Remove ads

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

Reader mode
TotallyNotEvil said:
There was nothing wrong with the original vote, in the sense that it was more or less how it always went. Seemed perfectly fine.

The message hasn't changed much from that, on a high level. But, beyond the words themselves, the way they are... coached? Delivered? Approached? Feels different, from the last one.

I thought the retcon not that useful, and I think for the same reason as Azel did, that I didn't think it would change the outcome that significantly. So I just expected for it to go more or less the same, but for us to not get steamrolled.

And yet, well, this feels like it might alter things.

And fortunately, doesn't have an apologetic hangdog feel to it, which was one (extremely OOC) way I though there'd be to change the outcome.

It's like it's the same message, but a different point of view generated and delivered it.

Feels like the natural way we should have approached it, actually. More... Organic? Yeah, that feels like a good away of describing it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Here we are the Dread Sorcerer tersely saying the minimum amount necessary to get our point across without going out of our way to be intimidating. Also just being less open and more guarded makes it clear we are still very twitchy, which might at least ward off [Danelle Inserting Foot Into Mouth Intensifies].

I mean before we made some diplomatic mistakes to the point where it might as well not have been rolled for (it probably wasn't really, because that was barely productive of us in the first place).

Here just screeching about moral platitudes when we're being reasonable (from our perspective) and at least not totally unreasonable (we didn't just turtle her and go on our merry way) would get her... very little. I mean there's pointing out that our methods are extreme or that she disagrees with them, and then there's calling us a monster and saying unless we submit ourselves unto the Seven's judgement or leave her and her friends alone, no cake for you.

Now if that happens the acerbic "you have no fucking clue what you're even taking about" doesn't sound like a weak deflection, but the literal truth.
 
...I may seem overly focused on that issue to you all (I mean, I feel that myself) but all I care about at this point, is that we aren't forced to compromise with them in order to get anywhere.

There will be some moralizing, I suspect, simply because of keeping true to characters.

Also, I still can't help but hate the fact that Baelor is going to get justification now. Perhaps even reasonable one.

That said, I hope that stuff goes better after this.
I certainly don't see what has been changed so drastically with the vote, nor understand anything that has been written about characters/models the last 5-7 pages.
:V

But if nothing else, at least the interlude was great.
 
Well, no point in waiting.

[X] Truth in Mercy
-[X] "Given your own lack of protections from seeking magics, I hope you will not take it amiss if I secure us further from prying eyes. You have my word that I will abide by the peace of the Conclave." Bloodwish Mage's Private Sanctum on the room. Then drop the mask of Dywen, using glamour to hide the mundane disguise Tyene has equipped us with. I'm keeping this. Everything else changes. In this context, we're giving security and openness.
-[X] Contact Dany and ensure that the captives are safe and whole. "Your friends are perfectly healthy, as are Lucan's subordinates. I am not a monster, whatever rumours may paint me as." Directly lifted, and an excellent opener.
-[X] "You wish your companions returned." This is not a question. She hopes we will be a person of reason, and not what the rumours have shown us to be. We can prove that. "I will have them released. Now, or at a time more convenient to you."
-[X] When she asks of Lucan's subordinates, grimace, and explain that it is more complicated, as our only true interaction with the works of the man has painted him as our enemy. The Angel born of the man who had been Baelor the Blessed in life was summoned to kill a king. Given that it had not already struck down the pretender in King's Landing, as it surely could, there were few enough other targets. I want the explanation for Baelor before we go any further with this.
 
Last edited:
egoo said:
...I may seem overly focused on that issue to you all (I mean, I feel that myself) but all I care about at this point, is that we aren't forced to compromise with them in order to get anywhere.

There will be some moralizing, I suspect, simply because of keeping true to characters.

Also, I still can't help but hate the fact that Baelor is going to get justification now. Perhaps even reasonable one.

That said, I hope that stuff goes better after this.
I certainly don't see what has been changed so drastically with the vote, nor understand anything that has been written about characters/models the last 5-7 pages.
:V

But if nothing else, at least the interlude was great.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Baelor getting justification...well that would be interesting to see how his creation would be justified. I mean let us talk shop here. The man is, in the thread's and in Visery's eyes, one of the worst kings in our family. And that is a list with Aegon the Unworthy, Viserys I and every idiot involved in the Dance of Dragons. And he was given both angelic status and a Kingkiller template. This feels personal because it is personal. If we decided to recruit Lucan's cousin and gave him a weapon that severs his connection to the Seven it would also be personal. And we would be called monsters for doing so (by members of the thread.)
 
Last edited:
TotallyNotEvil said:
--[X] If she asks why they were taken, explain that we wished to parlay, but had the word of one of his Called Angels that he would simply refuse such a request. With so many lives hanging in the balance, we needed a way to bring him to the negotiating table so we could get a true measure of the man. This is truth, if a very specific shade of it. But frankly, I don't think she can beat our Bluff. I do expect to be called on it in a different way, but I'm willing to take that hit
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
you might not have noticed, but there was a pretty general consensus to leave this part out until we actually hear Danelle's response.
 
TotallyNotEvil said:
I don't see the harm, especially qualified on her asking it first, but sure, removed it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My understanding and own concern was that there are several different ways for her to ask, and we would want to tailor the specific response. Basically a precaution against the very kind of mistake that caused the retcon in the first place without having to rely on DP.
 
TotallyNotEvil said:
There was nothing wrong with the original vote, in the sense that it was more or less how it always went. Seemed perfectly fine.

The message hasn't changed much from that, on a high level. But, beyond the words themselves, the way they are... coached? Delivered? Approached? Feels different, from the last one.

I thought the retcon not that useful, and I think for the same reason as Azel did, that I didn't think it would change the outcome that significantly. So I just expected for it to go more or less the same, but for us to not get steamrolled.

And yet, well, this feels like it might alter things.

And fortunately, doesn't have an apologetic hangdog feel to it, which was one (extremely OOC) way I though there'd be to change the outcome.

It's like it's the same message, but a different point of view generated and delivered it.

Feels like the natural way we should have approached it, actually. More... Organic? Yeah, that feels like a good away of describing it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The main thing that I personally noticed in the update, was that Viserys seemed to be reciting a speech to her and when Danelle called him out on things he just kept on reciting the speech without pausing at all.
 
[X] Snowfire

This plan is the ideal option as far as I can see. Let's see how she (and the wider Conclave) responses before we lay down any argument.
 
You know, I just remembered something, which shouldn't influence the current vote since we don't know it IC, but might make for some interesting future points. Danelle called Baelor a herald in her interlude. Now, it might just be me, but that doesn't sound like something designed to basically be a glorified holy assassin. Could it be possible Lucan lied about its purpose? If so, I can't wait till Danelle tries to spout off that "never known him to lie" line.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top