Okay this concubine trend has gone on long enough

There's been a shit tonne of concubine threads on tg recently so eff it, I figured I might as well actually share my thoughts on how they can be an awesome [not bearable, awesome] addition to your games and not just some shitty barefoot captive fantasy like that one user keeps pushing [you know who you are, I'd dislike you if the art wasn't so generally pretty]. With that said let's dive right in to dismantling one of the most common version of this fetish that I've seen on this board in my time. The elven harem, often this picture used specifically.
Now, if a player does seek out one of these, pay attention to the fact that elves are immortal/ageless beings that live for absolute centuries and usually have a very low birthrate. There are not many of them, and it's usually very rare to find them outside of their homelands. So, if they choose to try for this particular goal, don't be afraid to let them genuinely attempt it with a chance of success. People have been talked into polygamy after all, but make the elf waifus A: extremely difficult to convince, B: Kind of put off if the character is off a race that will be gross and wrinkly within a few decades, C:Expensive if they're being bought from a slave market and D: Named characters with alignments, ability scores and two to three proficiencies. They're elves, they're Good At Things.

I think it'd be uncomfortable for the other players if someone's goal was to "have a bunch of elves in a harem."

Not if it's an ERP game.

> two to three proficiencies
> Good At Things.
Do I REALLY need to stat out their proficiencies and specialties? Seems like TMI for a fade-to-black...
Jk, we don't fade to black :)

Yup, but you CAN turn it into an awesome roleplaying opportunity, one that lets you use the players choices against them but in a way that isn't cheap or petty and actually helps shape their motivations.

Sex is a fade to black, my point is that spouses aren't. If a player marries a character for God's sake make sure that they have to interact with them often. If they marry two, force them to roleplay the interactions. Awkward dinners, the two arguing with each other behind the PC's back, bitchy powerplay moves etc.

Also I'd like to point out that the first post was addressing the elf harem thing/meme specifically but the rest of the thread is really going to address the concept of players seeking polygamy in a game in general.

What? I've just seen the one about body guards, what others are you talking about?

I've seen two threads so far today alone about "Captured and put into a harem what do?" Or "Turned into a barefoot concubine what do?"

Okay, so next up, how many does your would-be polygamist have? Because if he has two wives, they're going to either A: Gang up on him and try to force him to do what they want, or B: Hate each other and each try to manipulate him to lift them above the other.
If there's three? It's not much better. Two will form a de-facto alliance and bully the third, who will resent and despise the other two, who will be busy monopolizing the PC's attention.
If he goes for four, congratulations! At least two factions will form within the harem.
On top of that, remember that the player probably imagines that their character is banging their wives, hence why they went for this in the first place. Make sure that they tell you if their character does [no details neccesary just "Does he sleep with X, Y or Z tonight?"] and then roll dice. For crying out loud, roll dice to see if they get pregnant. Pregnancy is a thing, and it will mess up your player's heads like nothing else.

Blonde > Brunette > White > Green

fite me irl

I was joking that we don't fade to black for sex lmao. I uhh....may have not totally been joking.
Anyways, I do agree with you. That sort of interaction is pretty important for character and relationship development. Shouldn't really have to "force" anything if the players like their spouses. If not, lol even better.

Swap Blonde and Brunette and we're good.

...

Which brings me to my first rule of roleplaying polygamy; women are an ordeal, and the more there are, the worse it gets. If this wasn't a political campaign before it sure as hell is for this player now. Girls want things, and when I say "Want things" I mean that they "Want everything and one hundred percent undivided attention that a harem by the way inherently denies them at least in some regards."

Links?

You're both what this guy says;

Both are archived now, but one of them had this picture in it;
Which is where I got it from and what convinced me to write this thread, cause someone on it mentioned that he hoped there would be a new fapbait trend next week, I agree, but I'd like to see something useful come out of this one first.

Second rule; Love and alignment, for every wife the player gets, you should know how they feel about the player at any given time, how they feel about sharing them, and where they would fall on the alignment chart. Bitch about alignment all that you want, it still helps in situations with loads and loads of characters.

What exactly, are the consequences of not caring about your harem's happiness? In a system like the Ottoman one, they only really had any power if the Sultan gave it to them, or if he gave the D to them enough for them to have a kid.

I just cast Geas on women NPcs of various races

They serve in my harem with 100% loyalty or they take 5d10 psychic damage killing any non-hill dwarf commoner with absolute certainty

Assassination, spying, spreading rumours, killing or abusing your favoured harem wife or your children

Not many, in an a system like the Ottoman one. A Neutral Evil character is unlikely to give a shit about their concubines for instance, but most parties are at least Neutral or Good, and those people have a tendency to care at least partially about the happiness and well-being of others, particularly those that they're intimate with. This is another thing that you have to keep in mind; who else in the world is polygamous and why? Is polygamy with multiple spouses legal? Or can someone only have one legal wife, whose children can inherit, but as many concubines as they want? In which case, force them to choose which will be which, and make them deal with the consequences of their decisions.

user, I am appalled by your historical ignorance.

The political scene inside the harem *was* the politics of the Ottoman empire for significant duration of time. Hell, it certainly is what resulted in Abdul the Damned, and that was modern times (2nd or 3rd to the last one, and a consequential reign).

Also, don't forget that even if a harem is all smiles in front of their husband, they're still interacting with each other behind the scenes. Murders happened even in harems, if the happiest, most cheerful and submissive concubine happens to secretly know poisoners kit expertise, literally what is there to stop her from causing a miscarriage in a rival? Or sabotage her own birth control [if it exists in the setting] and trick her husband into impregnating her with his firstborn and heir?

Harems require a lot of upkeep to maintain. Between having to have people guard the individual 'wives'. Hierarchy systems will develop, so it's probably best to create your own system to try and limit in-fighting.

But there'll be in-fighting anyway. If we look at harem politics in history, those wives will fight each other for heir-rights, good placement and gifts in so many ways.

Killing each other, fighting and making up plots. Causing miscarriages. Lots of shit.

But to have a harem you kind of have to also be good wealthy enough to maintain so these women are even interested in trying to gain your favor or to be the head of the harem.
Otherwise you just have disinterested sex partners. And hookers would just be cheaper and more convenient.

>specifically, Abdul was a motherless child- his mom died young, and he was semi-adopted by a number of hareem members growing up- it meant it had a lot of political influence spent in his favor in aggregate (being the longnosed kid all the women kind of like), and no real singularly powerful enemies

> Assassination, spying
Concubines under surveillance can't really do that.
> abusing your favored harem wife or your children
Highly doubt they'd do that when they have no say in anything. Also
> having a favored wife
This itself was acknowledged as a terrible idea by Ottomans. After the kid, each one is out, and lives in private, isolated housing.

> care at least partially about the happiness
Fair enough, but keeping them happy doesn't entail giving them power
> In which case, force them to choose which will be which, and make them deal with the consequences of their decisions.
Yeah, I think this is the way to do it. It's not like concubinage really has much in the way of mechanical rewards - it ought to be rather expensive too.

>for significant duration of time
This is key. I'm fully aware of how it worked, especially in the era of Suleiman and forward. But the "traditional" system was nowhere like that, and I was asking about an extreme case like that, where concubines were purposefully given zero power.

>Concubines under surveillance can't really do that.
The vast majority have zero form of surveillance

Different poster with no experience with the Ottoman concubine systems, but in different Eras of Chinese systems the concubines themselves didnt have much power.

But their families could. And Emperors in China were very willing to give favors and raises/promotions to dutiful concubines.

Giving them gifts or money from favor itself can give a concubine a lot of power, since loyalty or power can be bought.

The Ottoman system was similar, the families of concubines, esp. with good sons, would be given boons. My question was regarding the concubines that don't end up with power in this way.

I doubt assassination would be easy if you didn't have favor with the guards, and it's just pointlessly risky to anger the husband. Might happen, but not like, all the time.

Yeah these are plausible.

Exactly, but also you have to remember that your PLAYERS aren't people raised in a polygamous society %99.99 of the time, and as such even if they're outright told that their character's concubines have no power, your standard dude is going to side with and make a waifu of whichever one is best as seducing him. Saying that a woman having no political power means she has no power over her husband/lord even if she plays her cards right is a gross underestimation of the ability of anons to think with their dicks.

Some people, when given sufficient background info on the culture of the setting and with characters who have considerate backstories with regards to this, can RP other cultures just fine.

Sure they might not feel intuitively comfortable with it, but that's the fun of it for a lot of us. Yes, "play/write what you know" always holds true, but you can still understand how a person with your personality might behave, if raised in a foreign culture.

DESU letting players get away with this sort of bending of setting culture is just immersion-breaking. If you can't trust them to RP a culture well, then don't let/make them be part of it. That's my stance anyways.

Now, this can also be an awesome thing for your players too, racking up the chicks like pokemon can be a fantastic way to acquire skilled, loyal [if they're treated right] individuals who can be of great aid to your party! But if the players use them as tools, make sure that the results are realistic, a woman who realizes she's been married just for her spell slots? Not a happy woman, and a woman who's likely to be on the lookout for a better deal. You'd take loyalty and motivations into account in a corporate setting, you should do so doubly in a harem setting.

I wasn't trying to imply that at all.
I assumed they were talking about Explicit forms of power like titles and such.


The harems were rife with implicit forms of power being used. Sex, skills, affection, etc. Even people born into these settings who know about this stuff fall for it.

And we cant forget when concubine's sons become the new Emperors/leaders. In cases like Empress Dowager Xiaoshengxian, her Emperor son consulted her a lot!

Then what about potential suitors?
What if one of the guards secretly is in love with one of the concubines and she requites?
What if one of them gets violated/kidnapped?
What if she doesn't hold interest in you anymore?
These problems can all cascade into the group if left unchecked, OP.

There will always be another man/woman that will love to take your harem away from you for themselves just as you desired before.
And it will get in your head.

All the more reason to allow a player to go after it if they choose to! In reality the player gains nothing except for the idea of their fictional character having a lot of sex with a lot of women, but you? As the GM you get more power than any other player would likely ever give you. A whole literal bevy of characters who are potential hostages, traitors, loyalists, romantic options, enemies in disguise etc. all for the low, low price of your player getting an occasional semi.

It's a bit harder to find information about lower ranking concubines because they fade into obscurity.

Does anyone have any resources about these individuals?

I assume the ones who dont try to climb and dont stand out accept their lot and try and enjoy their lives in peace

>Then what about potential suitors?
Suitors, in the harem? Guards should have dealt with them by now.
>What if one of the guards secretly is in love with one of the concubines and she requites?
The eunuch guards? Who cares in any case.
>What if one of them gets violated/kidnapped?
kick her out/leave her be
>What if she doesn't hold interest in you anymore?
When did her interest matter in the first place?

Not saying this is a moral way to go about it; rather pointing out that these things aren't really problems.

>because they fade into obscurity.
Exactly. History (where this sort of mass concubinage happened) is full of lists of names, if you'd like. Most of the time, even the names are irrelevant, even if their child becomes notable, it might just say "child of an unknown concubine".

fuck off, retard

Nigga you have never been in a relationship.

Also, you guys are operating under the default assumption that polygamy in a game will be concubinage, in which case sure! You can ignore them completely if you want to, but as the GM you have to remember that they're still existing in the background and that they have motivations, even if they're as simple as comfort or survival. If the polygamy is based on some form of romance however, her interest absolutely DOES matter in many ways.

user, if you piss on one the others will tend to fight back.
And if you treat them like prisoners, lo and behold one day you will see one very bloody bedroom with their wrists cut open.

This all of my this.

In my experience, players technically have more power over the GM due to how they can just up and leave and bring the others with them.

I'm aware of that? The point of this situation though is that they give you power because you have something that they want, and by giving it to them but on the one condition of Actual Roleplay it can be an absolute turbo booster for storytelling.

Agreed. I just picked an extreme case for sake of discussion. It's the least interesting development-wise, but yeah, the usual GM rules regarding NPCs apply.

> muh freedoms
That's not "treating them badly", if it's the default in the culture, and none of that is out of place really. The assumption is, they are treated as is typical for concubines of men who can afford such things - a comfy life. The only thing complaint-worthy is lack of freedom, but seeing how revolts or mass suicides in the harem never really happened, we can safely assume that such behavior wouldn't happen.

Now, capture a woman from a society in which she's used to freedom and force her into this, yeah you'd probably have potential issues. But many concubines weren't prisoners - they wanted the job or were given by their family etc.

Because the word "harem" by the definition being used in this thread isn't the exact traditional use of the word in real life.
Hence your correlation.

There have been cases of cultures with concubinage to have revolts.

An extreme case, but the (failed) Renyin plot against the Jiajing Emperor is an example of this.

Not that user but a great number of those women were technically not part of a harem or even concubines.

You make an excellent point there as well, which brings me onto my next one; it's absolutely feasible, depending largely on the setting, for the pc's harem to genuinely love them. Especially if, as you said, they were women of low standing, or even poverty, who were suddenly brought into a life of luxury and relative bliss by a mysterious, wealthy stranger who, considering pc stats, is probably sensational in the sack. In fact, if the pc exclusively draws their wives/concubines from those who are most likely to be grateful, I think that you should reward them with a largely carefree harem environment, in regards to intrigue and backstabbing. Bonus points if the pc agrees to send money to their families, simply out of the kindness of his heart. Throw in treating them well and helping at least slightly to raise their children and it's perfectly feasible that his girls won't cause much trouble.
BUT you should still make sure that they take up a lot of his time. Hell, maybe even more than usual. Girls who actively desire his company are going to be more annoying than the alternative in many ways.

>Renyin plot
Interesting stuff, thanks. Indeed pretty extreme circumstances though, plus . I'm pretty it's otherwise a rare event. Was at least, for the Ottomans. Concubines there did participate in plots, but never heard of any due to their mistreatment.

The way i'm using it isn't actually the traditional usage of the word either. The ottoman system is not at all related to the traditional Arabic "harem". Western/"orientalist" conception of harems (which is what these threads are about) are based almost entirely on Ottoman-style harems. It's not exactly the same, but it's worth comparing the real-life history to see how they worked. Unless you just want to eschew history and reality altogether to have a nice fap. In which case, go for it.

Man i read up on the Renyin plot, and the Emperor was kidnapping young virgins and keeping them in his palace so he could drink their menstrual blood, which he believed would make him immortal. The virgins were fed only mulberry leaves and rainwater, and were harshly punished for the slightest transgression. This extreme behaviour is probably what triggered the plot.

The most fucked up part though is that one of the concubines got cold feet and went to alert the Empress, and the Empress had her executed by slow slicing just like the others! Then she went and executed the Emperor's favourite concubine as well, since it gave her a convenient excuse. She got hers tough, since the Emperor never forgave her, so during a palace fire a few years later, he refused to have her rescued, so she burned to death.

How we're using it in this thread is also a misunderstanding of the Ottoman-style harems of old.

That's because when people talk about the harem genre they are not thinking about the Ottoman-style harems of old.

I think, since power in the harem is expressed implicitly in other ways, that taking care of emperors wouldnt normally be done by explicit ways like revolts.

Plotting together with women who could gain a lot by throwing you under the bus is probably not the best idea either.

Concubines, if pushed to the point of acting against their husbands, would most likely resort to poisoning tactics, or using other more powerful family members to incite uprisings or political dissent.

> it's absolutely feasible, depending largely on the setting, for the pc's harem to genuinely love them.
For sure, and I'm sure plenty of concubines/wives have had loving relationships. I've just been playing devil's advocate to help brainstorm and discuss the variety of ways things could happen, and what the real concerns could be. A benevolent person like you describe would probably have no issues at all, besides internal politics and having to spend more time in the harem than otherwise.

Yeah it's a really bizzare story. Thanks to that user for teaching us some history.

I think people IIT are discussing more than one thing at once. A few of us are, indeed talking about the Ottoman and Chinese systems. As I said, the usual image is that colored by romantic orientalism, and misunderstanding.

Oh dude don't worry, I'm not arguing with you and I appreciate your input to the discussion on this thread, I'm just responding with what your posts make me think of.

Alright.

Another question then.
What about whatever male harems are called?

Like in a non procreation-with-me queen ant kind of way more like seeing them fuck each other for my amusement and only seeing me as the only naked woman they could ever see for the rest of their life?
Men have a more consistent libido so should it be less of an issue?

Men have a more constant libido but are MUCH more possessive than women and have a minor complex when it comes to the sexual exclusivity of their partners. I've got to say that a hypothetical "reverse harem" or whatever you want to call it [there isn't actually a word we can use for it in English] would actually be much more likely to descend into genuine violence, murder attempts, brawls and the like. BUT, it's definitely not IMPOSSIBLE. Just more difficult, there's a reason it's almost always been one man with multiple women rather than the other way around, one idea might be to keep the men as isolated from each other as possible when they're not pleasing you?

>it's a OP wants to lecture people about harems but he's an incel and doesn't actually play games thread

I know about their competitive nature rather than camaraderie when it comes to the opposite sex but wouldn't isolating them bring them more closer to hating each other since they don't get to socially bond besides when in our sessions?

There have been a few, surprisingly non-fringe societies in history, which practiced polyandry.

The Tibetans and various Himalayan peoples, during the time of the Empire and after, kept common wives between husbands, who were usually brothers. This was limited to landowning families, and due to how land was inherited. This also shows up in the Pandavas of Indian folklore. This is "fraternal polyandry", the only particularly common type.

The Hephthalites, a powerful nomadic confederation had non-fraternal polyandry, and were patriarchal otherwise. This might have been to avoid different clans squabbling over whose line gets the throne.

I don't think there's ever been a case of men being held for the sake of pleasure, but then again, polygyny didn't start for pleasure either. There's also things like proxy marriages available for women in various nomadic cultures, or even in Ancient Persia, but this seems limited to when your husband literally can't get you pregnant.

To have a society in which men would even consider this arrangement reasonable, a lot of things would need to change. It'd have to be matriarchial or at least egalitarian (sure, possible), and some social precedent would have to be there (unless you're some crazy-powerful queen), and for that, women would have to have some political or social reason to take more than one husband, and I don't mean just status. It's just a little hard to see happening.

One option is, they have a harem of men, but the men are given to other women. As in, this one woman somehow holds the attractive men, and distributes them for breeding. And as time goes on, this practice evolves into the monarch having some of these men kept all to herself. Seems ridiculous desu, but just brainstorming here.

Hm, good point. I guess a balance would be a better idea. As you mentioned, guys do have higher and more constant libidos so your main problem is likely to be that if you're their only woman they're probably going to be trying to get up in you almost all the time. Which I get is kind of the point of the whole scenario, but I mean, you're going to be busy, even if they're all average guys in terms of stamina. They'd proooobably want you two or three times a day each knowing dudes, so, invest in a bath house.

This would be more akin to the exception than the norm.

Oh, they can pleasure themselves and with their other brothers in the circle.
Just not with any other women than myself.
I have nothing against gay men (but in this case they would obviously be bi).

So if you guys want to use Harem plots there is that most of the time there wasn't that much in the way of conflict. The big problems often came AFTER the owner of the harem died, because that created a power vacuum which resulted in everyone picking up daggers.
Take for example the Ottoman empire. Kings often had multiple sons with multiple women. When a king died his sons would have to kill each other often times with conquest.

I remember in a game, one of my players was playing a lady of a rare race. She turned down all advances, be they from men, women, monsterbois, exotic girls, all of 'em. Then, when she eventually found a male of her race, she married up immediately and had a pile of kids.

It was weird, right next to the wizard and his constant acquisition of new exotic harem members.

Well that's sort of exactly my point. Guys like variety and if you're their only source of variety from dudes you're going to be in pretty high demand and they're going to find you much more desirable as a result, leading to my previous point.

How was it weird user?

oh, the monogomous and driven nature of the one right next to the lecherous and party havingness of the other.

Yeah, the bath house idea is great.
Instead of handmaidens, I get handsome half-naked lusty men instead.
I practically wouldn't really have much women in the palace save for some maybe in my royal retinue.
And if they would be, they'd practically be full-on lesbians.

>This would be more akin to the exception than the norm.
Right, which would be the case in my example. Mostly the monarch just holds men as glorified studs, distributing them in a reasonable fashion, but some could abuse the system and keep them all for herself.

Are you suggesting a system in which usually there is monogamy, but somehow has a woman show up to shake things up? I don't think that'd work. People are very much shaped by the culture they are from, and if there's not a precedent for polyandry, I doubt it would be accepted. Polygyny is accepted in many societies because it's traditional. My point here is, some tradition or precedent of polyandry has to be there.

Okay but you'd also have to take into consideration the servants who'd take care of your reverse harem thing, eunuchs would be ideal, because slavegirls would be off the menu if you want to keep bi guys exclusive.

Oh, also pregnancy, because unless you had one guy per month it could get nigh-impossible to figure out who's baby you were pregnant with.

That didn't matter in some societies. See .

Actually, in any Matrilineal society, it's unimportant who the father is to a degree, and those are plenty common.

Well if the girl is okay with not knowing then that's fine, but I'm just saying.

I don't want to truly erase monogamy but maybe relationships like these are reserved for nobles or vassals that can sustain a reverse harem.

Men and women technically have to work equally as hard so it fits well with most fantasy settings.

Yes, that's what I meant.

I'm not mainly procreating with them though, only getting truly impregnated by either one or rarely two. (Most I'd rather are rendered sterile)
Even then, being pregnant is a large issue since it heavily restricts my duties so maybe it's usually done when I'm a lot older.

Ok but you have to remember that in the sort of time period most rpgs take place in, avoiding pregnancy was not a particularly easy thing. There's a reason why people had lots of kids.

>reserved for nobles or vassals that can sustain a reverse harem.
Yeah I was implying that it's literally only the highest nobles who get this privilege. It most polygynous societies, it's a comparatively tiny portion of men who do it, so it's no doubt the same in this case.

> rendered sterile
The thing is, concubinage of women evolved to produce more kids as heirs so there's some rationale, and incentive for women to want to concubines sometimes. Don't you think men would object to this practice, especially if it was otherwise rare? Unless their wife-queen was exceedingly attractive and they were living lives of luxury, I don't see why they'd want this, over having a nice monogamous relationship with a common woman.

> kids when older
Universally a bad idea. Chances are in this system, you die with few or no heirs.

Yeah the thing is when you look at it from a logistical standpoint the cards are really stacked against women who want harems but, yeah I guess that's just the hand biology and history dealt. It's still possible though, anything's possible.

So desperate to make "reverse harems" work that there's no way it's not pic related

I mean there could be a homebrewed common plant herb thing that prevents pregnancy or dampens sexual desire so rape is less common.

But in turn that 'll probably just lead to create the opposite: women raping men to bear children.
So there's really no eliminating the problem there.

>Unless their wife-queen was exceedingly attractive and they were living lives of luxury,

Exactly!
They would want this because they are essentially free of any troubles or hardwork.
Just sex almost all day, everyday.
And I find that sterile men are less of a death sentence than a barren woman to a monarch.

Oh please, you can say that anything sex-related nowadays.
Even proposing that everyone only does the missionary position when having sex is magical realm territory.

The sex almost all day everyday thing only really applies to you considering the dudes have to take turns remember.

Take turns on what?
Sex?
Multiple men can easily service a woman far easier than the opposite.
And these men are bi too so they wouldn't just be limited to me, they can do each other while waiting for PIV.

Bi doesn't mean nympho, that doesn't mean that they're each other's types.

It's obviously that user's magical realm, but it's legitimately interesting to consider if it would ever be possible. For science. And for user.

If you define harem as a bunch of sterile, loyal male sex slaves, then yeah, it's not going to be that believable. Remove the sterility, allow for being let go to have kids with other women at some point (maybe when said noblewoman gets bored), and have a society which has some traditions where polyandry might be useful for nobles, and it's not totally illogical.

Don't know how rape is relevant here, but that sort of stuff can be socialized to be unacceptable, and that's common in many societies. If women had a lot of social power, wouldn't be (that much of) an issue.
> They would want this because they are essentially free of any troubles or hardwork.
Children are a powerful motivator user. Being forced to not have kids could piss people off.
> And I find that sterile men are less of a death sentence than a barren woman to a monarch.
Depends on inheritance laws. If you go for something like "eldest daughter (or child, if there's male kings too) of all the monarch's sisters or brothers (i.e. the queens' nieces) inherits" (which was how some kingdoms did it actually), you could have plenty of heirs.

>that doesn't mean that they're each other's types.
this. it's not guaranteed. assuming the monarch is hot is one thing. assuming all her beefcakes are all into each other and never get jealous of the precious time with their one woman is another.

But still.
One guy can't just have all the fun if you know what I mean.
This isn't really a utopian society so it just has to be humanly manageable.

>Children are a powerful motivator user. Being forced to not have kids could piss people off.

Honestly, why would they even be part of my pleasure harem if all they want is for me to get pregnant?
Don't they know that if I get pregnant during times of heated political strife it could distract me?
Are they trying to undermine my authority?
HOW DARE YOU!

>inheritance laws

Yeah, those will have to be modified.

I mean they usually can get along but if it really doesn't work out then maybe the boys and I will have to kick him out or give him to another noblewoman that'll take him in as either a husband or haremboy.
There are severance fees of course so it's all good business. (sort of like a dowry to offer some persuasion of the transfer)

>Honestly, why would they even be part of my pleasure harem if all they want is for me to get pregnant?
I don't think they'd care that much about getting their lady pregnant. But they certainly would, in general, like to have kids with someone, someday. Hence the suggestion that they be given away after the noblewoman is bored of them. Might even be i high demand, given their skills, as husbands. As concubines, I'm assuming they'd get comfy lives after "serving" as usual, so they could take common women as wives, and you'd have a nice caste of gentry from those unions.

If they are forcibly sterilized, what do they do when they are discarded? Women concubines raise their kids, but these guys would be bored, and with nothing. Giving them a wife would be a pretty easy way to keep them happy. I highly doubt a society would allow their most attractive young men to all be sterilized for the pleasure of some noblewomen.

Assuming some sort of birth control on the part of the noblewoman, one could avoid pregnancy.

>modified
well its not like there's some "canonical world inheritance system" to modify lol. primogeniture was by no means standard.

I think that an easy solution to this problem would to discard them once they reached a certain age, you get a revolving stable of young, studly dudes and they get to go have kids with someone eventually.

Yes, there is birth control in this setting.

Yes, that is what I have been suggesting this entire time, lmao.

We are almost at 100 posts and nobody pointed out that these are genii?

Well in that case, literally no reason to sterilize.

Only thing to work out is inheritance. If you don't have kids until older, you'll need a decent pool of heirs. If you're willing to allow descent from a male line, you can have your brother's daughters inherit. If not, your sisters (or more extended relatives) can have kids and you pick an heir from them, if the social structure is clan-based this is fairly reasonable.

they are?

You can even say that those that devoted themselves into sterilization can go higher in the market since they have already taken care of the birth control and is implying that they're there only for pleasure.

I just don't want to rule out any options fully.
Even older men have experience worth making a lady "experience" herself.

Funnily enough,the right of first night can also be applied here that a "feudal" lady can take the virginities of strapping boys when they reach of age which may be their first initiation/taste of the reverse harem life if they so choose to pursue it.

Are they genii user?

Nope, they aren't.

Yes.

Everyone that plays traditional games hides in their general. The rest is barely fantasy related shitposting and fetish threads.