Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Crime Examples for the Rites of Punishment

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Now I'm wondering what exactly must a Garou do to become ostracized from his tribe, either temporarily or permanently.

    Septs are the basic units of Garou government so they handle most criminal matters. So I imagine tribal ostracisms have to take into consideration only those matters that concern the tribe. Most of the time these would purely cultural or religious (totem) issues or taboos. Though some of the more formal and organized tribes (like Silver Fangs) could have more institutional crimes.

    I think these are likely the cases where the personal behavior or actions of that Garou greatly contradict the customs of the tribe or bring dishonor or shame to the tribe. The Get of Fenris might do it in cases of great cowardice while the Shadow Lords do it to someone who botched a conspiracy to seize power and greatly harmed the reputation of the tribe. Silver Fangs, as devotees of Falcon, might do it to someone who appears particularly dishonorable. I can't imagine the Bone Gnawers doing it at all - except as a way to avoid proclaiming the death penalty instead.

    I wonder if it would be a good discussion to examine each tribe in detail and figure out what would apply.

    Comment


    • #32
      I would guess that mono-tribal septs or septs with a clear majority of one tribe would ostrazise a garou from the tribe, while multi tribal septs usually would not. If one garou did something so heinous that it warrants expulsion from the tribe (and a member with of that tribe with the appropriate standing demands this), the offender might be brought to a sept of that tribe or Elders of that tribe would be invited to the multi-tribal sept.

      As far as deeds go, that would warrant such a punishment, well, that depends on the tribe. In most cases it would require a deed that goes against the fundamental believes or practices of the tribe.
      For Jacob it might have been enough that Albrecht didn't show him the respect he demanded (paired with the fact that the up-and-coming great-grandson was heir apparent). Other crimes might harming the tribe and its traditions for selfish reasons, like killing the last of a once important family line, undermining the own house's authority with the other tribes that live in their fiefdom.
      For Shadow Lords any botched op that shines a bad light on the tribe could entail the removal from the tribe of the ones responsible, or the scapegoat, or both.
      For the Silent Striders, well I guess someone who would murder one of the Past Live Kids (Bennu & Co) would thrown off the tribe in addition to any other punishment that murder carries. Also, pacts with Setites, or any non Children-of-Osiris vampires, might lead to expulsion.
      For Black Furies it would be murder of children or taking part in any subjugation of women to men (with the exception of consensual BDSM).
      For Bone Gnawers, not helping other Bone Gnawers to a point where they died.
      For Children of Gaia, repeated cruelty against innocent people.
      For Red Talon, acting human repeatedly .
      For Fianna, repeatedly breaking the tradition of hospitality. Igniting large scale conflict between Fianna and Fae.
      For Get of Fenris, cowardice, other weaknesses and failure to conquer one's own weakness.

      That's from the top of my head. Might need to refine those statements, maybe.

      Comment


      • #33
        I think we'll disagree whether septs can ostracize a Garou from his tribe. I don't think that a sept can decide such things. A rank one caern (the most likely to be mono-tribal) might not even have 10 Garou while even a rank five caern (the least likely to be monotribal) may have around 40 Garou. Surely these low numbers of Garou can't ostracize a Garou from his entire tribe. How can something like six Garou of a single sept possibly ostracize someone from their entire tribe? I think that has to be decided with many Garou at a tribal (not sept) moot. Something like a Grand Moot where all the tribe members from the region are summoned to discuss important matters. I think something only like that could have the authority or legitimacy to do so. (I also remember previous threads where I discussed tribal moots and you had a difficult time thinking of them as something separate from sept moots, so I suspect you won't be able to wrap your head around that.)

        But regardless of the quorum or format of such a decision, I think we're in alignment of the kinds of things that would cause a tribe to ostracize a Garou from their tribe (for whatever duration). I think this is an example of things that should have been in the tribebooks, but we're never included to my recollection.

        Comment


        • #34
          Septs can introduce garou into tribes through the Rite of Passage, why shouldn't they be able to remove them?
          I'd argue that a significant number of garou of that tribe need to be involved in the education of the garou prior to the Rite of Passage, as well as in the hearing or other decision making about the ostracism. I know the RAW doesn't give an indication that the education needs to be appropriate for the tribe the garou enters or that members of the tribe need to be involved (hey, couple of Black Furies trying to educate a male Fianna lost cub, what could go wrong?). But I think in most cases this is what happens, special snowflakes not withstanding, being mentored by tribal totem, Numen/Spirit Familiar, Past Live / Ancestor Backgrounds and appropriate Merits, and so on...

          But....
          Would a Get of Fenris Jarl Elder, with his Truthcatcher Athro and Ritemaster Athro council need to lock away a garou who committed acts so heinous that permanent ostracism is even on the table so that other septs form other regions in the world can send garou to meddle in their affairs. Hell no. They would ostracise the bastard, bash his brains in and feed the body to the pigs before breakfast. Why, because Fenris himself would frenzy through their caern if they didn't. That would be especially true if the Songkeeper had an old tale that sets precedent.

          If that bastard would have wanted a fair trail and spectators, so that Galliards will immortalize him for his crimes, he should have betrayed and get ostracised by the Glass Walkers or some other Urrah-bullshit-tribe.

          The tribe novels show a different story.
          Here a multi-tribal grand moot is summoned together, so the fate of Arkady can be decided. A high ranking, sept leader, purest in a generation, Silver Fang garou, in whom's case the question of guilt is not yet determined. Sure, he controlled a Thunderwyrm, but who wouldn't if he could save his (blood relative) cousin. Sure, he was banished by Albrecht, the nominal King of all Garou who is reigning somewhere beyond the Atlantik, but nobody knows why (for Albrecht, Mari and Evan never told anyone). Also, Arkady wasn't in custody at the time, so the whole thing was a political stunt, initiated by a Get of Fenris Jarl or all people.

          I can totally see, situation like this, where the possibility of guilt or the severity of the punishment is still open for discussion and where possibly a wider number of voices from the tribe needs to be heard, but I also totally see situations, where the matter is so clear, that septs wouldn't bother, because it would be unwise and dishonourable to delay. Also, cases where the perp isn't in custody (not that ostrazism works over a distance, RAW).
          Last edited by heinrich; 12-10-2020, 06:52 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            I think there are many errors in your analysis. The primary ones being of jurisdiction and authority. You are also making many assumptions that shouldn't be assumed.

            Originally posted by heinrich View Post
            Would a Get of Fenris Jarl Elder, with his Truthcatcher Athro and Ritemaster Athro council need to lock away a garou who committed acts so heinous
            Who says they are so heinous? This one sept? What if all the other Garou of that tribe disagree that the acts are heinous enough for tribal ostracism? You are assuming that the sept's ideas and that the specific scenario would be agreed by all other septs. But that isn't necessarily the case. What if the sept is filled with morons who don't know what they are doing? What if the sept leadership is abusing their power? We would like to think that is not the case, but it isn't necessarily so. It's one thing for a sept's leadership to screw up in matters that only pertain to their sept. But when that sept attempts to speak for an entire tribe, it's a different matter.

            Originally posted by heinrich View Post
            that permanent ostracism is even on the table so that other septs form other regions in the world can send garou to meddle in their affairs.
            But the other tribe members are not meddling in the sept's affairs. The sept is meddling in tribal affairs. The sept has authority to make decision on the matters that affect their sept. But the sept doesn't have authority to make decisions for the entire tribe. Let's say its a rank one sept with six Garou. Do these six Garou make a decision on behalf of the entire tribe? I don't think so. They get to make decisions for their sept, and their sept alone. They're not authorized to speak or act on behalf of the entire tribe.

            Originally posted by heinrich View Post
            Hell no. They would ostracise the bastard, bash his brains in and feed the body to the pigs before breakfast. Why, because Fenris himself would frenzy through their caern if they didn't.
            Or in my scenario, the sept has overstepped their authority and made the wrong decision. So the rest of the tribe steps in, bash the brains in of ever member of that sept and feeds their bodies to the pigs before breakfast. Why, because Fenris himself would frenzy through their caerns if they didn't.

            Originally posted by heinrich View Post
            That would be especially true if the Songkeeper had an old tale that sets precedent.
            And what if all the other Garou of that tribe have Songkeepers with other old tales that set equal or greater precedent? Even if we assume that in most cases, the local sept will act correctly in ways the other tribe members will agree, that won't always be so. And they are always going to be local big wigs of that tribe who will want their say in such tribal matters. (How dare that sept ostracize someone from the tribe? I was nearby, the great big elder of the tribe with all this renown. Who do they think they are making this decision for the entire tribe by not consulting me when they don't have anywhere near the reputation I do?) They need to be appeased by including them in the process lest they get so pissed off they create problems for the sept.

            Originally posted by heinrich View Post
            If that bastard would have wanted a fair trail and spectators, so that Galliards will immortalize him for his crimes, he should have betrayed and get ostracised by the Glass Walkers or some other Urrah-bullshit-tribe.
            And what if the rest of the tribe decides that whatever the accused Garou may have done, it doesn't amount to something that merits ostracism of the entire tribe? Or feel the ostracism should only be for a lesser period instead of permanent?

            You are assuming the rest of the tribe will agree with their judgment. But they may not for various reasons.

            That's why I think some kind of tribal grand moot needs to be held. It confers legitimacy to the decision to ostracize someone from the tribe, immediately communicates that decision to a large group of tribal Garou, and offers the chance for many informed tribal leaders and experts to influence the decision. It also prevents potential abuse of ostracism by forcing a small group of Garou to explain their evaluation to others.

            If the matter is so important that Garou don't want to wait, the Garou have lots of ways of expediting the process. Moonbridges allow instantaneous travel, and on real high priority matters, someone can gather up prominent Philodoxes and other experts to render a decision. And if the matter is simply ostracism, why the rush? What does it matter if the ostracism begins next week or next month instead of now? If the sept feels punishment is immediately needed, they can always punish in other ways that only impact the local sept while leaving the issue of tribal ostracism to a body that is better suited to render that judgment.

            Many things can be decided at the sept level. But local septs are not the governing authority of an entire tribe.

            We can go back and forth on this. But I don't think we're going to convince each other so let's move on.

            Comment


            • #36
              In a nutshell:
              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              Many things can be decided at the sept level. But local septs are not the governing authority of an entire tribe.
              But ostracism of a single criminal in an undisputed case is not the same as changing tribal policy. It simply isn't a matter for the whole tribe, if there already is a policy in place in form of precedence and if the local sept is a sufficient local tribal authority anyway.

              Complex answer:
              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              I think there are many errors in your analysis. The primary ones being of jurisdiction and authority. You are also making many assumptions that shouldn't be assumed.
              Jurisdiction and authority are so human concepts.
              And, sure, there is the whole Litany which is a whole poem about precedent, due process, judge appointments, juridical districts and my favourite all the bar rhymes about appeal courts.
              Funny how only some tenets always make it into the books...

              Seriously, I agree that authority and jurisdiction matters are to be concerned with, but really, I think you give them way to much room in your head canon.
              I would believe they are a lot less defined, as seem to think...

              But, for one thing, I would think that Fianna can't ostracise a Get from his tribe, even if the Get would agree. A Fianna Ritemaster in the presence and with the accordance of a significant Get presence (in terms of numbers and rank), however, could.


              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              Who says they are so heinous? This one sept? What if all the other Garou of that tribe disagree that the acts are heinous enough for tribal ostracism? You are assuming that the sept's ideas and that the specific scenario would be agreed by all other septs. But that isn't necessarily the case. What if the sept is filled with morons who don't know what they are doing? What if the sept leadership is abusing their power? We would like to think that is not the case, but it isn't necessarily so. It's one thing for a sept's leadership to screw up in matters that only pertain to their sept. But when that sept attempts to speak for an entire tribe, it's a different matter.
              All possibilities. Although some are pretty constructed.

              In any case the sept Elders might try the Rite, and might succeed. The "perp turned victim" might believe he is ostracised until, for example, his tribal totem says otherwise. Wait, seems that's exactly what happened to the 2nd Edition signature character... huh...

              Just to clarify, there are matters that are certain to such a degree that local elders feel (and probably are) within their right to remove an offender from the tribe.
              Especially, but not limited to, someone their sept introduced into the tribe and ...
              also especially, but not limited to, offences for which the Talesinger/Truthcatcher recollect clear precedence, and...
              also especially, but not limited to, repeat-offenders.

              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              But the other tribe members are not meddling in the sept's affairs. The sept is meddling in tribal affairs.
              First of all, I see the sept as the central part of garou society, as per 1st and 2nd Edition. I don't really like the more global scale approaches to Garou Nation affairs that were present in revised and onwards. There is, however, also a mention of local laws and traditions, per sept, might have a status that equals the tenets of the Litany in the books, so law is locally decided.

              But, besides that, septs make decisions for the entire tribe all the time, mainly introducing members to the tribe. "The tribe" does not send an emmissary to each and every Rite of Passage to give "the tribes'" blessing. And why would the tribe do that? The local members of the tribe who perform the Rite basically have a mandate to do what they do. Shouldn't punishment Rites have the same level of mandate? Sure, the local garou could abuse that, but what about the benefit of the doubt that garou are honourable and wouldn't use the Rite recklessly. Also, just like with the Rite of Passage, other septs could opt to ignore the punishment rite or choose to re-invite the garou into the tribe.

              Evan became a Wendigo - yet it is documented, that due to steps in separation to native American ancestors and the resulting skin colour and facial features he had to proof himself again and again when visiting Wendigo septs for many years until his renown was so great that Wendigo accepted him entirely. So, if introduction into the tribe is not necessarily accepted automatically by each member of the tribe, why shouldn't exclusion from the tribe be any different. Meaning, that some make the decision, but besides being a mystical, ritualistic and usually globally accepted procedure, individual tribe members can choose to evaluate it differently.

              And that is perfectly normal. The communal registry office granted my daughter German citizenship at birth, it wasn't discussed by Angela Merkel and the federal cabinet, as far as I know.
              And the same goes for crimes as well. According to John Olivers Last Week Tonight, US citizen can loose their right to vote, on every level up to the federal elections, because they plead 'no contest' on felony charges.
              Meaning some guy, who might have been voted into the judge office in some small hillbilly town without necessarily being qualified, can remove fundamental rights from a person, who doesn't necessarily have to be guilty of anything, but fell victim to a system that bullied him into submitting to a system that actually might charge you for the supposedly free attorney to help him out. Rights, that one other not necessarily qualified person or a board of people with few to no oversight might or might not restore on a whim.
              Do other US citizens feel that this system is wrong, sure, to a degree that they do anything about it, seemingly not. So, if for the second time a pack member was killed because of sheer cowardice of a get cliath and the local Get sept leader, an Adren, as well as his complete 12 garou sept (all Fostern and Cliath) would feel, that the garou isn't worth being a Get anymore, than sure, Get in Denmark might object (bur really they shouldn't), but on what grounds? Being not consulted on a matter that doesn't really concern them? Shit, should the sept have send message to Grimfang - he is the authority in the Americas, isn't he?

              So, to think that groups as diverse and complex as garou tribes, and as driven by Rage and animal instincts, and as focused on their (local) territory have a regional or even global court procedure is in my mind wishful thinking. I mean, nothing in RAW indicates something like that, aside from the House of Gleaming Eye being possibly Silver Fang internal police or undermined by Wyrm themselves. Not sure.
              Oh, and the Fangs of Garm. What about this, self proclaimed Get justicars. I can totally see how they come in conflict with a local Get (or any tribes') sept, if they decide to exercise their justice on another ones turf...

              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              The sept has authority to make decision on the matters that affect their sept. But the sept doesn't have authority to make decisions for the entire tribe. Let's say its a rank one sept with six Garou. Do these six Garou make a decision on behalf of the entire tribe? I don't think so. They get to make decisions for their sept, and their sept alone. They're not authorized to speak or act on behalf of the entire tribe.
              Well I said, an appropriate number of members of the tribe should be responsible for a rite of passage as well as an ostracism. How many these are, what Ranks or standing (renown, offices...) they have is certainly something that will be handled on a cast to case basis, and there might be differing opinions within the game world as well.

              That Austere Howl queen might feel, that only she has the right to govern members of her House, but if the Gleaming Eye sends a pack with their inquisitor-like demeanour to round up some Austere Howl members living in a Get Septs protectorate, accuse, trail and ostracism them, who is to object? They have the backing of the Gleaming Eye, the (geographical) territory between both Houses is disputed, the Get won't dare to interfere, House Wyrmfoe and Clan Crescent Moon are far away.... so...

              Of course a sept usually has influence only limited to their region and area of control, but the garou to be tried also (hopefully) is their subject or at least the crime was performed on their turf. If not, we revert back to the tribe novels and then I totally see the need to bring in garou from other septs, and even multiple tribes, depending on the circumstances.

              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              Or in my scenario, the sept has overstepped their authority and made the wrong decision. So the rest of the tribe steps in, bash the brains in of ever member of that sept and feeds their bodies to the pigs before breakfast. Why, because Fenris himself would frenzy through their caerns if they didn't.
              Sure, if the sept was wrong in their decision to perform the Rite because they misused it for political reasons, personal gain or something like that. But, that doesn't mean that in a lot of scenarios the sept is perfectly within its right to punish garou who belong to their sept, who are of the same tribe as the primarily lived tribal culture within the sept and who committed crimes within their area of influence. Especially if the criminal act and guilt is undisputed. And such punishment does not per sé exclude ostracism from the tribe.

              "Hey, we need to be heard before you ostracise this garou".
              "Ha, waiting for that is a pain in the ass. We just kill him to satisfy our need of punishment in a timely fashion."
              "Ah, okay. That is totally okay. Not interfering with tribal interests at all....... hey, wait a minute..."

              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              And what if all the other Garou of that tribe have Songkeepers with other old tales that set equal or greater precedent?
              In that unlikely case the sept has a truthcater/talesinger who is very bad at his job. He or she shouldn't be an Athro, and then the scenario doesn't meet my prerequisite of garou with the appropriate standing any more. So, we shift to septs that do bad stuff and are sanctioned by the other septs in the are, as described in the Storyteller's Handbook, iirc.

              Actually, we had this in the backstory of our LARP once. A Glass Walker sept spied on their surrounding septs and used awoken computer simulations of these septs office holders to test scenarios to influence these septs and their politics. When the awoken simulations escaped into the umbra and their respective home septs, the House of gleaming Eye removed the sept leadership forcefully and replaced it with an interim sept leader...
              Just as a side note.

              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              Even if we assume that in most cases, the local sept will act correctly in ways the other tribe members will agree, that won't always be so. And they are always going to be local big wigs of that tribe who will want their say in such tribal matters. (How dare that sept ostracize someone from the tribe? I was nearby, the great big elder of the tribe with all this renown. Who do they think they are making this decision for the entire tribe by not consulting me when they don't have anywhere near the reputation I do?) They need to be appeased by including them in the process lest they get so pissed off they create problems for the sept.
              Ah, that is a bit constructed, isn't it? If there was a garou of a given tribe, who did acts so severe that ostracism from the tribe is considered, than an Elder living in the area should know and be involved in the capture, the following gathering, the sentencing and execution of the sentence. The only reason this was not the case is if the Elder specifically removed himself from sept affairs and another equally high standing garou in the sept said: "we don't need that jackass". If the Elder was just passing by, well, how should the sept have know?
              I never intended to paint a picture where a sept would deliberately exclude local big wigs out of some sense of "we know better". In the contrast, I believe the sept of that tribe to be the local big wigs, and therefore within their right to do as they see fit (within tradition of the garou as a whole and the tribe specifically).

              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              And what if the rest of the tribe decides that whatever the accused Garou may have done, it doesn't amount to something that merits ostracism of the entire tribe? Or feel the ostracism should only be for a lesser period instead of permanent?

              You are assuming the rest of the tribe will agree with their judgment. But they may not for various reasons.
              What if only a single sept decides the garou's punishment was to harsh, but the rest of the tribe thinks it was justified?

              Wait, will the tribe call a grand moot if someone got of too easy?
              Is there a sacred verse on double jeopardy in the Litany?

              Nah, those who think the ostracism was to harsh might invite the garou back into the tribe, to live in their sept. Maybe ritualize that with a Rite of Adoption or new Rite of Passage and subsequent Challenges for Rank (since the permanent Renown is still there, hopefully).

              You always mention the "tribe" as if that was an entity. But it isn't. It is still a group of people with different levels of authority. Sure, some tribes have formal leadership, like the Arg Righ of the Fianna, the council and secret council of the Black Furies, the Kings of the Silver Fang Houses, but other tribes have not, or not to this extend. But even those with formal tribe-wide leadership authorities wouldn't necessarily interfere or even need to be informed, if the case is clear. If the case is controversial, that is a totally different matter, but in this case the local garou would also know, that it is controversial and act differently.

              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              That's why I think some kind of tribal grand moot needs to be held. It confers legitimacy to the decision to ostracize someone from the tribe, immediately communicates that decision to a large group of tribal Garou, and offers the chance for many informed tribal leaders and experts to influence the decision. It also prevents potential abuse of ostracism by forcing a small group of Garou to explain their evaluation to others.
              And I think it only needs to be held, if the case in question is controversial.

              Also, as I mentioned, the sept to ostracize should be a sept of that tribe with significant numbers of garou attending to legitimize the Rite in any case. You came up with the "rank one sept" scenario of five cliaths. We can agree that this doesn't meet the prerequisite for the sept to be a local tribal authority in regards of number and rank of garou of the tribe in question.
              My example was an Elder sept leader, two or more Athro backing him up as well as an unspecified number of other garou of that tribe. You see the difference?
              And while I don't think an Elder and two Athro are the minimum requirement, I think the rank and position of the garou of the tribe that constitutes an appropriate authority to perform a tribal ostracism is depending on the crime in question as well as the local situation. A Get sept that is made up of Adren and lower in Scandinavia might not have the standing to make such a decision. A sept with the same number of Garou in Australia might, because there are no other Get around and these Get are the local authority.

              Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
              If the matter is so important that Garou don't want to wait, the Garou have lots of ways of expediting the process. Moonbridges allow instantaneous travel, and on real high priority matters, someone can gather up prominent Philodoxes and other experts to render a decision. And if the matter is simply ostracism, why the rush? What does it matter if the ostracism begins next week or next month instead of now? If the sept feels punishment is immediately needed, they can always punish in other ways that only impact the local sept while leaving the issue of tribal ostracism to a body that is better suited to render that judgment.
              But that might not be appropriate.
              The perp has done something really bad. Offensive to the fundamentals of the tribe.
              So, there is most likely a number of garou (and kinfolk) who want him dead. There is also a number of victims or relatives of victims to whom the very presence of the perp is an affront. The perps very presence might be blasphemous. Not dealing with the matter post haste is an invitation to frenzy.

              While there are Rites to build a prison of sorts (well bar of side stepping) there really isn't apparatus in place to deal with prisoners until a trail can be held.

              Comment


              • #37
                Yeah, I certainly don't see either of us converting the other. I'd respond to some of your statements, but we'd just be repeating ourselves and hijacking this thread. So if you'd like to continue the discussion, please start another thread. I do think a debate on the merits of certain crimes/judgments being done at the sept level and others at other levels could be beneficial. But I'd like to keep this thread on providing examples of crimes and tying them into specific Rites of Punishment. That will always prompt some discussion, but I think this issue can overwhelm the entire thread.

                Thanks.

                Comment

                Working...
                X