Lifeapth Requirements Confusion

Burning Empires Burning Empires Character Burner
1

(Or: The Australian BE Wannabe GM Nitpicker’s Convention)

Okay, I just want to make sure how firm my grip on Lifepath requirements are, but I wanna make sure I’m grokking them. The and/or phrasing throws me sometimes.

Right. Let’s let the machine get a baseline with a couple of tests. The requirements for the Justiciar lifepath (p. 148) are: “Mandarin, Constable, Coroner, Anvil Captain, Hammer Captain” So, your character must have all of the above lifepaths in order to access the Justiciar lifepath, right?

Example of Confusion #1 (assuming the above isn’t actually an example also): The requirements for the Forged Lord lifepath (p. 145) are: “Hammer Lord and Anvil Lord or the Your Grace or Your Majesty traits”. Other parts of the text state that Forged Lords are both Hammer and Anvil Lords, but I can understand how a little politicking could go a long way for a Hammer Lord. Still, should I parse the requirements as “Hammer Lord and (Anvil Lord or Your Grace or Your Majesty)” or “(Hammer Lord and Anvil Lord), or Your Grace, or Your Majesty”? It seems a bit of a stretch for a Grace or Majesty to get Forged Lord status on hereditary title alone, but still…

Example of Confusion #2: The requirements for the Lord-Pilot Anvil lifepath (p. 145) are: “Mark of Privilege and Armiger/Court Armiger, or Anvil Captain, Executive Official, Magnate, Treasurer, Financier or Chamberlain”. Okay, so you can give your character the lifepath if it already has:
[ul]
[li]Mark of Privilege and Armiger.
[/li][li]Mark of Privilege and Court Armiger.
[/li][li]Anvil Captain, Executive Official, Magnate, Treasurer, Financier.
[/li][li]Anvil Captain, Executive Official, Magnate, Treasurer, Chamberlain.[/ul]
[/li]But you can’t give the character Lord-Pilot Anvil if you only have Chamberlain, right?

Example of Confusion #3: The requirements for the Sodalis-Captain lifepath (p. 154) are: “Sergeant, Court Armiger, Armiger, Sodalis-Brother or two Sodalis lifepaths”. So, when can give your character the lifepath? If it already has:
[ul]
[li]Sergeant, Court Armiger, Armiger?
[/li][li]Sergeant, Court Armiger, Armiger, Sodalis-Brother?
[/li][li]Sergeant, Court Armiger, Armiger or two Sodalis lifepaths?
[/li][li]Two Sodalis lifepaths?
[/li][/ul]
I think it’s the second or the third, but I just want to check.

2

Nope. I think any one is good enough. That one’s a little confusing because it doesn’t have an “or,” though.

Example of Confusion #1 (assuming the above isn’t actually an example also): The requirements for the Forged Lord lifepath (p. 145) are: “Hammer Lord and Anvil Lord or the Your Grace or Your Majesty traits”. Other parts of the text state that Forged Lords are both Hammer and Anvil Lords, but I can understand how a little politicking could go a long way for a Hammer Lord. Still, should I parse the requirements as “Hammer Lord and (Anvil Lord or Your Grace or Your Majesty)” or “(Hammer Lord and Anvil Lord), or Your Grace, or Your Majesty”? It seems a bit of a stretch for a Grace or Majesty to get Forged Lord status on hereditary title alone, but still…

Hammer Lord and Anvil Lord gets it. So does Your Grace. So does Your Majesty. If they want to be good Forged Lords they’ll have other LPs too, but you could be a good ruler with stuff like Justicar, Lord Steward, or whatever. You just won’t be able to get there without the highest of birth unless you can master Hammer and Anvil.

Example of Confusion #2: The requirements for the Lord-Pilot Anvil lifepath (p. 145) are: “Mark of Privilege and Armiger/Court Armiger, or Anvil Captain, Executive Official, Magnate, Treasurer, Financier or Chamberlain”. Okay, so you can give your character the lifepath if it already has:
[ul]
[li]Mark of Privilege and Armiger.
[/li]> [li]Mark of Privilege and Court Armiger.
[/li]> [li]Anvil Captain, Executive Official, Magnate, Treasurer, Financier.
[/li]> [li]Anvil Captain, Executive Official, Magnate, Treasurer, Chamberlain.[/ul]
[/li]> But you can’t give the character Lord-Pilot Anvil if you only have Chamberlain, right?

I’m not seeing those requirements (EDIT, sorry, found them), but using your list… Any one lifepath after the “or” gets it. Just Chamberlain would be fine. If you have Armiger, that is good enough if and only if you also have the mark of privilege, but an anvil captain doesn’t need the Mark.

Example of Confusion #3: The requirements for the Sodalis-Captain lifepath (p. 154) are: “Sergeant, Court Armiger, Armiger, Sodalis-Brother or two Sodalis lifepaths”. So, when can give your character the lifepath? If it already has:
[ul]
[li]Sergeant, Court Armiger, Armiger?
[/li]> [li]Sergeant, Court Armiger, Armiger, Sodalis-Brother?
[/li]> [li]Sergeant, Court Armiger, Armiger or two Sodalis lifepaths?
[/li]> [li]Two Sodalis lifepaths?
[/li]> [/ul]
I think it’s the second or the third, but I just want to check.

If they have been a Sergeant, that’s enough.

A couple of observations here. The LP requirements are “default or” where you seem to be assuming “default and,” that is, unless it says otherwise, you only need one entry on a list. Second, look at the commas. It seems like you understand how to use parentheses to divide up a mathematical equation. Apply that to using commas to divide up the clauses of these lists. (I’m still more comfortable with parens myself). Notice the comma that separates off “Mark of Privilege and Armiger/Court Armiger” from the rest of the list for Lord-Pilot Anvil.

Check the example in the book. Notice that Propagandist, Mayuran’s fourth LP, requires “Circle of 10,000, Psychologist, Ravilar, Lieutenant,” and some other options. Mayuran only has Psychologist, no Circle or Ravilar.[/quote]

3

Zabieru, thanks for weighing in.

That’s the confusing thing. Written in the Elements of a Lifepath section is, “Requirements list lifepaths, traits or other restrictions that must be taken or fulfilled before the player can choose this path.” (P.92, emphasis mine.) To my reading, the broadness of that description (especially the verb “list”) seems more inclusive than exclusive; that’s why I assumed “deafult and”, and I’ve not yet read anything in the text that directly contradicts that assumption. If I’ve missed something, though, can you point it out, please?

The only place that defines comma usage is the Stats section on p. 104, which reads, ‘A “,” means “and.”’ It reinforces the idea that if it’s in the Requirements list and not otherwise differentiated by an “or” or another modifier, you gotta have it.

Plus, if a comma means or by default, why then have a lifepath requirements list like Mandarin’s (p.147), which reads, “Student, Court Clerk, Foundation Student or Courtier”? Sure, it could be a typo, but I want to make sure. Like I wrote, I’m a nitpicker. Stuff like that throws me; it’s a communication failure of sorts, and I wnat to know where the fault lies (if it’s me, I can fix it myself; if not, I can point it out so someone).

Hmm. Which, to me, means that either the text needs to be more clear on Lifepath requirements and its use of commas and "or"s or the writeup for Lord Faisal is incorrect. Probably the former, as it seems a stretch to expect that all Propagandists must be psychologists and members of the Circle of 10,000. Being less broad in that paragraph explaining Requirements on p.92 would be a help also.

4

Ah. Actually, I think I know where my confusion comes from; I’m going from reading a separated-by-commas list (the Skills listing) which doesn’t need “and” or “or” to reading the usage in the Requirements section which is more like a a regular sentence in that it uses “and” or “or” before the last item in the list.

In fact, on re-reading, most of the lifepaths do just that. Maybe the absence of an “or” before Hammer Captain in the Justiciar lifepath is the typo.

Zabieru, thanks for your help!

5

Let me ask you something. Do you understand how the interpretation I described is supposed to work? Your response reads like you do and you just want to argue that I’m wrong. (Which is fine, by the way. Please don’t feel like you have to spare my feelings. I am well-prepared to debate my ideas)

If you do, try and burn a character whose last LP is “Man At Arms.” from the Stewardship and Court setting, your way and my way. Tell me which you think works better. Remember that 7 LPs is supposed to give a powerful, achieved character, and that Man At Arms is pretty low on the totem pole.

If you don’t, ask me some questions, or just say “I don’t get it, but you’re not helping” and someone else will give a (hopefully better) explanation, since mine wasn’t great.[/quote]

EDIT: Totally ignore all that. I wrote it without seeing what you’d posted, and now I look like an asshole. Also like an idiot, because “read it like a regular sentence” is what I meant all along, and you just went right there and said it while I was all fumbling around trying to explain it.

6

Hey, don’t worry about it. I keep trying to get what I write to say what I mean, too, and I’ve noticed my writing style’s been getting more blunt lately as a result. Again, thank you very much for your help!

7

Just want to confirm that Zab was correct.

8

Nota bene Zab’s title. Whether or not he’s being an asshole he, far more often than not, gets it.

9

No worries, gents. It’s finally sunk into my thick head! :lol: Thanks, everyone.