Parent of / Offspring of

[meek75]

So, in the relationship selections there are "parent of" and "child of" as well as "Offspring off" and "Immediate Ancestor of" options. Why did we need both? What am I missing? I know that if I want to see a family tree in relationship view I must use the offspring and ancestor option, but I'm not sure why parent/child is not sufficient for this? Is there a reason to use both? Right now I have four relationships in my contents pane (child of x2 for each parent and offspring of x2 for each parent) and that seems like a strange way to set it up.

[bodrin]

Originally Posted by meek75

So, in the relationship selections there are "parent of" and "child of" as well as "Offspring off" and "Immediate Ancestor of" options. Why did we need both? What am I missing? I know that if I want to see a family tree in relationship view I must use the offspring and ancestor option, but I'm not sure why parent/child is not sufficient for this? Is there a reason to use both? Right now I have four relationships in my contents pane (child of x2 for each parent and offspring of x2 for each parent) and that seems like a strange way to set it up.

My opinion only.

If you are building a family / relationship tree You could use the "Parent / Child of options" to show direct links and the "Offspring / Immediate Ancestor of" options to show Story / World / Game links.

For example Child A is the Parent of Child B - Direct Link, but Child A is also the Offspring of "The Lord of Oogle Boogle" who is an Immediate Ancestor of Nurgel the Beligerent, but neither Child A nor Child B are aware of this.

But Phnarfur the inquisitive, knows this information and can reveal the missing information and provide the relevant details to anybody asking the correct question!

[Silveras]

I believe this was raised in another thread, and one of the responses had to do with biological vs. social parenting/ancestry.

Parent of/ Child of can be used to indicate adoption, fostering, and other non-biological raising of the child.

Offspring of / Immediate Ancestor of can be used to indicate biological connections.

Whether you need both depends on your world.. if you are simulating a Medieval situation where hostages were often sent as foster-children to other nobles, the two relationships may become important. Likewise, if you are running a more modern game, estranged biological parents and such may be represented with the Offspring of/ Immediate Ancestor of relationship.

[MNBlockHead]

Originally Posted by Silveras

I believe this was raised in another thread, and one of the responses had to do with biological vs. social parenting/ancestry.

Parent of/ Child of can be used to indicate adoption, fostering, and other non-biological raising of the child.

Offspring of / Immediate Ancestor of can be used to indicate biological connections.

Whether you need both depends on your world.. if you are simulating a Medieval situation where hostages were often sent as foster-children to other nobles, the two relationships may become important. Likewise, if you are running a more modern game, estranged biological parents and such may be represented with the Offspring of/ Immediate Ancestor of relationship.

This. Offspring of/Immediate Ancestor connotes a biological relationship. Parent of/Child of can be used for legal status and social conventions.

[meek75]

Thanks for the feedback. I don't love the way it works, but I think I get it. I have been using RW for a while now, but only recently started using the family relationships. We are gearing up for a Song of Ice and Fire game and the relationships are important. Honestly, I am not very impressed with how RW handles genealogies. They seem to use the same basic coding as plotpoints and suffer the same issues. Here is an example, the picture attached below shows a pretty basic web. As you can see, RW is not able to show unions and offspring at the same time (this is very important to genealogies). Berenea and Leobold are married and have two kids. The map doesn't show the marriage and create a confusing web. If I were is continue this way, it would quickly get out of control. So, am I missing something here? Unless RW can do this better than it appears, I don't think I will be able to use this feature. I guess I will have to use a third party program and then embed a smart image with links. This is not ideal, but I can make it work I guess.

[kbs666]

I had never tried to use the relationship view. It, to put it simply, doesn't work.

I imagine it isn't a high priority but it is another thing that needs to get fixed.

[MNBlockHead]

If family trees are very important to keep track of and are something you want displayed nicely, I would use a third-party program. I would probably use a tool specifically designed to create and manage family trees, rather then try to format one in a flowchart or mind-mapping application. It is one of those things where having a tool designed specifically for that purpose will make things much easier.

I would still input relationships in RW, however, as it is helpful for me to see the link in the relationships section of the links pane, even if I don't find the relationship view very helpful.

Like many things in RW, I think it does a great job allowing me to create linkages, but attempts to provide a graphical representation leave much to be desired. When I want a graphical display of complex relationships or plotlines, I use other tools, but I still find it very valuable to have the linkages in RW.

[Cornelius]

I run a Pendragon game where family is all important. And yes. RW is not doing the job I hoped for the view, but as MNBlockhed states it is still a great way to create linkages and keep a track on the various relationships.

As for the difference it seems you can approach it in two ways:
1. As Bodrin states. to differentiate between direct link (parent/child) and a further off relationship (I am related to the King, because I am also offspring of the King in the very past).
2. As Silveras mentions. To differentiate between biological and non biological relationships.

In my game I only use the parent/child relationship, and not the offspring/immediate ancestor.

[MNBlockHead]

Originally Posted by Cornelius

In my game I only use the parent/child relationship, and not the offspring/immediate ancestor.

Same here. I've thought of using both, e.g. a human biological child and his or her parents would have both parent/child and offspring/immediate ancestor. But that level of exactness and the data entry and discipline to create those relationships is not warranted in my current campaign.

The only time it has come up is I've designed an adventure that takes place in a small duchy where for reasons I don't want to get into here, the Duke has started a crusade against bastardy. Bastards must leave the duchy or be killed. I could see how relationships could be used to differentiate between merely biological and legally recognized offspring/children. Still, even in this setting, I merely make a note. Heck, I don't even create separate topics for individual NPCs unless they will have long term importance to the campaign or are complicated enough, and will be interacted with throughout an adventure (rather than a single encounter) that it helps to have all their information in a separate topic. Therefore, I really have not had much occasion to use parent/child, offspring/immediate ancestor relationship links very often.

[Vargr]

You can actually go in and set up your own relationships.

I just made a Father/Son and when assigning Sam the Smith to Sir Davon Dragonson as Father/Son, Sam the Smith automatically get the relationship as well, but whereas Sir Davon Dragonson is shown as Encompassing Sam the Smith, Sam the Smith is shown as Belong to/Within.

Now, adding King Rupert Dragonson as the father of Sir Dragon Dragonson gives a very neat looking relationship tree.

Relationship-01.png

In the annotations you could write "Bastard son" or "Ligitimate son" (or what the terms are).

Hmmm.... I am going to play around with this - looks very promising.



[Later]
Aaand I just realize, that Parent/Child does the same as far as I can tell...