MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 2692 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Valdemaran Bill of Rights - Ownership of weapons by "Layla Voll" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:05:29 From: "Layla Voll" To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Valdemaran Bill of Rights - Ownership of weapons Message-ID: Peter Allen >Again, as we continue through the world of Valdemar, what TextEvd can be >given towards or against the ability of citizens and commoners to carry, >possess, or otherwise practice the use of weaponry? > >Given that we are surrounded by a series of fighters instead of other >characters, it is only natural for them to have a dagger or perhaps a >crossbow close at hand. Yet, when we venture out of the realm of the >herald, the soldier, the Shin'a'in, is it commonplace for other < characters to carry weapons and be knowledgeable of their use? And, thinking of the "right to bear arms," what is the concomitant responsibility to raise a militia in Valdemar? I seem to remember that in LHM, Vanyel's father was expecting that he and his personal guard would be expected to show up if it came to an all-out border war, but that the Guard units were doing most of the patrolling even when there was significant skirmishing nearby. It seemed as if, even as early as Vanyel's time, the personal armies of the local lords had been stripped down as much as possible, to be replaced by the national Guard. (Anyone know if that was just common sense, or if it came about in response to some early threatened rebellion by the great lords?) Also, are there any restrictions on weapons within the city limits? It seems to me that having everyone go around fully armed out on the plains or in a rural forested area is a different proposition than having loads of heavily armed people cheek by jowl in the Haven marketplace. I believe, for instance, that ancient Rome used to have laws against carrying bladed weapons within the city walls. > Another thought for the conversation is that, restricted to Valdemar, >do >you believe that it is within an Herald's duty to restrict the use of >certain weapons - or perhaps the knowledge thereof - from the commoner? >Perhaps even more interesting is the next: is it within a Companion's duty >to do the same? Kethry's attitude on this one was interesting: when she devised a really nasty weapon (her reflective trap in Oathbreakers), she decided it was actually her responsibility to disseminate it as widely as possible, with the reasoning that if she could create it, so could others, and if it was widely disseminated, then everyone would have a chance to develop defenses against it. I'm not sure if that works for everything, though: it seems as if Velgarth is full of things that only certain people can tap into, and that, therefore, only certain people could defend against. The Companions restrict the use of certain weapons for a long time by hiding the knowledge of magic altogether: this works for a long time, but ultimately causes some problems when Valdemar actually has to face magic-users. The real problem is that ignorance only lasts so long -- some day, someone will discover the weapon that you've been trying to hide. I suppose the Companions felt that they would cross that bridge when they came to it. Layla _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ End of MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 2692 **********************************