hire a wizard (emperors should have better access to them) and pay for a clone spell (or a two-for-one deal perhaps). The problem of the bloodline is rapidly less critical when the Emperor's death is no longer really in the cards.

And besides, His Immortal Imperial Highness is a title just about any self-respecting emperor in a magical world should strive for.

Any complaints about running out of clones can be met with the fact that clones are way easier to develop then children.

Applause to you, that may be better.
As long as he doesn't out and out declare it.

[veti]

Even leaving aside whatever undefined nasty stuff will happen without this bloodline...

The lack of an heir in a feudal society typically leads to a lot of chaos and death. Exactly how much chaos occurs depends on a lot of different factors, but it is not unreasonable to say that the Prince failing to do this particular job risks the lives of each and every citizen under his rule.

This.

Nobody in a feudal society gets to just do whatever they want. That sort of freedom - even contemplating it is far more anachronistic than any amount of sexual tolerance. Everyone has a place and a duty, determined (usually) from birth; there may be some freedom about how you discharge that duty, but the option to "just forget about it" would instantly cast you as an outlaw/brigand.

That's how royalty works. It's not just "sit back and boss the peasants around", it's about duties. Sometimes, unpleasant ones. But if you want to keep the job, you do the duties; if you don't, there's usually no shortage of other candidates waiting to replace you.

[Erik Vale]

if you don't, there's usually no shortage of other candidates waiting to replace you.

Given the number of candidates in any democracy, yep. Of course, there's a tendency for feudal monarchies in medieval periods not to be replaced by them, but by other feudal monarchies, or dictatorships.

[Coidzor]

Corrected - in a magical world rife with murderhobos and genuine nastiness, taking a title like that is epic-level shmuck bait. Heck, all it takes to foil a Clone spell is a Thinaun weapon in the hands of the assassin...so if the ruler's anti-assassin defenses aren't sufficient in the first place, their contingencies won't matter. Declaring yourself to be immortal/unkillable/perpetual just raises the caliber of challengers.

Murderhobos being notoriously bad with metaphor.

[tomandtish]

This is an interesting scenario, but I think we need some more information.

What happens if the bloodline isn't continued? Are the consequences political? Magical? Both? Can the bloodline be faked? "Why look, here's my 'son' with my wife, despite the fact she spent the last year in her father's castle 1000 leagues away". Does our Emperor know the consequences (or thinks he knows)?

How much power does the Emperor actually have? Does he rule with his own force, or are other nobles providing the bulk of his troops and his might? (That is, if he decides to be stubborn do they have a serious shot of taking the throne from him and does he understand it if they do?).

For that matter, how did he get into this position of having a consort in the first place? As other's have said, usually the marriage of the heir to the throne (and that of the spare for that matter) is arranged well before the heir takes the throne. The marriage may or may not be held until after they are crowned, but the arrangements are made. And the heir usually has little to no say in the matter, as it is based on political need. If the society is so progressive that they have no problem with him openly (is it openly?) having a male consort, then how come no one saw this potential problem coming? When used with Monarchs, Consort usually means spouse, so if it is open then everyone (or enough) said "Sure Emperor Joe, Count John can be your consort". Was everyone just assuming he'd later take a wife in addition in order to create the heir? For that matter, what are the laws regarding marriage, annulment, etc.? Depending on what you mean by consort, technically his child with someone else would be a bastard. Would that child be eligible to rule? The society seems enlightened, but are they that enlightened?

[Sartharina]

Murderhobos being notoriously bad with metaphor.

Finger on Throat Means Death!

[Cazero]

The main question here is the actual importance of the bloodline. We know it's powerful, but does it absolutely need to be continued ad eternam?

If it doesn't, well, he's the emperor. He can make whatever law he wants, like transitionning to some form of democracy/aristocracy wich doesn't require an absolute ruler and is ruled by a parliament/lord's chamber instead (preventing chaos of no heir situation), or simply create/use adoption laws for gays couples (providing an heir).

If it does, well he's the emperor. He can make whatever complicated law he wants, including a law allowing gay couples to (be) inseminate(d) by a relative for an heir, defining accurate legal status for all parties involved, and then lay back and think of England. That's still "suck it up", but there should be much less trouble attached.

[NichG]

Its a misconception that the head of state in a feudal system can just make any law that they want though. Their power is being supported by the power of everyone who serves under them, and if they upset those people enough then things stop getting done. This doesn't mean he can't try, but it will generate a lot of plot along the way.

Maybe those feudal lords have to obey the emperor's decree or be declared to be in rebellion, but they can show their displeasure in a hundred other ways by driving down the efficiency at which tasks get carried out. So if the emperor pisses them off by passing an unpopular law, suddenly the empire is having a lot of trouble getting the levee they requested for war efforts (we're a progressive empire so we don't use conscription, but no one volunteered this year for some reason), or the tax money doesn't flow in (it was a lean year so we gave our peasants a break - it'll pay off in 10), or otherwise bureaucracy makes things start to break down. Or the nobles start plotting to put pressure on the emperor in other ways (well, we have to do our feudal duties, but we can shut out the emperor from some of our more profitable intrigues so he doesn't actually know as much about what's going on in his empire anymore).

So the emperor can't just do whatever he wants. He has to do things that make his feudal lords happy enough that he stays in power (both actually being able to get them to do their feudal duties well, but also staving off the threat of a rebellion or plot). Inheritance laws are going to be particularly touchy, because they not only influence what the emperor wants to do but they also influence the succession patterns in all the various noble families. So by making that one change, now there's a dozen nobles who thought they'd be inheriting their family's title but now are finding they have to contest it with someone who was previously considered illegitimate by law, or whatever.

So okay, the emperor only changes the laws about imperial succession and has them be different than the succession laws for the realm. Well, now maybe there are a couple nobles who would have been candidates for emperor under the new law, but weren't at the last succession due to the old law being in place then. It's just the thing to get them all ambitious and thinking that maybe they deserve to be on that throne instead of the current emperor. Maybe they can even convince enough people of that to take a shot at splitting the empire. Or maybe, if the current emperor dies before having an heir this way, then because of the change in the law suddenly they've got a shot at it. This wouldn't necessarily change the overall number of threats like this in the empire, but the big problem is that it changes the primary actors - so if the emperor has been using his intrigues to keep the biggest threats down, then when those people become less of a threat and a new crop suddenly becomes a risk, the emperor has to act fast to adapt.

Suddenly going 'hey, we're a democracy now' would most likely just be hitting the 'civil war' button. He's basically disenfranchising all of the feudal lords - what benefit is it to them to carry out his will and calmly hand over their power?

[veti]

So the emperor can't just do whatever he wants. He has to do things that make his feudal lords happy enough that he stays in power (both actually being able to get them to do their feudal duties well, but also staving off the threat of a rebellion or plot). Inheritance laws are going to be particularly touchy, because they not only influence what the emperor wants to do but they also influence the succession patterns in all the various noble families. So by making that one change, now there's a dozen nobles who thought they'd be inheriting their family's title but now are finding they have to contest it with someone who was previously considered illegitimate by law, or whatever.

Yep, for a monarch to mess with inheritance laws is a sure and direct shortcut to civil war.

Imagine you're the elder son of a noble, looking forward to inheriting a nice little holding. You've been bred pretty much from the cradle to fight, educated in warfare and politics (and very little else). All your life, you've known that your job was to step into your father's shoes one day and support the emperor as required.

Then you hear, through whatever grapevine you get your information from (with who knows how many distortions along the way), that the emperor is changing all those rules. The life you took for granted - isn't there any more.

And your father is going to be just as pissed as you - he's arranged everything in his life around this assumption, including the education he's given his children and the deals he's cut with his neighbours, and he's looking forward to a nice peaceful old age. Now the basis of all that is being changed, he's got a buttload of work to do over again, and all because the emperor has a metaphorical headache?

Worse, if he's done this once, he's untrustworthy and arbitrary, and could just as easily undo it tomorrow. Time for a new emperor. (That's approximately how the Wars of the Roses started in England, by the way.)

Suddenly going 'hey, we're a democracy now' would most likely just be hitting the 'civil war' button. He's basically disenfranchising all of the feudal lords - what benefit is it to them to carry out his will and calmly hand over their power?

Yes, again: democracy takes time (measured in generations) to build, and I don't think anyone has ever succeeded in doing it "from the top down", by decree.

[Tengu_temp]

Why do people keep saying the emperor should just tough it out and impregnate a woman when the OP said he's not comfortable with that and would rather go with something else? So what if it's the most historically accurate option. There's nothing historically accurate about a fantasy land with magic. Deal with it.

[Flickerdart]

Step 1: Acquire vampire.
Step 2: Divest emperor of a quantity of blood.
Step 3: Pump blood into designated heir.

[JusticeZero]

We keep saying that because refusing means the next hook is "We need to get close enough to put a Greater geas on the Prince, can you help with some cloak and dagger work and make it happen?"

[Sartharina]

We keep saying that because refusing means the next hook is "We need to get close enough to put a Greater geas on the Prince, can you help with some cloak and dagger work and make it happen?"

No, it's not.

[NichG]

Well, the other point is that its possible to write yourself into a corner - you can set up a situation where you can't have your cake and eat it too. So sometimes you have to ask why you're creating a particular situation and if you need to do so at all.

When you set up something like 'the emperor is gay, but must father a direct heir, but I don't want him to just go along with it for duty's sake' then you've created a situation designed to create tension around the parameters of the situation. E.g. 'something has gotta give'. When you create a MacGuffin that resolves it, you're using that tension to drive plot for the PCs - its a traditional staple of gaming. Deep in some tomb is the Scepter of Bloodline Transference, etc, etc.

The thing is, for that tension to work, there has to be an 'or else'. If the emperor doesn't manage to acquire/perform the miracle that no one thinks is possible, he will be forced to do X. If there is no real 'or else' or if the 'or else' isn't compelling to the PCs, then it will weaken the impression of the plotline on them. Instead of 'this guy is really in trouble, so lets help him' it'll be 'oh, a quest; I guess we do quests'.

So to come back to the beginning, that 'or else' has to be something that is a bit uncomfortable for people or it doesn't feel like a real push for people to want to intervene. Often in RPGs its 'or people will die' but players get numb to that after awhile; here you're creating a tension which may be a lot more personal for the players and so might bypass some of the 'save the world' ennui. Normally that'd be great, but if it makes you uncomfortable to use a situation where someone may be compelled by the state to act against their sexual orientation as a plot-driving tension, then maybe its best not to create a situation which has that kind of threat to it in the first place.

Its worth keeping in mind that even if you set up a MacGuffin that can solve things, there is some possibility that the players follow the same line of thinking as people on the thread and decide that the emperor's will isn't important here - e.g. they end up being the ones forcing him to 'lie back and think of England'. So if you're uncomfortable with that possibility, you really have to be careful about writing in a situation where its a readily-available answer to the problem.

[Slipperychicken]

Its worth keeping in mind that even if you set up a MacGuffin that can solve things, there is some possibility that the players follow the same line of thinking as people on the thread and decide that the emperor's will isn't important here - e.g. they end up being the ones forcing him to 'lie back and think of England'. So if you're uncomfortable with that possibility, you really have to be careful about writing in a situation where its a readily-available answer to the problem.

That awkward moment when you realize the emperor is asking talented, one-of-a-kind heroes to risk their lives so he doesn't have to deal with mild discomfort for a few minutes.

[Sartharina]

That awkward moment when you realize the emperor is asking talented, one-of-a-kind heroes to risk their lives so he doesn't have to deal with mild discomfort for a few minutes.

Y'know... there's a term for the act associated with that 'mild discomfort'.

[Erik Vale]

No, it's not.

I agree. You need to be targeting the emperor instead... And if you can do that, then it's entirely possible that someone could have already been tampering with him to try and cause a civil war, as many suggestions other than 'Tell him boo hoo' or 'Grab a gender change belts and tell the prince boo hoo'.


Also, more than minor discomfort. I'm fine with gay people myself on a logical level, but if I even see two men kissing I've got to resist the urge to hurl on a physical level, so I doubt minor discomfort begins to cover it. In the same way 'The sun is warm' covers the sun being so hot that you would be vaporised killometers away if you attempted to approach it.

[NichG]

Whether the discomfort is minor or not isn't really the point. The point is that from the players' point of view the emperor is likely going to appear to be a selfish jerk for putting everyone at risk, no matter how major the discomfort would be. After all, the PCs put their lives at risk for the sake of fewer lives on a daily basis - those battle wounds and fallen comrades aren't a minor discomfort either. So regardless of what the world as a whole feels about the emperor's situation, the DM has to be prepared for two possibilities at the least:

1. The PCs find the emperor's plight to be uncompelling due to the former comparison and develop a general contempt for the emperor as a result. This may interfere with other impressions the DM wants to give and lead to PC ennui/snarkiness/detachment, especially if the emperor is a quest giver in other ways as well. This may not happen, but you have to be aware that its possible and be ready to deal with it if it does happen. If the DM is made uncomfortable by the possibility that their players may end up disliking the emperor because of the consequences of his sexual orientation being combined with this particular scenario, then its very important to be aware that its a possible outcome of designing a story like this.

2. The PCs decide to solve the problem by brute-force, via whatever combination of hypnosis, drugs, magic, etc is needed to compel the emperor's behavior. If the DM is uncomfortable with the 'lie back and think of England' solution, then he needs to be aware that something like this could result from a more extreme version of the reaction in case 1.

Now, one could say 'but those are just possibilities, it may not go that way'. And it may not. But the responses in the thread should at least be considered a warning that the responses of players may be similar in nature. And if that's going to take the game somewhere that the DM is uncomfortable with, it may be worth changing the initial details of the scenario rather than trying to come up with more ways the emperor could solve his problem.

The issue is the intersection of this 'magical bloodline of the hero' detail with everything else; remove that and it means that the PC response is likely to be far less severe. The reason has to do with the cause of the trouble. When there's a magical bloodline protecting the world, then the conflict is between the realities of the universe and the emperor's will. Generally its harder to consider 'the universe is in the wrong' and act upon that productively than it is to consider 'a person is in the wrong' and act upon that productively. So the emperor is going to come across as less sympathetic as a result.

When there's no magic to the bloodline and its just a succession crisis, then both sides of the trouble have a human origin. Yes, the emperor is being a bit selfish, but so are the nobles who will clamor for the throne and slaughter eachother if he doesn't produce an heir. So when its human vs human, its a lot easier for the players to go with someone who seems to have the moral high ground. In that kind of situation, the PCs can come to the conclusion 'the feudal lords are in the wrong and we're going to force through a change in succession law' or other such things.

[Flashy]

Step 1: Acquire vampire.
Step 2: Divest emperor of a quantity of blood.
Step 3: Pump blood into designated heir.

I don't know why, but this is far and away my favorite option so far.

[Coidzor]

Y'know... there's a term for the act associated with that 'mild discomfort'.

Joyless sex in a loveless marriage? AKA, par for the course.

[LokiRagnarok]

No.
The term is rape.

[Coidzor]

No.
The term is rape.

Oh, to be sure, that's been suggested in this thread, but despite Sartharina wanting to make that parallel, what she was actually replying to was exactly as I put it.

[Segev]

Yes, please, let's be very, very careful what we characterize as "rape," here. Rape is a horrific crime even beyond other forms of unpleasant sexual interaction.

A prostitute or a kept woman is not generally being raped (absent other considerations beyond the "she's being paid for sex" one) just because she finds her paying customer repugnant. A man guilted into having sex with a woman he doesn't like because it will somehow be "good" to do so is not being raped, as much as he may not enjoy it.

I won't say it is an untraumatic experience; sex is intensely personal and is arguably designed to be the more-than-symbollic giving of oneself to another. Using it for tawdry or pragmatic purposes is likely to jade and scar, emotionally.

But rape is something else altogether. And the modern tendency to cry it over things that are not it risks cheapening it when it really happens.


"You have a duty to produce an heir, so endure the experience with somebody who is not out to hurt you nor prove any sort of dominance over you, and simply wants to help you fulfill this duty," is not rape. It's probably not pleasant, and it probably is emotionally scarring, but it's not rape.

If you got rid of the "magical bloodline" thing, it could even be faked: find a girl who has a lover she wants to keep secret. Let them meet in the Emperor's chambers, pretending she's meeting with the Emperor. When she's pregnant, claim it's the Emperor's kid.

[Dienekes]

There really isn't much to discuss here, I think.

The guy has a bloodline you continue the bloodline through sex with a member of the opposite gender.

So his solutions are:
Deal with it and knock someone up, through turkey baster if necessary
Bring in close relative who shares bloodline, adopt them.
Use magic to solve conundrum, because magic.

Pick whichever suits your story. Admittedly, each has their problems either morally, politically, or dramatically, but thems the breaks.

[Segev]

There really isn't much to discuss here, I think.

The guy has a bloodline you continue the bloodline through sex with a member of the opposite gender.

So his solutions are:
Deal with it and knock someone up, through turkey baster if necessary
Bring in close relative who shares bloodline, adopt them.
Use magic to solve conundrum, because magic.

Pick whichever suits your story. Admittedly, each has their problems either morally, politically, or dramatically, but thems the breaks.

Just want to second this one. It's a good summary.

[JusticeZero]

No.
The term is rape.

No, it isn't rape to make this unreasonable request. It is not rape if the Prince uncomfortably acquiesces to this bit of awkwardness. I wouldn't even say that it is likely to be particularly scarring. Seriously, this is the kind of thing people today have been doing for various reasons, and they refer to it using language befitting 'distaste'.
If coercion is required, the person doing the coercion is definitely guilty of something; that something is generally considered a somewhat lesser crime than murder, which I am sure a group of murderhoboes is not going to be horribly fased by as an alternative to going on a vast romp across lakes of other peoples blood and bodily organs while themselves being maimed and stabbed. All to do something - resist the responsibilities of their position because of their own desires - which, at that social class level, is even today in a similar class of unheard of deviance as wanting to marry two goldfish and a Buick.
Again noting that there is this "Magical Bloodline" thing which means that a lot of people are very possibly going to be slaughtered, watch their children die in front of their faces or whatever, because the Prince doesn't want to fulfill his obligations which aren't even permanent or even especially time consuming; they are on par with occasionally scooping out a cat litter box or washing dishes in an over full sink that has been left too long with the help of someone who is at least sympathetic and has the hard part of the job.
If you take the magic bloodline out, then you have all sorts of other alternatives - but as long as he needs to do this ritual task to prevent widespread mayhem, and the ritual task is actually this minor, then you should expect this response.

[Storm_Of_Snow]

Firstly, the Emperor will have had it forced into his head, from the day he was old enough to understand speech, that the second of his duties (after protecting the throne) is to produce an heir to said throne.

We're not talking an option - it's something he has to do, whether he likes it or not. No ifs, no buts. End of discussion.

Which may be a reason (or one of many) that he's gay.

Secondly, I'm not sure gender-switching would necessarily work - the switchee is still essentially the same person, but, depending on the other person's preferences, they may not be physically attractive to them afterwards.

Thirdly, there's always the possibility that this may have happened before, and procedures were put in place by the great^n-grandparent - whether that's bringing in a close relative to actually do the deed (maybe the party have to bring him to the palace, or escort him from the palace after the deed is done, and then protect him from rivals to the throne who'd use him for their own ends), having the prince-consort involved as well in the royal bedchamber, judicious use of the royal turkey baster, magic (illusions, incomplete shapeshifting, compulsion, memory manipulation after the event and so on), drugs (hallucinogens or narcotics), or having the Empress just do the deed while he's asleep (I think I just squicked myself out there, let alone anyone else ).

With specific legal exemptions as necessary.

In fact, with magic, there's the opportunity for temporary possession/body swapping - the Emperor doesn't actually do the deed, his body does (thus transferring the bloodline) with someone else in the driving seat.

And maybe the Empress wonders why the Emperor's completely uninterested 99.999% of the time, all but ripping her clothes off on each night that she's at her most fertile, then having a very long bath the following morning as though he's trying to completely cleanse himself of something particularly distasteful - or maybe she knows full well, and has her own consort (whether male or female themselves) who's the other party to the body swapping.

[Slipperychicken]

That awkward moment when you realize the emperor is asking talented, one-of-a-kind heroes to risk their lives so he doesn't have to deal with mild discomfort for a few minutes.

Y'know... there's a term for the act associated with that 'mild discomfort'.

Joyless sex in a loveless marriage? AKA, par for the course.

No.
The term is rape.

I didn't say "put a gun to the emperor's head and tell him that he'll die unless he bangs the empress", I said to convince him to do it. You know, with reason, and not coercion.