Remove ads

A Sword Without a Hilt: A Song of Ice and Fire/D&D 3.5 Crossover

Reader mode
Dimensionist said:
Yes, which is why I'm not voting for it as I want to. It's too much of a quagmire as it stands - at the very least, if we want to vote in favor of the lord, we'd need to square away when it's acceptable to use such magic and why it's acceptable then and not how the lady did it.

There is some possibility there, however, with what @Tomcost said. But it'll need to be properly expanded and explained.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We will not punish makeup by law.
We will not punish buying pretty clothes. Not even if the clothes are fancier than what you can usually afford with the intent of decieving someone.

We will not end deception on a social level, so trying to work against magic in that area is pointless.
 
Last edited:
DragonParadox said:
"Your Grace," the Septon begins. "Freely do I call you this for I have long thought it an unjust and ungodly thing to pass you over for the claim of a rebelling lord. Like you I have found shelter in the east from foes in the Seven Kingdoms... though I admit my exile was rather less productive than yours was..." He pauses while a faint titter passes though the room. "Yet now perhaps I have found a task to set my hand to for though I have seen many wonders in this city there are no septs to cater to the souls of even the faithful who are here much less any who might wish to embrace the Seven. I humbly ask for patronage as your House has given in generations past."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, we were talking about building temples to Rhllor and the Seven in SD before. Now's as good a time as any. I do think we should handle this a little more delicately than just saying yes, however.
 
Artemis1992 said:
We will not punish makeup by law.
We will not punish buying pretty clothes. Not even if the clothes are fancier than what you can usually afford with the intend of decieving someone.

We will not end deception on a social level, so trying to work against magic in that area is pointless.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This.

What we need is to solve the ignorance in the general population so that this doesn't happen again.
 
Artemis1992 said:
We will not punish makeup by law.
We will not punish buying pretty clothes. Not even if the clothes are fancier than what you can usually afford with the intend of decieving someone.

We will not end deception on a social level, so trying to work against magic in that area is pointless.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Are you really comparing a +6 Charisma enchantment to 'pretty clothes and makeup'?

At that level, you're basically an entirely different person. The lord married that person, not the one she actually turned out to be. As I noted, it's textbook fraud. This isn't just makeup and pretty clothes, this is the equivalent of marrying the woman you idolized and finding out that actually, it was just some random woman who disguised herself as her in looks, words and demeanor. There are laws against that for a reason - namely, the contract (marriage, in this case) was done under bad faith.

Also, there is a heavy air of victim blaming going on here.

By all means, protest this for pragmatic reasons, like how it cuts into our own actions, but let's not pretend she has any moral or ethical superiority here.
 
Last edited:
Oh shit son, we're finally getting hands on here

@DragonParadox I'm assuming the "worst of the worst" or the "convinient" magisters got caught up in the days after Tyrosh and in Garin and Malarys' sweeps afterwards? What about Magister Fatmouth, the guy who tried to get us to pay him for freeing his slaves?
 
Ergh, politics. Leaves a bad taste in the mouth it does, but we didn't pick this job because it'd be fun.

Right, first things first, the land should go back to the girl, if only for legal reasons. The Law is the Law and that must be truth.

That being said we should also recognize the service of the steward and the effort he put in to keeping that land stable. I say we provide him with a parcel of land similar to the one he's losing, if the woman doesn't offer him employment. Show that we recognize a smart man when we see one and will happily reward said man for his service.

Second case, the marriage is legal.

The woman seduced him, true, but that could be said for any pretty girl willing to slip a bit of skin to a new sugar daddy. If he fell for it then that's his problem, especially when we keep telling folks that "Magic is real, people are learning to use it, here are things that make it not work on you or at least not as strongly. I highly recommend you make some, hire someone who can make some, or buy some."

Just because the honey is sweet doesn't mean it's not poisoned and anyone in a position of power should recognize that.

That being said, we should also let it be known that while a charm might be okay, compulsion is not and will be punished to the full extent of the law. She got lucky, real lucky, that all she did was make herself more charming. If she slipped him a "love potion" or made a deal that altered his mental state in order to force the wedding not only would said wedding be null and void, she'd be in prison.

We need to make that clear. Making yourself more charismatic is like wearing fancy clothes and taking a bath, compulsion is breaking into someone's house and making it look like you lived there.

Third option, and by far the simplest, let the man set up shop.

We don't hate the Seven, we're just going to dismantle everything they stand for and see them humbled by their hubris. Spanking doesn't mean we don't want to see them better themselves in the future.
 
LonelyWolf999 said:
Well, we were talking about building temples to Rhllor and the Seven in SD before. Now's as good a time as any. I do think we should handle this a little more delicately than just saying yes, however.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

As long as they treat other gods in a neutral or positive manner, do not decry all magic users as evil, not get added to the motto of our citizens; Sea, Snake and Tree, and follow our laws I don't give a flying fuck about their temple. Although a personal apology from the Father about his invasion would be amusing to ask for I doubt it will be so. Also check this guy with magic because I don't trust him.
 
Dimensionist said:
Are you really comparing a +6 Charisma enchantment to 'pretty clothes and makeup'?

At that level, you're basically an entirely different person. The lord married that person, not the one she actually turned out to be. As noted, it's textbook fraud. This isn't just makeup and pretty clothes, this is the equivalent of marrying the woman you idolized and finding out that actually, it was just some random woman who disguised herself as her in looks, words and demeanor.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Equivalent +3 bonus.

Masterwork dress gives a +2

I assume more fashion can give higher bonuses but...
 
[x] Side with the lady, the law must be upheld not only for principle but because the decision will further reassure the remaining aristocracy of the Three Daughters
-[x] However for exemplary services she will pay out the steward with enough money to buy a viable piece of land for himself to work on. Any freemen in service of the land in question are obviously free to follow the steward if they wish to keep working for him.
--[x] If she's lacking the money we lend it so her estate can pay off the costs in time.

[X] Find in favor of lady Nesora, she was legally wed and therefore the arrangement can only be settled with divorce

Dimensionist said:
Are you really comparing a +6 Charisma enchantment to 'pretty clothes and makeup'?

At that level, you're basically an entirely different person. The lord married that person, not the one she actually turned out to be. As I noted, it's textbook fraud. This isn't just makeup and pretty clothes, this is the equivalent of marrying the woman you idolized and finding out that actually, it was just some random woman who disguised herself as her in looks, words and demeanor. There are laws against that for a reason - namely, the contract (marriage, in this case) was done under bad faith.

Also, there is a heavy air of victim blaming going on here.

By all means, protest this for pragmatic reasons, like how it cuts into our own actions, but let's not pretend she has any moral or ethical superiority here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Okay maybe not makeup.
But let's say photoshop. That enough to make the difference?
If you know someone only from writing and worked-over pictures and go for a relationship it's comparable?
 
zxzx24 said:
Equivalent +3 bonus.

Masterwork dress gives a +2

I assume more fashion can give higher bonuses but...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Wait, is it a +6 to her Charisma stat, or a +6 to her Charisma bonus? The two are different things. I'm confused.

EDIT:
Artemis1992 said:
Okay maybe not makeup.
But let's say photoshop. That enough to make the difference?
If you know someone only from writing and worked-over pictures and go for a relationship it's comparable?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That actually would fall under fraud, incidentally. Though I doubt a person would receive any sympathy if they married someone using just pictures, it should be noted - charisma isn't just your looks, but it's also how you talk, your demeanor, your presence and presentation. It's basically how you present yourself to the world.
 
Last edited:
Dimensionist said:
Are you really comparing a +6 Charisma enchantment to 'pretty clothes and makeup'?

At that level, you're basically an entirely different person. The lord married that person, not the one she actually turned out to be. As I noted, it's textbook fraud. This isn't just makeup and pretty clothes, this is the equivalent of marrying the woman you idolized and finding out that actually, it was just some random woman who disguised herself as her in looks, words and demeanor. There are laws against that for a reason - namely, the contract (marriage, in this case) was done under bad faith.

Also, there is a heavy air of victim blaming going on here.

By all means, protest this for pragmatic reasons, like how it cuts into our own actions, but let's not pretend she has any moral or ethical superiority here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh, it is fraud. But if we don't have an actual law against marriage fraud (yet, we should make one), then we simply can't make it up for this case. Anyway, I think that the solution is far simpler. The problem is economic, right? If goods are to be divided, ust divide the goods earned by the couple during the time they were legally married. That means, during the three days she still had the enchantment on.
 
DragonParadox said:
Even after recent improvements Dragon's Roost's audience hall can still become crowded on the days you hold court personally, not only with petitioners and court officials that have grown around you like mushrooms after the rain, but with local Sorcerer's Deep potentates whose privileges date back to the time your rule ran only as far as the shores of the island you are standing on now and whatever your raiders could enforce when they were not taking the chance to rob whichever Essosi traders looked the richest. Now many of those traders are your subjects as are the former slaves set loose from their chains yes but also faced with a world transformed.

It is these transformations that shake the pillars of your rule even as you forge them, that press you to run ever faster before the tide least it drown you. The first case before your consideration is in some way typical of what has been brought before you in the wake of the conquest of Tyrosh, a contested inheritance following the death of a wealthy absentee landowner who had never set foot on his estates.

The steward makes a decent point for having been the one to care for the land and the people, for fully collaborating with the legion unlike many of his neighbors. The fact that many of the former slaves did not abandon the land but continued to to work there as free tenants makes him one of the success stories of the Tyroshi hinterlands, but he is still not the rightful owner and unfortunately said owner was not so accommodating as to be involved in daemon summoning or the worst of the slave trade. The worst that could be said of him according to both the inquisition and your mother's account of court gossip is that he was sickly and ineffective, practically a recluse by reason of his fear if illness. By all accounts Nakeqor Irniros had died incidentally during the looting, leaving behind a recently widowed daughter and a passel of opportunistic cousins.

The latter you quickly dismiss as opportunistic sycophants who would promise you anything you might want to hear and then run the lands into the ground in a handful of months, but Lady Irniros carries herself with dignity in her dark veils, demanding her heritage on strictlegal principles, not even deigning to glance at the former steward who is trying to claim them as his own.

What do you do?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The legality of the matter is pretty clear here and the widow is entirely within her right to be granted ownership of the estate. The steward makes a good case for himself, but being competent isn't a substitute for legal rights.

[X] First Case: The lady has clear and legal right to the inheritance and thus the estate. However, the steward made a good case for his work, so he will receive the right to buy the estate from her at the market value, as determined by the office of taxation of the Imperial Administration. If he is willing to do this, the Iron Bank will certainly be willing to offer him a loan at a reasonable rate and if not, you have many positions in the realm where a man of his skill would be greatly appreciated.

This is not dissimilar from a shared inheritance with non-dividable assets and pretty fair. The lady definitely gets her due, one way or another, and the steward has at least a chance to get the estate, if he is willing to take a loan for it. Otherwise, we got tons of job openings for him.

DragonParadox said:
Cases involving magic rarely make it as far as needing your personal attention these days, the Scholarum prefers to deal its own members before any transgressions grow large enough to come to your attention and the inquisition takes it as a point of pride not to involve you in their cases and work instead thought the local magistrates, for discretion after all is as fundamental to their mission, however neither institution truly holds sway over the case that comes before you today.

It begins, as to many headaches do, with a wedding. Glyllo Argolys had not only managed to lose an eye and a hand an an eye to a painted lizard recently, the healing of which had bought his support in the recent conquest of Myr but he had also fallen in love and married a young woman while in his sickbed. The bride was of considerably lower birth, though not impossibility so, such that his peers argued that the lizard had rattled his wits, or that missing an eye had made him blind to her scheming. There had even been a rumor that young magister was feverish and thus in no fit state to make the decision. He wed her regardless, hand an eye restored... and then the tale turns from the stuff of third rate ballads to something requiring royal judgement.

It seems the lady Nesora did use magic to seduce the magister, nothing so overt as a charm or compulsion but she had bargained with the fey to make her more charming, to grant her for a time that spark of grace and confidence as could match a lady of faerie. On the third day after the wedding that gift was spent, leaving Glyllo claiming that he had been bespelled, which under the laws of the realm would grant him an annulment. The issue arises from the fact that no magic had directly touched him. Were you to simply argue that all magic that enhances charm and glibness of tongue is enchantment then you are yourself enchanting the whole court in this very moment. On the other hand you could simply hold the fey bargain responsible, cast the onus upon them... save that you have many fey in your employ and it would ill serve you to demonize them.

What do you decide?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Congratulations on marrying a woman you've known for at most a week, moron.

[X] Second Case: It is self-evident that Glyllo was not bespelled as he claims, thus he has no right to an annulment. The use of magic to improve the self is inherently no reprehensible act, not dissimilar form buying fancy clothing, using make-up or dying your hair. All of these things also change the way a person appears to others, yet no one would ask for an annulment for discovering a wrinkle or mole on his bride. The marriage stands and must be divorced as normal, though you would approve if they spend at least some time together before doing so, as Nesora merely tried to overcome shyness and there might yet be a chance that he will appreciate her once he knows her a bit better.


Going for a smoke, then on to the septon.
 
[X] Side with the lady, the law must be upheld not only for principle but because the decision will further reassure the remaining aristocracy of the Three Daughters
Although proper compensation for the stewards services would not go amiss (perhaps even from our own pocket as a way to publically shame those too poor or stingy to do it themselves).

[X] Find in favor of lady Nesora, she was legally wed and therefore the arrangement can only be settled with divorce
Not that we cannot use this an argument within as a cause for divorce> not knowing the true nature or character of the person and whatnot, our divorce laws are what we make of them (or is that considered a face saving compromise ?) but no annulment.

On the matter of the sept... some of our Dornish subjects already worship the Seven (in their own way) so having a sept is not that much of a problem (even if I dislike the idea) but some principles professed in the Seven-pointed Star are antithetical whith our public institutions (like the Scholarum) so it will have to adapt or be banned.
What he is asking for here is more than that though. It's actual patronnage, money to build a sept on Sorcerer's Deep, it's a bit different isn't it ? Then again we have already created a precedent, didn't we ?
 
My input regarding the cases

The Marriage: There was no crime commited here. The lady merely made herself prettier and more attractive. It's the equivalent of buying expensive make-up and loaning some high-quality clothes. It's the man's fault for marrying somebody based on their appearance. If he's unhappy, then he should file a regular divorce.

The Inheritance: Sadly, the widowed daughter is the owner by law. That said, since the owner had no interest in administering his estates, there should be a sizable inheritance tax or whatsover. AFAIK there are actual laws to deal with sitatuations like these in real life. Might be worth doing some research to see what solutions people have thought of.

The Septon: We'll have to talk and sort him out first. See how he interpretes the Seven Pointed Star. His opinion on magic and Outsider, and also ask why he was exiled. It is very strange to hear of an exiled Septon. If he fell out of favor he would simply have been demoted, so there must be an actual reason for his exile. Once we know what he would preach about, we can make a decision.
 
I agree, let's just snipe the steward and however many servants we can get he's worth his weight in adamantium if he's this good.
 
Cant we ask him to wait till next month for our decision? I really want to know about Oldtown and Bloodraven's opinion on the matter before we do this.
 
[X] Side with the lady, the law must be upheld not only for principle but because the decision will further reassure the remaining aristocracy of the Three Daughters.

[X] Find in favor of lady Nesora, she was legally wed and therefore the arrangement can only be settled with divorce
 
I dont think he's oing to be decrying all magic use as evil.

We were willing to let the Rhllor guy kill himself on public opinion, why not him?

If we want to pick his brain over dogma he wanted to do this publicly.
 
Artemis1992 said:
To stat.
To bonus would be unnaffordable, even we can't get a +12 Charisma bonus.
That would be an Epic effect, I think.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Hm. That makes it less of a deal than I thought.


Tomcost said:
Oh, it is fraud. But if we don't have an actual law against marriage fraud (yet, we should make one), then we simply can't make it up for this case. Anyway, I think that the solution is far simpler. The problem is economic, right? If goods are to be divided, ust divide the goods earned by the couple during the time they were legally married. That means, during the three days she still had the enchantment on.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We probably should get laws regarding the matter squared away, because as it stands conmen and the like seem to have so many options opened to them which aren't being currently countered by the laws.

As for the matter at hand ... well, there was a reason I didn't vote so far. Certainly, him marrying her within a week killed my sympathy something fierce (though I'm going to keep stressing - this is a damn sight more of a big deal than makeup and nice dresses, so will people please stop pretending otherwise? Your argument actually loses persuasive power when you use such analogies). I'd be okay with ruling in favor of the lady, but we really need laws regarding supernatural persuasive ability soon, because at high levels it's no different from mind control, just more insiduous.
 
zxzx24 said:
I dont think he's oing to be decrying all magic use as evil.

We were willing to let the Rhllor guy kill himself on public opinion, why not him?

If we want to pick his brain over dogma he wanted to do this publicly.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Then lets interrogate him in public and see what he believes. Any wiff of anti-magic sentiment and we find a new septon. I am assuming that that would be the notion.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top