Population, Finances, and Loyalty

This is what I get for referring to my notes rather than the rulebooks.

Does anyone have a suggestion for how we should set up the base Loyalty values for each group then?


A priori, most magi are, at least nominally, christians.
Then, we have some muslim companions, and, it seems to me, a lot of NPCs.
Then, there are the jews.

So, the magi should get the more loyalty from the christians (say, 45%), followed by the muslims (they quite of own the place, and raoudha is one) for, say, 35% loyalty.
And then, the jews, not represented amongst the magi, and seldom among the staff or the companions.

So, say

Negative: -28-15-3 = -46
Positive: +20+10+8+6 = +44

I'd say divide the negative by 3, the leftover points going to the group that's the more ill-at-ease, so everyone gets -15, the jews get -16
And the positive, apply the %, with leftover points going to christians:

  • Christians +44*45% = 19,8, rounded up to 20
  • Muslims: +44*35% = 15,4, rounded down to 15
  • Jews: +44*20% = 8,8, rounded up to 9

Christian loyalty: -16 + 20 = +4
Muslim loyalty: -16 + 15 = -1
Jews loyalty: -16 + 9 = -7

If people disagree about the %, this is easily corrected. Yet, IMO, this works rather fine, and has the advantage that a simple calcul can give you the base loyalty of any group.
So, for exemple, going with 35 / 35 / 30, we'd get:
Christian loyalty: -16 + (4435%=15) = -1
Muslim loyalty: -16 + (44
35%=15)= -1
Jews loyalty: -16 + (44-30=14) = -2

+08 Raoudha , should be -04 to the other two factions loyalty.
+06 Chamberlain , -03 to the two opposing factions , if clearly a member of a particular religion.

Well, I'm not sure at all.

  • I've already counted these as part of the christian and muslim dominance
  • It ignores their skill and character, assuming that, say, the more skilled a steward raoudha will be, the more muslims will love us an christians hate us. This feels wrong, especially for a character that's supposed to be compassionate and all.
  • This ignore magi: In an all-christian magi with a muslim steward and chamberlain, say, christians would hate us and muslims love us.

I'd like to find a method to calcultate the loyalty % going to each group, but my wits avoid me. We should begin at 30%, going up with magi/cadres of your faction, going down with those of others. That way, a good steward still helps with opposite factions, just less.

Probably should have put a question mark on my sentences.
Compassion has nothing to do with it , there are 3 factions , in competition with each other.
Actions by the steward/chamberlain that benefit one faction , negatively affect the others.
The christians hating the magi for appointing a highly competent muslim steward & chamberlain sounds right to me.
The competence of the steward and chamberlain affect the overall loyalty.
The christians feel that they will not be treated fairly by a non-christian steward
and are resentful if there is a christian candidate who was not appointed , even if less skilled.

I think we're overthinking this. I whipped up a spreadsheet, plugged in the numbers from the Covenants book about Loyalty and Situational Modifiers (p. 36-38), and just did three columns: one each for Christian, Muslim, and Jew (although, now that I think about it, I probably should have done one for "Other" since they're not one of the competing fractions). Took me ten minutes, and that was including doing a table in the bbcode generator. Voila! (actually took more, since I have to go back and add another column).

[tr][td]Base Loyalty[/td]
[tr][td]Living Conditions[/td]
[tr][td]Turb Captain (Abdul Fati)[/td]
[tr][td]Steward (Raoudha)[/td]
[tr][td]Chamberlain (Raoudha)[/td]

I was somewhat surprised at the final result. Even with all the newcomers, we have a Positive Loyalty Rating across the board? Muslims and "Other" have a +2 Loyalty, while Christians and Jews have a 0 (which is not that surprising, since the Turb Captain and Steward/Chamberlain are both Muslim, which might cause some resentment among the other factions).

I also haven't figured in anything for decreasing loyalty due to actions and events (e.g. giving the Jews a -1 Loyalty Points Penalty for Jamie yelling at the two Jewish maids in the hot spring when the new magi arrived).

Does this work for you?

(Edited to reflect Amul's judgment on the Money adjustment and Chico posting Captain Abdul)

If one person has two jobs , i don't think they are counted twice.

I didn't think so at first, but Covenants, p. 37, at the end of the first paragraph (which carries over from p. 36), in talking about the turb captain, steward, and chamberlain says:

So, it looks like it's the job that gets the points, not the worker. (And I had missed the use of "autocrat" until looking for this stuff...still sounds like an SCA-ism that worked it's way in, but it's a canon use of the word, so shrug)

Still need to go through and look for the stuff on Finance and Population (esp. the multipliers for the various roles), but I actually have my Covenants open, so I'm making progress :laughing:.

Jamie's been spending the income elsewhere, so he's unlikely to give double salary, but 1.5 is okay. IIRC, the pension is for shield grogs and soldiers, and they all were taken into the battle except for Fati. There are two -15 modifiers to represent the loss of all the men and the heavy workload rising from it, that get spread across the board.

Throwing a 0 at the non-Muslim factions for the autocrat and turb captain feels wrong, though I agree that they shouldn't get the full weight of their bonuses.

Okay, fixin' to go change the "Money" modifier from +20 to +10. That drops the Prevailing Loyalty to 0 for Christians and Jews ("Moderately content...treat them as they would normally treat members of the gentry"), and +2 for Muslims and Outsiders ("unusually loyal to their masters.")

And on the autocrat/turb captain numbers...call it a +2 for the non-Muslims, give them half credit so to speak? Something along the lines of "Well, he/she is okay at what he/she does, but he/she's not one of us"?

Disagree: This is only true if/when the Steward/Chamberlain actively favors one faction.

If, for exemple, the steward takes mesures that ameliore finances, everyone benefits. And they may take actions that impact negatively everyone.

This also ignores larger policies, like an all-christian magi council.

Yup, this is why I counted these as part of a larger percentage.

By your calculus:

  • A covenant with full christian magi and compagnions, with an incompetent steward and chamberlain clearly opposed to other factions would have the same loyalty for everyone
  • A covenant with full christian magi and compagnions, with an extremely competent steward and chamberlain trying to do their job mostly right would have an insane loyalty for muslims, and a very bad one for christians and jews

Both cases feel wrong.
My method has the drawback of requiring some handwaving on percentages, but, in these cases, would give more realistic figures (especially in the second case, which is mostly our situation)

That's why I prefer my method, although it handwaves some (like wealth) to represent both minor discriminations and the resentment due to the fact that, say, Jews are a minority in all commanding instances.
A chamberlain at +8 would, for exemple, give +4 to one group, +3 to another, and +1 to the last.

I feel myself moving from a discussion of "how to represent our story elements with numbers" into a conversation more focused on the mechanics of the system than on our story considerations. This strikes me as a bad sign.

We only need to establish the base loyalty scores for the three groups and then adjust each according to the impact of each violation at points forward in time. Yelling at Jewish maids would be -1 to the Jewish faction, maybe -1 to the Others, and no adjustment to the other factions. Physically punishing a Mulism, on the other hand, which is listed as -3, would be -2 to the other groups (since they're all offended by the act, but "at least it isn't one of ours."). The harsh effects of war would still be a -15 across the board, because it makes them all suffer equally.

If Raoudha dies, and is replaced by a Christian autocrat, then all groups would feel the difference in their skill levels, but the Muslim faction would get a loyalty penalty based on the death of a public figure, while the Christians get a bonus for having one of their own recognized. Replaced by another Muslim, and everybody still feels the difference in their relative skills, but now the other groups feel shafted because they were "finally going to get their chance to show what a ____ would do in that job."

If we add in the effects of Claudia (negligible, since we're averaging the number of magically distasteful) and Fati, we'll be somewhere around +4 if we didn't have the Divided Loyalty hook. The Jews should have the lowest Loyalty score. The "Others" should be the average score, feeling the least pull from religious allegiance. The Islamic faction should be higher-than-average, as they feel strongly represented by Fati and Raoudha. Where should we put the Christians? Why? What factors of the setting affect their allegiance to the covenant?

After that, we only need to decide how wide the range is, note the starting points, and then work from them for future calculations.

Well, IMO, muslims should be second, christians first. While they are represented by Fati and Raoudha, the ultimate authority lies in the hand of mostly christian magi, at least nominally.
So, something like "Fati and Raoudha are doing a great job, too bad they gotta answer to these devil worshippers" and "Luckily, we have christian magi or else, this covenant would be governed by infidels".

Not that this is terribly important

Except, would this be the attitude of your Typical Hermetic Magus (tm)? After all, they're more educated, should have a basic well-educated grasp of the Divine and are aware that Muslims and Jews are both embraced by The Divine and not the Infernal. It may be the opinion of your typical ignorant rabble, but not necessarily of the Hoi Poloi. (At least, that's my take on it)

Okay, let me try a different tack. I'm wanting to approach this from a character-motivation angle rather than a what-do-the-numbers-say one, because I'm a writer and that's how I roll.

This covenant has been around for, what, going on fifty years (if I remember right)? Probably most of the inhabitants of the covenant and the farmlands that surround and support it were born and raised here, and have known Jaime Lannister (and most, if not all, of the other magi that used to live here) all their lives. The Muslims are probably rather fond of him because of his actions to protect them, their culture and their religion against the Reconquista. The Christians probably feel something similar, because the covenant has been in Al-Andalus for most of the time they've been there, and they have been treated fairly well (or, at least, not poorly) during their lives. Ditto the Jews.

Then, in the last year or two, everything just want kablooie. All but one of their magi was killed or lost at the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa...not a single one of the men who went off to war last summer came back alive. (Which still boggles my mind...by comparison: during the Battle of Gettysburg, the bloodiest battle in American history, the 26th North Carolina Regiment started the first day with 839 men, the largest regiment on either side; three days later, they were down to 152. An 82% casualty rate, with “casualty” being killed, wounded, taken prisoner, or missing – the highest single-battle casualty rate of any regiment during the entire war). um...sorry...history geek-gasm. Where was I?

Oh, right. Um...so. All of their magi are dead and gone. All of their able-bodied men are dead. Like a lot of people, if not most people, do in times of great tragedy, they turn to their faith and to each other (i.e. Divided Loyalty). Yes, they are Cijarans and will stand together against whatever enemy may come their way (literally or figuratively)...but for the first time in a long time, they are not just Cijarans, but they are Cijaran Jews, or Cijaran Christians, or Cijaran Muslims.

Then, to add insult to injury, Jaime Lannister, their lord and master, their protector and benefactor, invites a bunch of...outsiders to the covenant. (I have a feeling that few, if any, of the residents know of his plan to leave). Why are they here? What are their intentions? Only Cygna and maybe Serrano have Gentle Gift, so all of the other newcomers will have to overcome the social effects of The Gift with regards to the residents in addition to what they would normally have to deal with as newcomers to a Strong Community.

It should be easy to see, then, why the residents are going to have a hard time trusting the newcomers, even the ones with Gentle Gift (although they may have an easier time getting the residents to not mistrust them so much than the others). The residents don't really want the newcomers around, they have no idea how they're going to be treated under the new “regime” (and in fact, from rumours they may have heard from other parts of the land, may expect to be mistreated by these apparently Christian interlopers).

Sorry...past my bedtime, I'm rambling a little bit. But my take on it is that it feels to me like we're over-obsessing on the numbers and losing sight of the role-playing slash character motivation aspect of everything.

And with that...I've presented my take on how we should approach the Covenant's Base Loyalty, others have given theirs. As far as I'm concerned, it's up to Amul to decide how he wants to handle it, and I don't really feel like bickering over it anymore. So this is (probably) my last post on Covenant Loyalty numbers-crunching until we have a decision. I'm still working on the Population and Finances aspect of the covenant design, but the Loyalty debate is making my head numb.

Okay, was finally awake, coherent, and not-at-work enough to work something up for the covenant population and finances bit. Had to make a few assumptions (again)...chief of which is that we're not concerning ourselves with the roughly 300 covenfolk that live and work on the Right Side out in the vineyards and fields, the women children and old folk. If not, the math gets even more headachey.

The numbers for the "Points of Inhabitants" looks right, so I'll move on.

By my math, we have (or will have) 70 points in Laboratories (seven labs, assuming upkeep score of 0, with typical use).

[td]Yearly Expenditure Categories[/td][/tr]
[td]Weapons and Armor**[/td][/tr]
[td]Writing Materials[/td][/tr]
[td]Cost Savings: Noland Shepharad, blacksmith (-3 to Consumables)[/td][/tr]
[td]Cost Savings: the Widow Mustafa, vintner (-4 to Provisions)[/td][/tr]
[td]Cost Savings: Hector, glass-blower (-6 to Laboratories); Tatiana, lapidary (-6 to Laboratories); Sophia, silversmith (-6 to Laboratories). Maximum cost savings = £7, total for Laboratories[/td][/tr]
[td]Total Yearly Expenditures[/td][/tr][/table]

    • This is including the Generous Salary (+50%) that I figured into my Covenant Loyalty presentation.
      ** - I have no idea what the "320 points of weapons and armor" is supposed to mean. I'm assuming 1 point per grog, and considering how few men-at-arms we have, unless it's like 50 points per soldier, I think I'm good.
      *** - Not sure if having these three specialists would totally offset the costs of the laboratories.

But yeah, it totally looks like we're going to have to have a few job fairs or something, try to get our covenant back up to something close to decent staffing.

Jobbe Faires you mean. :stuck_out_tongue:

Be prepared for some wage demands , as Serrano will be paying his people £2 each per adult per Hermetic Year.

I think we should institute a Dower for women who wish to remarry , where religious custom permits.

Serrano's a tailor, I'm sure he can sew some pretty deep pockets :stuck_out_tongue:

As with Raoudha and Fati, this is, IMO, not a problem if individual atitude, but perception by others

Christian magi may be kind to muslims and Jews, Raoudha may be compassionate to everyone, but they'll still be viewed as belonging to "the other camp". Sure, they were good to you, but they're an exception, and you can be sure they favor their side even more. Their personnal attitude, over time, will make things better, of course, with individual acts changing some group loyalty. The only problem is the base loyalty, in fact.

At least that's how I see it, as I tried to convey with my previous sentences, but it seems I fail in being clear :frowning:

Hiems will agree, and push for this. Due to his history, he's developing a growing trend towards feminine liberation :laughing: