Remove ads

Warhammer Fantasy: Divided Loyalties - an Advisor's Quest

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Reader mode
Altom said:
If no, we might as well give it to the colleges as windherding was described before as "breaking the Teclisian paradigm" so unless we plan to make a new one soon we might as well let colleges know it is possible even if the craftwizardship is shoddy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Windherding is a refinement of already existing college knowledge. The way multi wind enchantments work currently is by taking place in much larger areas, such as a room/building. The innovation is in regards to massively reducing the space needed for them to play nicely together. So a stark improvement, but not paradigm breaking.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, the best way to break the paradigm would be to prove Teclesian theory right, since it's well known in and out of universe to be just wrong enough to work if you don't think about it too hard.
 
[X] [SADDLE] Donate it to Stirland
Since Roswita didn't get to ride MaEr, I mean, Stirland definitely needs it's own Dämmerlichritter, yes.

[X] Bring in Heidi
She is our foremost expert on Lahmian Conspiracies, after all.
 
MossPiglet said:
They also know more they should about classified matters, since the whole Haupt-Anderssens being murdered was classified on a pretty high level.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The definite confirmation of their murder might have been classified, but if a whole dynasty gets pruned by accidents then most people would speculate either a curse or murder.

@Boney Could you elaborate or give an example of what you mean with "violent parodies of the apparent 'natural causes' that carried off the Haupt-Anderssens"? Do you mean that there's a pattern eerily similar to how the Haupt-Andersens died, except that the accidents are even more gory? Or do you mean actual serial killer stuff where someone is clearly murdering the Unfähigers and deliberately staging each crime scene to look like an "official" Haupt-Andersen cause of death?
Codex said:
"To become a Hunter Lord, one must not only prove martial prowess and political savvy but also prove skill as a hunter by tracking down and killing a dangerous creature of the forest. Targets include bears, lynxes, or wild boars. The animal skin is worn as a drape and is a symbol of honour once blessed by the Priests of Taal."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So some kind of semi-meritocratic position jockeying that then has to be confirmed by a difficult and dangerous final trial with religious connotations. Is it known whether every Hunter Lord is on the Hunter Council or if merely every member of the Hunter Council is a Hunter Lord?

Also since the leaders of the various major military organizations of Talab(heim/ecland) need to be Hunter Lords that puts quite a damper on selecting military leaders for loyalty/nepotism. And that within the central source of power of any normal Elector Count. Talabecland might well be one of the hardest Provinces to rule despotically with the most checks and balances. Maybe tied with Ostermark.
K von Carstein said:
The Amber I understand (animality and such), the Jade too (the whole fertility thing) and maybe the Bright (passion, and being in very hot environments in the College😏), but why the Gold and Amethyst?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's why I said for very different reasons.

The Gold are both the rational/scientific/analytical Order (in their own opinion) that prides itself in how their logic trumps their irrational emotions and they put emphasis and social status in the (artificial) perfection of the physical form. I expect a good number of them to at least act like the Human body is something to coldly inspect and to have a clinical view on nudity up to the point that they actually notice that someone is trying to seduce or titillate them (provided they don't already have the emotion dampening arcane mark). I also expect that anyone that manages to gild their chest or legs to want to show it off to their colleagues in private just like they would any other gilded body part, regardless of gender. And that at least some of the more arrogant gilded Wizards would show more disdain than embarrassment upon seeing "imperfect" bodies.

As for the Amethysts, not only are they celibate, their desires of the flesh expected to die off sooner or later, they also have a very different attitude towards the human body. Mostly in the form of corpses, dressed or otherwise.
Altom said:
So a question to the thread: do you plan on making another go at windherding within next few turns? The reason I am asking is because it changes the answer to the "what to with the saddle" question.
If yes, we should do whatever and submit to the colleges something less umgak.
If no, we might as well give it to the colleges as windherding was described before as "breaking the Teclisian paradigm" so unless we plan to make a new one soon we might as well let colleges know it is possible even if the craftwizardship is shoddy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That seems to be a hard to answer question. Quite a few people seem to be afraid of the risks. Others think that the Gambler could mitigate the risks, but that would require not using the Coin for anything else that turn, which might be a hard sell especially in the next few turns.

Personally I think trying again is worth the 19% chance of miscast (two wizards), but see no need to do it right the next turn. IIRC many if us want to fill the next turn stock full of actions at least potentially related to the Father. I also want to finally have recruited everyone we want on board for the foundation action by the turn after the next one after the latest. That includes House Tindomiel, the Halethan Hedgewise and maybe (but not necessarily) one Hoeth-centric House and the Kislevite magic traditions. For plenty of others even that timeframe is far too long.
 
Last edited:
Artemis1992 said:
If she wanted a horse she would have one.
She's clearly trying to do her job here without technically breaking her questing vow and riding on.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Codex said:
While I think Soizic on a horse would be cool, I'm starting to get the impression she doesn't want one. She hasn't gotten one despite being fully capable of doing so for years, and Boney has pointed that out before.

I have no idea why she doesn't want one (the region is mountainous but there's a few places where she can still use a horse), but it seems to be the case.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Nah- I'm not making the argument that she wants a horse or needs a horse. I'm saying, I want her to have a horse.

So please, thread, give her a horse.
 
ReImagined said:
Oh hey, Mathilde's Intrigue is finally higher than her Piety. After eighteen years.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No wonder our rolls were so bad this turn. Have we built a shrine to Ranald in Laurelorn yet?


Regarding windherding, I would say that this miscast has soured me on the notion of windherding for the sake of windherding. I am not opposed to taking risks if the rewards are worth it: Mathilde is no stranger to risk, and every time we choose to go into battle we are rolling the dice on fates far worse than a miscast. But the potential rewards should justify the risks.

I don't think any one was excited for the Nightrider Saddle in particular (though feel free to correct me if you feel otherwise). We just wanted to do a windherding project, any windherding project, as a proof of concept. Well, concept proven. I will consider supporting further windherding projects only if the projects have the potential to be useful, useful enough to justify the use of an action and the risk of miscast. Also, I have to admit that I mostly don't find enchanting interesting to read about, and this particular update wasn't an exception. So you can add that as another requirement for future windherding projects: be interesting.
 
Last edited:
DocMatoi said:
[ ] Bring in Heidi
GIRLS NIGHT GIRLS NIGHT GIRLS NIGHT
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Need an X there, buddy.
Altom said:
So a question to the thread: do you plan on making another go at windherding within next few turns? The reason I am asking is because it changes the answer to the "what to with the saddle" question.
If yes, we should do whatever and submit to the colleges something less umgak.
If no, we might as well give it to the colleges as windherding was described before as "breaking the Teclisian paradigm" so unless we plan to make a new one soon we might as well let colleges know it is possible even if the craftwizardship is shoddy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'd like to take another swing at it sometime in the future, because, well, we didn't get anything out of this attempt except the item:
Boney said:
Still, the fact that there's no leakage between the two and no disruption of either effect proves that there's merit to what you're attempting, you're confident that if you manage to contribute at least basic competence to a future enchantment you'd be capable of even better things.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Emphasis mine. I parse this as Boney saying "if you do it again in the future, and aren't shit, you can increase your skill in Windherding and do some other cool shit with it." That seems worth shooting for.
IronFist said:
Also, anyone else notice Engrimm's learning got a +1 after the first windherding attempt?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Codex caught it this morning, but her theory is that Egrimm's learning didn't go up, but rather he has different traits that applied:
Codex said:
For enchanting his learning was 22. Chances are Egrimm's base learning is lower than 22 and he has a bonus to Enchanting and to Academia, and his Academia bonus is one point higher than his enchanting. Overall pretty good. Not as good as Mathilde, but Mathilde is stupidly stacked, and I'm sure he has fields in which he most likely surpasses Mathilde in.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think the +1 learning is likelier, but her interpretation isn't impossible.
 
Boney said:
[Mathilde Windherding: Learning, 6+29+10(Enchanter)=45.]
[Egrimm's contribution: Learning, 92+22=114.]
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Boney said:
[Drawing board: Learning, 10+28+5(Library: Enchantment)=43.]
[In the workshop: 74+28+20(Room of Dawn and Dusk)+10(Enchanter)+5(Library: Enchantment)=137.]
[Integrating power stone: 48+28+20(Room of Utter Neutrality)+10(Enchanter)+2(Library: Power Stones)=108.]
[Integrating scales: 10+28+20(Room of Utter Neutrality)+10(Enchanter)+4(Library: Dragons, halved)=72.]
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Comparing the rolls from when we made our robes to this attempt, that's a lot of bonus points that weren't applicable to this round of enchanting. I assume this means we did it in Laurelorn, and the library didn't help because this is outside the precedent of what's written in the books.
 
ReImagined said:
Comparing the rolls from when we made our robes to this attempt, that's a lot of bonus points that weren't applicable to this round of enchanting. I assume this means we did it in Laurelorn, and the library didn't help because this is outside the precedent of what's written in the books.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
we couldn't have done it in the tower of dusk and dawn, that would have messed up Egrimm something awful
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top