Alr, very excited to do my next post but before I do so what definition of peace bond are we using? There’s a couple and I don’t want to get things mixed up.

It could mean different things one culture to another, so part of this could be a misunderstanding of the term. Kavian means tying the hilt to the scabbard. It prevents the hasty utilization of the weapon, say in a fit of anger. It would require deliberate attention to remove the tie and release the blade, and time.

Got it thank you! [then Asherah probably wouldn’t know the meaning either lol]

I think anyone who does any degree of long distance travel will be familiar with the practice.

Sorry if it’s rough, I wrote it entirely on my phone which can be quite the pain.

@Li Hua
Interesting stuff. I understand a lot better, now.

@Kavian/Asherah
Yeah I also had trouble finding what peacebonding meant. I knew it had to do something with weaponry, but my first Google result led to some Canadian legal term. I figured that wasn't the right thing so I kept looking. I ended up on a section of Wikipedia about sci-fi conventions and near the bottom of the page there was some information about peacebonding.

It sounds like a wild ride but it actually took less than two minutes. Browsing the internet is a wild ride. pretty sure it would instantly kill a Victorian child ROFL

It can indeed.

@Interesting stuff
Yes indeed. History is fun. Maths is fun. And when they come together it's even better.

@Peacebonding
 I did recognise it :) The term I am familiar with is peace knotting but they are (I think) the same concept

The idea is that law enforcement (when you enter a controlled area) uses a weak knot that you can break easily but is obvious. Kind of like the original Gordion knot. The Gordion knot was a means of knowing if someone had broken into your room. The peaceknot/bond is a way of knowing if you have drawn your weapon. When you leave the controlled area, they check the knot. If it's broken you have explaining to do

As far as I know it's used at cosplays and SCA and similar, but there are no records of it being used anywhere in western history, and only some sparse evidence for it being used in the samurai era

That said I use it in my fantasy games: it's a good idea

Nice, I like that a lot and will definitely include it in the setting.
The fact that it's easily breakable means it can't be used to set traps, so it would be a lot less abusable.

Ah the Gordion knot. I don't recognize the name, but I infer that it's similar to putting a slip of paper in your doorframe (if it's on the ground when you return, someone entered)?

Reply incoming to Abarion thread

Real quick, let me know if this is all acceptable (working on the Timeline in the Wiki):

(Sigismund will be 24)
Asherah: 17 (probably 18 soon)
Zhao Li Hua: 22 (probably 23 soon)
Kavian Aminar: 15 (Ruhan is 14, so Kavian should be at most 19)

I have a few sources for peace bonding.

Edo period Japan(1603-1868):

Stephen Turnbull, Samurai: The World of the Warrior (Osprey Publishing, 2003). This book provides a detailed account of the practice of peace bonding among samurai in Japan.

In Western history, a similar practice was observed in medieval European cities, where weapons were often peace-bonded as a security measure during fairs, markets, and public gatherings. For instance, in some medieval European cities, visitors were required to tie their weapons to their belts or scabbards to prevent them from being drawn easily, thus maintaining public order and safety.

A specific example from Western history includes the medieval city of Lübeck in Northern Germany, where the city's laws mandated that "swords, knives, and other weapons must be secured to prevent sudden violence." This practice was common in other Hanseatic League cities as well, aimed at preserving the peace in bustling trade hubs.

The Lübeck law references can be found in historical legal texts from the city archives, documenting the regulations imposed on visitors and citizens to ensure public safety.

For a scholarly discussion on the peace-bonding practice in medieval Europe, see:

Robert Bartlett, The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change 950-1350 (Princeton University Press, 1994). This book explores various aspects of social and legal norms in medieval European cities, including measures to control violence.

https://youtu.be/9rp3nve9CJk

Just on a casual search, weapons are generally highly restricted in cities. Swords being considered a weapon of war and a target for law enforcement in particular. Not an all inclusive list of sources here with plenty of room for debate on individual cultures and other exceptions. I can see a case for nobility being able to carry freely, but only for local nobility charged with such duties as public order and enforcement, certainly not for foreign nobles who aren't a part of a diplomatic envoy. Probably rare to witness openly carry even still. I think its enough evidence not to dismiss the dangers dedicated weapons pose and the controls in place in "most" societies.

My viewpoint on weapons control in history and RPG's in particular is colored strongly by my favorite system, GURPS.



They've done an extensive amount of research on the subject and have a detailed system on how to model the issue of controlled substances and weapons in different societies and time periods. The quote is where I got the assault rifle comparison. I ran into it by chance and forgot I got it from here lol.

Conspicuous sure, but threatening? If anything, a person wearing plate armor is LESS threatening, because their mobility is restricted.

I'm not familiar with GURPS (I've been a bit interested in learning more lately and I've heard its excellent) but regardless of what GURPS has to say, I'm doing my best to avoid basing this world off TTRPGs. For example, I really like D&D, but it's designed for 'gameplay' not 'worldbuilding'. Plenty of fans of the game point out that some things just don't make sense if you think about them too much.

I'm sure GURPS is the same, at least to some extent. Sacrifices always have to be made for TTRPG systems, because you can't model reality while maintaining playability (a good example of not recognizing this is FATAL, which on top of being horribly designed and purposely offensive, is also unbearable to actually play)

This game is freeform, so it can avoid those problems because it's more about telling a story (though the power systems lean towards hard fantasy, as that's my preference, but mainly because it makes it easier to ensure players know what is and is not possible for their characters)

All of that is tangential though, because the idea doesn't actually rely on the GURPS rules.

This seems to be getting some discussion, so this is what I'm currently thinking: It all depends on the region

ex. If the region is very violent, peacebonding would be more of a necessity
ex. If the region has a warlike culture, carrying a weapon may be considered a personal right, even amongst commoners.

~

I agree with your distinction between landed and foreign nobles. However, there are still a number of reasons Li Hua would be permitted to carry a sword.

Firstly, she's very conspicuous, so it's doubtful whether she could commit a crime and escape easily. Getting away with crime is easier than it is in modernity, but it would be harder for her than it would be for the average person.

Secondly, Abarion is actually rather sensitive to other cultures. It's a trade city after all. They may presume it's part of her culture to carry a ceremonial weapon. She also has valuable items on her, so merchants whouldn't want to offend her and risk losing her business.

Thirdly, she is clearly in possession of some wealth. If someone were to try and steal from her, she must be able to defend her self and property.

Fourthly, her weapon is copper. That doesn't mean it can't kill, but that it's inferior to the bronze weaponry used locally. Whether guards are actually armed with swords rather than clubs or something is a changing variable depending on where you are in the kingdom.

Fifthly, it's for the same two reasons I let my adventuring parties carry their equipment - 1. it's more convenient and 2. there's always a bigger fish. If Li Hua went on a rampage for whatever reason, the city has enough resources to take her down.

Li Hua would have entered the city properly, and so she is known by the city administration. She's only been here a short time, maybe just one or two days - so she will likely be contacted soon to sort out the terms of her visit.

There are even more reasons to carry a weapon, but they don't apply to Li Hua. For nobles, they would also have to keep in mind that:

6. Should they misbehave, they have a lot to lose. It's only worth drawing a weapon if its an emergency. Using it to intimidate would mean social or legal punishment.

7. It's a display of status to carry a good weapon. Especially among more military-oriented families. It would be discorteous to make a comment about it, let alone to deny their right to carry one.

---

Now some reasons why peacebonding or disarmament could be preferrable:

1. Reduces risk of violence. For a number of reasons already stated, it's exceedingly rare for a noble with a weapon to use it. For commoners, they would have much more reason and chance of using it. Thus, they are not allowed to carry weapons. The guards would be suspicious and take you in (there's no human rights in the ancient age, so they can arrest you if they can justify it to their superiors later)

2. More peaceful atmosphere. This would be relevant if the atmosphere was one of conflict, but its not in Abarion. It's a trade city, mostly peaceful. The powers at be have a vested interest in ensuring that trade flows smoothly. Violence would be punished much more harshly than it would be in other settlements.

---

As for the interpersonal arguments between Kavian and Li Hua, it seems that it could be solved simply by agreeing to meet at a later date?

On the possibility of combat,
here's a few things to keep in mind:

1. Li Hua with sword could kill Kavian and Asherah with little effort. If they split up to run away, she could probably only kill one.

2. Li Hua without a sword still has enough training be able to overcome the mere physical difference between her and Kavian. A grapple would be the worst case scenario for her, but it would end up as a wrestling match on the floor, rather than a one-sided chokehold. Also, despite her small stature, she would have a deceptive amount of arm strength since some force is required to wield even a lighter sword.

3. If the two attacked her together, while she was unarmed, it would be a brutal fight.

4. Li Hua without a sword versus Kavian's party members (excluding himself) would come down to the terrain. If it's the cave, she gets overwhelmed and dogpiled. If it's open, she could try and make it a series of individual battles, or just decide to escape.

5. Li Hua with a sword versus Kavian's party members (excluding himself) would also come down to the terrain, but with more bloodshed. If it's the cave, she likely maims or kills a number of them before getting disarmed and dogpiled. If it's open, she could win or lose depending on how everything plays out.

If any of you think any of this is inaccurate, let me know. It's just my estimation of what might happen in certain situations. The cave in this situation counts as both cramped terrain (bad for sword wielding and for kiting) and terrain that is exclusively familiar to one side.

Also, a couple of Kavian's party wouldn't be actual fighting forces. The young ones who haven't hit puberty yet would at most serve as distractions, they wouldn't be able to grapple Li Hua properly. They would be at a major physical disadvantage, as well.

---

This isn't me advocating for combat. Rather, hopefully you can see that most of these situations end with mutual damage. Whether your characters know this much or think this way is up to you. To me, Li Hua seems a bit underconfident when disarmed, but a bit overconfident when armed.

Kavian is correct that he doesn't believe he represents a threat, but he might not have the experience to recognize that with numbers and terrain, he poses an equal threat to Li Hua.

---

Anyway, meeting in neutral ground would be good, but it seems you're all getting dragged along with Sigismund (the old man is Alvisdan if you remember that NPC, though none of you have learned his name yet) - technically this could be considered a kind of neutral ground.

Actually, funnily enough, Alvisdan appearing was planned before I realized where this convo on safety and threat was going. In a sense, this is a good solution, because Alvisdan could and would stop any violence that breaks out. I won't say any more, you all might or might not get a chance to see him display his strength.

I wasn't saying that we should follow the example of GURPS, just sharing why the concept of arms control is ingrained in my head. Also, I felt everyone was being a little dismissive of the notion that a sword is a big deal. Regardless of the laws and social statuses involved wearing a weapon is not inconsequential, it attracts attention in all cases, especially a weapon that serves no other purpose other than to kill people, vs a spear or axe that has other applications like hunting or as a tool. I don't think it likely that someone who has traveled far hasn't been confronted about the weapon or asked to set it aside, check it in, or peace bond it at some point.

Regardless of what the officials have to say on the matter of Li Hua and the permissibility of her weapon and what they will or will not do in response to it, the commoners won't see it the same way. Kavian feels threatened, the weapon is not welcome.

Realism aside, I agree with Froggy on the game applications. It's a game, someday I will want to carry my sword too, lol.






I believe I tried this at the outset, specifically for the purpose of avoiding this entire conflict over the weapon. Meeting at a neutral location in public so everyone feels safe.

We decided to continue our plan together with Asherah and Kavian and invited her along, making it clear that she is welcome, but the weapon is not. I think its fair for Kavian to dictate what is welcome in his abode.

Then he made a large concession to allow her to keep the weapon with a peace bond.

Then he suggested if she does not feel safe doing this they can meet another time, like at her inn in the morning.

I don't think it's fair to say he was trying for force anything, or take away a woman's defense, or has been impolite, lacks empathy, or is speaking words of control. The weapon isn't welcome where he is going, we don't trust each other yet, if you have a problem with this we can meet elsewhere.

As far as a fight is concerned it is very concerning to Kavian. You give scenarios where technically it is possible for Kavian's group to overcome Li Hua in certain situations. I disagree. These are children and nobody has any combat training. Even if united they could overcome her, they haven't the will to execute it. First sign of bloodshed and their moral would break, it would be a slaughter. A lot of crying, begging, pleading and all we could do is trust she will stop. Kavian knows this, so the sword is not welcome.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:39, Mon 20 May.

There doesn't seem to be any disagreement then, if both parties agree to meet at a later date.

Though, you're all being whisked away at the moment.

Also, @Li Hua - I'm not sure if I'm misreading, but does Li Hua think Sigismund is a God? If that's the case, I've got to ask how she came to that conclusion LOL

@Sigismund
The feeling of immense pressure was new and occured at the same moment as Sigismund. Li Hua at the moment has felt three types of supernatural feeling

• From a God
• From Kavian and Asherah (felt similar)
• The 'pressure' when Sigismund arrived

Since she can't sense herself she doesn't know what she feels like to the others. Asherah kindly told her that 'it's the same as Kavian'.

So this is a cool and interesting thing. What is Sigismund? How did that pressure happen. What was the 'feeling of something being released'...

---

Weapon control is a different topic. It is what it is. But in this scene it has been established Li Hua has a sword with her. Discussing that is valuable and good for the game but unrelated to this scene. We can't take it away now without deleting a significant part of the scene. If I had known it was going to cause a problem I wouldn't have brought it.

Just as an aside the purpose of weapon control had nothing to do with stopping insane psychopaths trying to mass murder people (not a common problem back then although banditry was). It was about control of the population.

---

Anyway onto the topic at hand. Thank you for the summary Kavian. My view is entirely different. I did spend significant time making a similar post  but there is no value to it so I deleted it. What we want to do is move forward.

I understand you don't understand Li Hua's situation. I'm not surprised. You're a man. You mass twice what she does. You're not alone in a foreign city and you haven't had a number of unpleasant supernatural events occur to you.

Now continuing on trying to take away Li Hua's protection is not going to be a postive and fruitful endeavour. I think that's pretty clear. Trying to talk and engage will. The best thing to do at times like this is to ignore the problem. Work around it.

It seems to me that really the easist thing to do is to just talk here. We don't need to go somewhere else. But I'm OK with that if other people want to.

Now come on. Let's drop the unpleasant RP and move onto nice RP
This message was last edited by the player at 07:28, Mon 20 May.

I'm trying to find a way to come with but I'm holding everyone's dinner! Got to give a kid a reason to live and afraid Froggy will kill him if I don't stay lol.

There's the 'NPCs always die if there isn't a PC with them' theory

@ Kavian

Me? Killing characters? Noooooo......
*laughs in evil GM*

@ Li Hua

I might have not explicitly stated this (maybe I felt it was implied heavily enough) but Kavian, Asherah, and Sigismund all feel 'similar' to Li Hua. In fact, Kavian put it best when he said it feels like "We are all of the same ilk" (paraphrased)

The God's presence and the mystery pressure were indeed different. The former was far more terrifying and unpleasant. The latter just felt stuffy.
The sense of freedom and liberation after the pressure disappeared is basically the flip side of the coin to the pressure itself. Like how one feels discomfort holding their breath, and so it feels euphoric to take a big gulp of air afterwards.

@ All - weapon control

Yeah, weapon control wise, I've got a lot of new stuff to think about. I think I'll use the idea to add flavor to cultures in the future.

The fact that weapon control is rather loose in these parts should hopefully give more positive feelings rather than negative ones - as Li Hua correctly pointed out that weapon control IRL was more about populace control than stopping random murderous psychopaths (those kind of people are very rare, and they would have been far more likely to be exiled or executed before they ever get to go on a true rampage)

At least in Abarion, the threat of nobles or random merchants having a weapon they may or may not even know how to use - is very low. Sure, it's not nothing, but this sort of danger can be easily normalized and accounted for. I mean, in modernity think about just how deadly and terrifying it is that we actually let people drive cars. Anybody could decide to just swerve into pedestrians and kill dozens of families. Obviously, this is incredibly incredibly rare, because as mentioned above, murderous psychopaths are not common at all (far less than 1%, even natural sociopaths know what's in their best interest most the time) and they never get to make the same mistake twice.

That's not to mention the much realer risk of traffic accidents.

Basically, if the utility of something outweights its dangers, those dangers will be allowed and attempt to moderate them will be made.

In Abarion's case, there isn't a huge benefit to letting certain people carry weapons, but the difficulty of preventing it entirely is too high to justify taking such overt action.

@ All - the future

I need to respond to Ahirom, I shouldn't make him wait too much longer.

Besides that, you've all got some stuff that needs my personal attention (except maybe Li Hua, if you want to time skip a day for her)

Here's what we'll be doing:

 1. Zhao Li Hua & GM - Whatever she intends to do until tomorrow morning. We can skip this if its not important

 2. Kavian & GM - You have things you want to do with your squad, and I'd like to RP that a bit since it's been a while since I've used those NPCs

 3. Ash, Sig (NPC) & GM - Dinner encounter. Not sure what we're doing here exactly, but it seems like everyone is going to try and pry info from one another. Ash and Sig get along well, and Alvisdan came off as more intense than he normally is, so this might be more friendly exchange of thoughts than intensive mutual interrogations. We'll see how it goes.

--

Li Hua and Kavian are free to post right away. Kavian, if you want a separate thread, let me know first.

Asherah, please wait a short time while I decide where to have Sig/Alvisdan bring you. IF you want a new thread for it, I can make it happen.

--

Ok, good hustle team - nobody died [[yet]] XD

I'm fine staying in the Abarion thread but if it would make it easier on you I'm happy to go into a different thread as well.

In part. I strongly agree with the sentiment that weapon control is a method of controlling a populace, but it is just one aspect. There is dueling as well. There is domestic violence, armed robberies (not confined to the modern age and guns), muggings, foolish young male posturing, tavern brawls escalating, influential families at war ect...

It wasn't long ago that congressmen would beat each other on the floor of the senate or step out to duel with pistols.

From my fencing days I remember the history lessons shared with me on the subject. Young men killing each other, dueling, was a serious issue. Some of the rules in modern fencing were less about creating a sport of sword fighting and more about teaching students to defend themselves. Too often both fighters died because they were so aggressive and wasted no time trying to parry. Epee fencing was created as a first blood rule so it didn't have the end in death. "Right of way", taken by parrying first before being allowed to attack back, was a method of training muscle memory to defend at all, lol.

The further you go back in history the cheaper life becomes. Killing each other was less of a "big deal". It was expensive for society.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:00, Mon 20 May.

Well this is an interesting chat. Nice to have it

So as far as I know duelling is a modern invention. By modern in this game we mean 'in the last 1200 years'. During the bronze age we don't have historical records or indications of duels. And by duel I mean 'I will meet you at <time> with some rules and formalities and legal protection/support in some way'. The earliest I am aware of are the Vikings with their Holmgard

Sure there were personal disputes that occasionally degenerated into violence. The law didn't recognise these in any way (unlike later medeival duels of the kind so common in movies and books). There were gladiatoral games in cultures like the Romans but these were set pieces with slaves usually. Or prisoners

The closest really was 'on the battlefield there were codified ways that heroes could meet'. This is in fiction of course (homeric duels). There's a possibility that this happened in reality, but we have no records either way.  There were also ways that you could have a trial by combat if all other mechanisms were not open to you in some legal discussions, but we don't have many (if any) records of them.

Given that duelling is basically a mechanism for formalised bullying, I think the ancients had it right!

As for life being cheap, that's very true. Still in many bronze age cultures the penalty for murder was death (Egypt for example). It probably isn't murder if a high ranking person kills a low ranking )different thing to what we are talking about - the high ranking person isn't subject to weapon control) but even then there is usually a cost.

Just some things to consider. There is nothing new under the sun. Mankind behaves today like they always have. Look at what we have now to see what things were like then. The same root, the same problems, the same motivations and behaviors. Some different methods over the years to make it better.

On another note, I'd like a private thread for Kavian. I'll wrap up some things in the Abarion thread.

Oh, the Epic of Gilgamesh. 2100BCE, Gilgamesh engages Endiku in a formal challenge to resolve a conflict over a woman and Gilgamesh's behavior. Technically a duel is just a formal challenge, I don't think we can put a date on how far back that goes. Even if the story is fictional the concept of a duel is understood.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:21, Tue 21 May.

But to your point, yes is doesn't fit this particular definition. But, most dictionary definitions of a duel are just "formal, single combat, prearranged, and conflict resolution."

In terms of in the 'historic record' record of the three kingdoms (not romance of the three kingdoms) noted a few duels and was written like 300 ad or so