Remove ads

Warhammer Fantasy: Divided Loyalties - an Advisor's Quest

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Voting is open
Reader mode
[X] The death of the Warboss and the shattering of an Almost-Rogue Idol.

[X] She disobeyed a superior Wizard and her commanding officer. Lecture her harshly but inflict no punishment.

[X] The job is done. Ale and riches for everybody.
 
I'll be honest here: if the second choice wins in this round, expect another 50-100 pages of debate about whether we should inform Kragg and Belegur what happens in private the next vote.

As to whether the Intel on Mork will help: we do not know, but that is why I think we should not hide what we did to Mork. It is hubris for us to say that the Intel has no value, just because Mathilde may not be able to see the value: we are not omniscient.
 
Last edited:
DragonParadox said:
I from what I have seen people just do not trust the dwarfs not to react badly to our 'dangerous manling magics' and melding with gods.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The thing is, we don't need to talk about melding with gods if we don't want to mention Ranald - even though Kragg the Grim probably knows what warp gods actually are, so would possibly understand what happened more than she would. I believe Runepriests are priests of Thungni after all, along with their devotion to the other dwarven gods.

I think the horse has bolted on the subject of Mathilde's dangerous manling magics as Kragg already knows that it's her fault. Being more transparent about the what (even excluding the how) seems like the option that would disappoint him more the least.

Assuming you instead mean meddling rather than melding, Mathilde didn't go out of her way to meddle with gods. She walked in on a god meddling that was from all appearances building up to meddling with the Expedition. She then dealt with it. She even dealt with it in a way that the miscast/ritual backlash ended up where it belonged rather than blowing up all over a bunch of decent dwarves and just about acceptable manlings. I think the dwarves would appreciate that as a job well done, if only for the poetic justice of an orc god trying to punch them and instead ending up punching himself in the face.

The entire valley saw Mork go nuts, so that's not something Mathilde can hide. What she can do is explain is that she ensured that it was a weakened Mork that went nuts, not a full strength one.
 
Last edited:
vsh said:
From context, he's fine with people who are content with the promised payment but will go mental on anybody who'd try a little tomb raiding. That's not unreasonable in a dwarven karak, you know.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, but intentionally killing your own men on suspicion wanting to go tomb raiding (he does not have perfect information) is pretty damn evil. If this were D&D I would call him lawful evil.
 
Alratan said:
Not very heroic though. We also never investigated to tell whether he was as discriminating as you hope he would be.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If we're very lucky (and their high rolls are interpreted this way), it could be that his spreading rumors of the riches to be found earlier and having the stupider men under his commend get themselves killed when they deserted to go looking for them means he's whittled the adventurers down to a core of the real professionals, badasses, and idealists. It'd mean his troops are going to be very effective, very loyal, and he can stop wasting them.

DragonParadox said:
Yes, but intentionally killing your own men on suspicion wanting to go tomb raiding (he does not have perfect information) is pretty damn evil. If this were D&D I would call him lawful evil.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nah, this is pure Lawful, I think. His ends are the upholding of law and order, while the means slip toward evil. He's not being evil for evil's own sake, just very utilitarian.
 
adaer said:
Nah, this is pure Lawful, I think. His ends are the upholding of law and order, while the means slip toward evil. He's not being evil for evil's own sake, just very utilitarian.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That is pretty much the definition of lawful evil, acting in a treacherous manner by killing his own men (some of whom are undoubtedly innocent of what he suspects) in the interests of maintaining order.
 
DragonParadox said:
Yes, but intentionally killing your own men on suspicion wanting to go tomb raiding (he does not have perfect information) is pretty damn evil. If this were D&D I would call him lawful evil.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean, the thread's impression of him is that he promised to kill all adventurers indiscriminately in favor of stirlanders and sylvanians. And my point is that he promised to discriminate, which doesn't make him a good person, but is less evil than the thread thinks.
 
vsh said:
From context, he's fine with people who are content with the promised payment but will go mental on anybody who'd try a little tomb raiding. That's not unreasonable in a dwarven karak, you know.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Or you know. Any Stirlander, what with the bajillion barrows with wights in them which normally just lie there rotting until some idiot adventurer goes to steal something, gets killed and now you have a Wight King wandering around every night complaining in dead languages of his missing treasures, terrorizing your sheep so their milk curdles and sometimes killing you because said adventurer paid for his bread with barrow silver.

Stirlanders have a very dim view of adventurers who can't leave well enough alone and take warnings of "don't go there/do that" as "theres untouched loot!"
 
vsh said:
From context, he's fine with people who are content with the promised payment but will go mental on anybody who'd try a little tomb raiding. That's not unreasonable in a dwarven karak, you know.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Considering the sheer amount of people he's condemning it seems unlikely that he's actually managed to successfully spot only the people who are going to want to steal from the Dwarfs. It also seems quite unlikely that many men would have the opportunity to actually do so anyway. Basically the problem isn't that he wants to kill tomb raiders, it's that he's marked a shitload of people out as potential tomb raiders based on flimsy evidence and then used that as justification to kill them all.
 
Can I ask what is the attrition rate of the army? As I think that will effect what we should do, what are the casualties for the human mercenaries is the most important as they are not going to keep on fighting to the last man the way the dwarfs will.

Remember, the 30% rule was created because generals know that mercenaries won't continue fighting if is more likely that they will die in the next battle if they already have enough gold from the last battle that they can cash out
 
Not going to lie not telling the council about weakening Mork is a huge mistake. Ranald gaining that strength i'm on the wall about but letting them know that the Grobi gods are weakened is massive. That information being effectively communicated has ramifications around the entirity of the Karaz Ankor given that Green skins are their biggest enemy outside of the Skaven. Not telling them is depriving them of critical strategic information.

Even if this has negative blow back on Mathilde personally it's to important to not tell them. Our own benefit pales in comparison to what it means to the Dawi and putting our own benefit above that of the Dwarves in this situation is really not the kind of selfish sentiment I expected people to partake in.
 
Last edited:
[X] The death of the Warboss, the shattering of an Almost-Rogue Idol
[X] You'd have done the same once. Tell her you understand, but treat her to a lecture on the risks and dangers of miscasts.
[X] The residents are weakened, taking the Citadel is now a possibility.
 
[X] The death of the Warboss, the shattering of an Almost-Rogue Idol, and the weakening of Mork.
[X] You'd have done the same once. Tell her you understand, but treat her to a lecture on the risks and dangers of miscasts.
[X] The residents are weakened, taking the Citadel is now a possibility.
 
Candesce said:
[X] The death of the Warboss, the shattering of an Almost-Rogue Idol
[X] You'd have done the same once. Tell her you understand, but treat her to a lecture on the risks and dangers of miscasts.
[X] The residents are weakened, taking the Citadel is now a possibility.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Could you explain why you're voting to not tell the Dwarves that their greatest enemies have been severely weakened?
 
[X] The death of the Warboss, the shattering of an Almost-Rogue Idol, and the weakening of Mork.
[X] You'd have done the same once. Tell her you understand, but treat her to a lecture on the risks and dangers of miscasts.
[X] The residents are weakened, taking the Citadel is now a possibility.
 
Alratan said:
ID we explain about injuring Mork do we have to explain the nature of the ritual, or could we let them assume that he was hurt in the process of Mathilde sabotaging the ritual, or by her redirecting the backlash to hit him?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If she's going to mention Mork's weakening there doesn't seem to be any reason not to mention the attempted schism, but if you want to control exactly what to tell you could do a write-in.

ctulhuslp said:
@BoneyM What does Mathilde think Ranald will think of options which reveal stuff about what happened?
Will he be annoyed/whatever if we hide his role in such a heist? And will revealing his role make him happy or, oppositely, piss him off?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Mathilde's got to live in this plane of existence, whatever cover story she does or doesn't use is her business.

Drucchi said:
If the expedition took the Citadel would we be able to set up artillery on the cliffs overlooking the Caldera and bombard Gobi Town? I am not quite sure about the ranges involved.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes.
 
DragonParadox said:
Somewhat weakened would be more accurate I'd say. Severely weakened would be if Ranald had rolled a 6 and grown to match Slaanesh on stolen power.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ranald took enough of a bite out of Mork that he went from the equivalent of a candle to a Bonfire. Now granted that's not a great way to tell what has happened but it's illustrative even assuming that Ranald was a very very weak god previously that power came completely at the expense of the Orc gods (Both gods were described as having had their power syphoned in the update) even if assume it's something like a draining of a mere five percent of Morks total power that's a pretty dramatic chunk of damage to have occured in one go and means that the Grobi shaman are pretty likely to be weakened all over the world, there's almost definitely Dwarf holds which could make use of this information to sally forth and crush nascent orc waaughs and tribes and it will take time for the information to spread.
 
[X] The death of the Warboss, the shattering of an Almost-Rogue Idol
[X] You'd have done the same once. Tell her you understand, but treat her to a lecture on the risks and dangers of miscasts.
[X] The residents are weakened, taking the Citadel is now a possibility.
 
BoneyM said:
Mathilde's got to live in this plane of existence, whatever cover story she does or doesn't use is her business.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

A very practical god, especially compared to how other gods treat their domains. For instance Ulric (a war god) insists that his followers must fight a certain way, meanwhile Randald, the good of liars, if fine with whatever lie works... or even the full truth.
 
Last edited:
SuperSonicSound said:
Could you explain why you're voting to not tell the Dwarves that their greatest enemies have been severely weakened?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, it's an interesting question whether they've been severely weakened. It depends on details about the interactions between orcs, the Waaagh field, and their gods that we don't know anything about, either in or out of character. There's a fair chance that Kragg the Grim knows a lot more about the subject though, and if we tell him he might be able to use it. It's shocking enough news that he might even let slip some useful tidbits to Mathilde.

One important thing is that I suspect that telling Kragg means telling at least one of the ancestor gods, and they might not necessarily have been able to notice themselves as they don't have appropriate portfolios related to theft.

DragonParadox said:
Somewhat weakened would be more accurate I'd say. Severely weakened would be if Ranald had rolled a 6 and grown to match Slaanesh on stolen power.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

True.

BoneyM said:
If she's going to mention Mork's weakening there doesn't seem to be any reason not to mention the attempted schism, but if you want to control exactly what to tell you could do a write-in.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I didn't want to go anywhere near the subject of the origin of black orcs. However, the general subject of black orcs damaging greenskin unity could be valuable information for rune development in the long run, if you could make a rune that would attack the weakness it might produce in the Waaagh field when both black orcs and regular orcs and goblins are om the field together. It's not something I'd want to talk about in front of humans though. Having visions isn't the type of thing likely to inspire confidence in them. If we did tell them I'd prefer a cover story.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Voting is open
Remove ads
Back
Top