- Location
- Germany
- Pronouns
- He/Him
A Sword Without a Hilt: A Song of Ice and Fire/D&D 3.5 Crossover
- Thread starter DragonParadox
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a song of ice and fire a sword without a hilt d&d 3.5 dungeons & dragons 100% high octane dragon fuel ave corvidae battle action dragon diplomacy best sister bureaucromancy delicious soul-stuff dragon dreams come true dragon ta'veren greatest uncle hubris is a coward's word in defiance of gods and men mammon's folly mutually assured mage's disjunction qm murderhobo top tier coatl
egoo
Totally Not Creating Problems Where None Existed
- Location
- Russia
...you are not wrong, at least whereas certain egoo is concerned.
Can't speak for everyone, of course, but I can't help but see just the same picture going forwards, and I doubt that compromising characters in order to not have that is any better than retcons.
Lately it seems like whenever I stop lurking and actually interact with you guys, it's because there's ooc drama brewing. At the risk of beginning to sound repetitive, I really didn't feel like anything that happened at the conclave seemed narratively bad or hamfisted.
Maybe at some points, Viserys acted a bit less competently than we're used to while our enemies acted a bit too competent but all in all I would've been perfectly fine with keeping everything going as it is. To my mind, this whole dilemma was years in the making. When we first pledged ourselves to the old gods, we knew that at some point that would most likely mean having to fight and possibly kill decent people. It was made clear years ago, that the old gods were on the warpath against the Seven and it was equally obvious that the Seven would not just take their just desserts lying down.
Now we're here and those damn Chosen don't even have the basic decency of being either horrible people or incompetent or both. Instead we're either gonna have to make some concessions and deal with the fallout that could potentially cause with some of our staunchest allies or we're gonna have to bite into the sour apple and directly harm people who don't necessarily deserve it. People don't like that, they'd like for there to be some third option where we can have our cake and eat it too. I get that, I feel that way as well. But this dilemma was literally years in the making. It makes perfect narrative sense to me.
That said, I do feel like the last update could probably have been handled better. And while I don't like retcons, rolling back one highly contentious chapter doesn't really disturb me. So in the interest of hopefully finding our way back to the regular, friendly atmosphere of this thread soon:
[X] Ret-con the last update to give you guys the chance to speak up better
Maybe at some points, Viserys acted a bit less competently than we're used to while our enemies acted a bit too competent but all in all I would've been perfectly fine with keeping everything going as it is. To my mind, this whole dilemma was years in the making. When we first pledged ourselves to the old gods, we knew that at some point that would most likely mean having to fight and possibly kill decent people. It was made clear years ago, that the old gods were on the warpath against the Seven and it was equally obvious that the Seven would not just take their just desserts lying down.
Now we're here and those damn Chosen don't even have the basic decency of being either horrible people or incompetent or both. Instead we're either gonna have to make some concessions and deal with the fallout that could potentially cause with some of our staunchest allies or we're gonna have to bite into the sour apple and directly harm people who don't necessarily deserve it. People don't like that, they'd like for there to be some third option where we can have our cake and eat it too. I get that, I feel that way as well. But this dilemma was literally years in the making. It makes perfect narrative sense to me.
That said, I do feel like the last update could probably have been handled better. And while I don't like retcons, rolling back one highly contentious chapter doesn't really disturb me. So in the interest of hopefully finding our way back to the regular, friendly atmosphere of this thread soon:
[X] Ret-con the last update to give you guys the chance to speak up better
Evaunit02mark1
S-s-smell the Prey, S-s-start the Hunt.
It's a valid fear. I'm not so deluded to know that I wasn't ready and willing to jump on my soapbox and give as good as I got as far as Lucan was concerned.
But I also know that doing so won't actually accomplish anything which is why I want to treat this like a contract negotiation or a business meeting between companies before a merger.
The fact that it's Pepsi and Coca-Cola doing said meeting, with all the bad blood and hired assassins waiting in the ventilation shafts, is not lost to me.
- Location
- Philippines
This arc brought us a powerful Tiamat cleric, MK converts and an Astral Dreadnought. Tired of saltplosion from Lucan? Turtle him and feed him to the trees.
And continue to do so until the management above is humbled before us.
But yes, Danelle steamrolling the last update is freaking annoying.
[X] Ret-con the last update to give you guys the chance to speak up better
And continue to do so until the management above is humbled before us.
But yes, Danelle steamrolling the last update is freaking annoying.
[X] Ret-con the last update to give you guys the chance to speak up better
tarrangar
Fat arctic chicken
Of course we aren't giving them special dispensations, but that's a problem for the future, and as such something we can deal with, after we actually have allies in the Faith, but they absolutely are going to compete on equal footing, with our other approved gods.
If Rh'llor can deal with having to be one of many recognized gods in our empire, then the Seven can suck it up and do so too.
[X] Ret-con the last update to give you guys the chance to speak up better
You aren't the only one here, you might not weep internally at such an ret-con, but I think TalonofAnathrax was saying some of us themself amongst them would.
- Location
- Castle
Its really hard to make people reflect on their choices in real life, even more in the internet specially when the path has been followed by 3 years of constant questing.
Honestly? Just "Vote and agree to be more moralizing." is like literally the best instrument we have as players to reflect on the choices made so far, and hell we kind of did that already with Syrax (and I was angry at that one too, but due to the result of that one was already in the making)
Honestly? Just "Vote and agree to be more moralizing." is like literally the best instrument we have as players to reflect on the choices made so far, and hell we kind of did that already with Syrax (and I was angry at that one too, but due to the result of that one was already in the making)
[X] Move on with the arc as it is, deal with the issues as they come
People, retconning the last update will only delay the shitstorm.
As DP said, he wanted to introduce an opponent that wasn't stupid, a slaver or evil, or a combination of those.
Problem is, the thread has gotten used to those and the fact that any good or reasonable character can be easily swayed to our side or ignored.
Problem is, the corolary is that if we can't do that, then we are in the wrong.
And the thread locks up because if that good and reasonable character is not swayed, then obviously the DM is telling us; not Viserys, US, that we are doing Something wrong slash reprehensible slash evil.
And after that it's over, because the vote is no about our objectives in game or even about the game at all.
It essentially becomes:
Are you a bad person?
[X]Yes
[X]No
And Yeah DP, introducing more complex conflict and nuanced characters to serve as enemies was a good idea and I'm behind that, but really? A teenage mother Theresa was your first choice to introduce moral ambiguity? Really?
People, retconning the last update will only delay the shitstorm.
As DP said, he wanted to introduce an opponent that wasn't stupid, a slaver or evil, or a combination of those.
Problem is, the thread has gotten used to those and the fact that any good or reasonable character can be easily swayed to our side or ignored.
Problem is, the corolary is that if we can't do that, then we are in the wrong.
And the thread locks up because if that good and reasonable character is not swayed, then obviously the DM is telling us; not Viserys, US, that we are doing Something wrong slash reprehensible slash evil.
And after that it's over, because the vote is no about our objectives in game or even about the game at all.
It essentially becomes:
Are you a bad person?
[X]Yes
[X]No
And Yeah DP, introducing more complex conflict and nuanced characters to serve as enemies was a good idea and I'm behind that, but really? A teenage mother Theresa was your first choice to introduce moral ambiguity? Really?
Goldfish
Friendly Spider-Fish Abomination
- Location
- Formerly of the Far Realm
And I'm sure all of it was done with good intentions, but honestly, we don't want want any more moral argumentation. We've had it, dealt with it, had it again, argued over it, repeat ad nauseum.
It should be obvious by now that most of the thread doesn't want to do any more moral reflection than it already has. Viserys' character is what it is, a product of years of development.
Why do we even need moral argumentation? Honestly, I don't mind Lucan not being a fanatic asshole, but he, of all possible people, should not have been the one used to introduce moral arguments.
- Location
- Philippines
This is untrue. We met Brienne who started preaching at us. We ignored her and gave her
- Location
- Germany
The intent was never to change anything about Viserys with this, just present someone who isn't either a mustache twirling villain or fawning over Viserys after two social rolls. And that needs conflict. Preferably one that is a bit deeper and interesting than "my god told me your are bad!", because otherwise we are in the Aurane corner of NPCs.
Viserys is who he is, yes, but people in story must be allowed to judge him for this or they are all just Pokemon or SotD targets.
Evaunit02mark1
S-s-smell the Prey, S-s-start the Hunt.
Let me rephrase. The first chosen we've gotten to the table who seems to be actively working against us.
Snowfire
Polyglot of Chimera
- Location
- Wordcats
I feel an issue with this is that we've ended up conditioned to expect this result. So adding in nuance and complexity all at once, and with no backdrop when taken against the larger narrative is...awkward. Breaking that conditioning is something to be strived for, yes, but just hitting us in the face with it is much more likely to cause double-down escalation than any positive reflection.
And that's not just thread culture, though it does play a part. That's humanity.
egoo
Totally Not Creating Problems Where None Existed
- Location
- Russia
*rant starts*
My largest problem with this whole thing is, partial retcon or no retcon, we'll be forced into making concessions, straight up throwing out specific parts of our MO they won't like, if we want to make any sort of peace with them.
They wouldn't just accept a list of terms we have.
But neither am I willing to submit and throw out everything I stand for, with "ruthless efficiency" as common denominator, out of the window for but a mere compromise.
And there are people who want that compromise reached.
So, I have little problem with writing, and a lot of problem with where the playerbase might just go right now, with the following few updates :/
We'll be beaten by morality in the face, no matter what we do.
Just slightly less if we retcon a chapter.
And on top of that, to get on "friendly" terms we'll have to back down on the things I care about.
I very much don't want to see the next few updates happen :/
...I am being petty and selfish, I know.
I also don't care for Seven, or their Chosen, nearly enough to stomp on my pettiness here.
*rant ends*
My largest problem with this whole thing is, partial retcon or no retcon, we'll be forced into making concessions, straight up throwing out specific parts of our MO they won't like, if we want to make any sort of peace with them.
They wouldn't just accept a list of terms we have.
But neither am I willing to submit and throw out everything I stand for, with "ruthless efficiency" as common denominator, out of the window for but a mere compromise.
And there are people who want that compromise reached.
So, I have little problem with writing, and a lot of problem with where the playerbase might just go right now, with the following few updates :/
We'll be beaten by morality in the face, no matter what we do.
Just slightly less if we retcon a chapter.
And on top of that, to get on "friendly" terms we'll have to back down on the things I care about.
I very much don't want to see the next few updates happen :/
...I am being petty and selfish, I know.
I also don't care for Seven, or their Chosen, nearly enough to stomp on my pettiness here.
*rant ends*
Snowfire
Polyglot of Chimera
- Location
- Wordcats
Given the above...yeah, ok.
@DragonParadox, @Azel may I propose a flat retcon of the entire In the Balance of the Faith chapter set? Because we've been acting on different levels of narrative from the start, and I'd vastly prefer a do-over on that now that we know how the story is trying to be fixed. The Conclave sections are, essentially, where the problem of countervailing narrative direction really started. Now that we know what you're wanting to do, wiping that slate clean could be to the benefit of everyone.
Either have the Conclave cancelled - in which case we can have the choice to reach out to the Chosen that are present, or at least do some much needed information gathering - or just start it over.
I know this probably won't win a vote contest, but I feel like it should be an available option. And it's not as if it removes any of our mistakes. In context, our actions with Maer were a big one, and Dany's reaction should have been a warning sign which we (I) just didn't recognise.
@DragonParadox, @Azel may I propose a flat retcon of the entire In the Balance of the Faith chapter set? Because we've been acting on different levels of narrative from the start, and I'd vastly prefer a do-over on that now that we know how the story is trying to be fixed. The Conclave sections are, essentially, where the problem of countervailing narrative direction really started. Now that we know what you're wanting to do, wiping that slate clean could be to the benefit of everyone.
Either have the Conclave cancelled - in which case we can have the choice to reach out to the Chosen that are present, or at least do some much needed information gathering - or just start it over.
I know this probably won't win a vote contest, but I feel like it should be an available option. And it's not as if it removes any of our mistakes. In context, our actions with Maer were a big one, and Dany's reaction should have been a warning sign which we (I) just didn't recognise.
- Location
- Germany
- Pronouns
- He/Him
You are emotionally invested in things that haven't happened yet and might never happen.
Snowfire
Polyglot of Chimera
- Location
- Wordcats
We've been outright told by the co-QM that what egoo fears really is something that has a high likelihood of coming to pass.
It hasn't happened yet, but @Azel's concern here is telling.
Azel is currently very upset and down regarding... everything, probably best not to tag him for right now. I'll get back to you on this in a bit.
- Location
- Castle
Well, we can always kill them or accept we will when the time comes.
Buts That's not really the point of the arc in my opinion, and if is its honestly a fat load of nothing.
Remember wise Maester Aemon' s words.
"Kill thePokemon child."
Buts That's not really the point of the arc in my opinion, and if is its honestly a fat load of nothing.
Remember wise Maester Aemon' s words.
"Kill the
Snowfire
Polyglot of Chimera
- Location
- Wordcats
The tag was an edit and shouldn't go through. But I'll remember not to do so in any future posts for now.
Last edited:
Evaunit02mark1
S-s-smell the Prey, S-s-start the Hunt.
I don't see why we would make concessions to be quite honest.
If we wanted to we could just kill them and be done with it and they know that.
Hell if anything how casually we steamrolled over their friends, while pursuing non-lethal options at that, has proven it quite well.
This hypothetical meeting, should it ever come to pass, would be more along the lines of "Okay this is what you're tying to do, this is what I'm trying to do, and here are all the people trying to kill both of us. Stop tying to kill me so we can both focus on them."
If we wanted to we could just kill them and be done with it and they know that.
Hell if anything how casually we steamrolled over their friends, while pursuing non-lethal options at that, has proven it quite well.
This hypothetical meeting, should it ever come to pass, would be more along the lines of "Okay this is what you're tying to do, this is what I'm trying to do, and here are all the people trying to kill both of us. Stop tying to kill me so we can both focus on them."
- Location
- Germany
- Pronouns
- He/Him
For me, the whole mess seems to be a communication problem. Introducing more nuanced antagonists/NPCs with agency is a good thing, but surprising the voters by 'suddenly, your old recipes don't work as they did before' wasn't good workmanship. And a lot of thread participants are highly invested in this quest, which means that they react emotionally - hurt, irritated, confused. I'm with Snowfire on this one, that's human nature as far as I'm aware of it.
- Location
- Canada (eh)
[X] Ret-con the entire arc since the arrival in Oldtown, the conclave is cancelled due to moves by the high septon you guys need to figure out what do do with Viserys this month
Honestly, I wouldn't even have minded if Lucan was the one to moralize at us considering it would be consistent with his character, but having this mutually exclusive moral choice come from Danelle which seems to be totally contrary to how her character was portrayed previously just seems like you are trying to railroad the players.
Like I've said before this just feels like one of our old alignment decisions, without the alignment spelled out for us but also without the option for a write-in. Not sure how it slipped past Azel considering the fits he'd throw about the alignment votes as a player.
Honestly, I wouldn't even have minded if Lucan was the one to moralize at us considering it would be consistent with his character, but having this mutually exclusive moral choice come from Danelle which seems to be totally contrary to how her character was portrayed previously just seems like you are trying to railroad the players.
Like I've said before this just feels like one of our old alignment decisions, without the alignment spelled out for us but also without the option for a write-in. Not sure how it slipped past Azel considering the fits he'd throw about the alignment votes as a player.
- Location
- Germany
That is mostly due to me being entirely drained by this whole ordeal. The last week was... harsh and has taken quite a toll on me, both mentally and physically.
I will be on my way. Concerned parties have my contact information.