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

[TotallyNotEvil]

Guys one thing to consider is that the optics are not as absolute as you have been making it out to be. A precedent here will not have magisters worried that you outlawed heredity both because the idea is so alien and because there are extenuating circumstances. You just conquered Tyrosh, this guys took the chance to make your job easier. If you had outright given him the land there would have been grumbling sure but little real unrest would have come of it.

Click to shrink...

Why take risks?

[X] First Case: The lady has clear and legal right to the inheritance and thus the estate. However, in recognition of the steward cooperating with the Legion and treating his slaves well while effectively administrating the estate independently for decades, we would request the lady to give him the chance to buy the property from her at a reasonable price, the Imperial Administration being able to offer a estimate for the market value of the estate. 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 does not in any way or form impact the noble titles of the widow or grant such to the steward. This is merely a property transaction.

[X] Second Case:
-[X] On magic: It is self-evident that Glyllo was not bespelled as he claims, thus he has no right to an annulment on that basis. 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.
-[X] Ruling: While the bride had done nothing illegal and we see no hard evidence of malicious intent, the marriage was established with him not being fully aware of the circumstances. As Glyllo objects to it after learning of the truth, an annulment is granted.
-[X] For the future: The law will be amended so that before a marriage, both partners have to state all permanent or temporary magical effects they possess. Failure to do so is a valid reason for an annulment, though not in of itself a crime. It can be however used as evidence to prove malicious intent and fraud, if other evidence of such is present.

[X] Septon: "I take it then that you do not agree with the High Septon, for he has crowned the Ursuper in the name of your gods. I have heard from many Septons many different things. Some decry all magic as fiendish work, others even going so far as wishing to bring back the Faith Militant and seeking to put a High Septon on the Iron Throne to spreed the faith with the blade. Before I answer your question Septon, answer mine. What is it that you believe?"

This is fine.

 

[Azel]

The core issue I have with the matter is that I still stand by the decision to force her to sell it, but we are lacking the necessary legal framework to argue that case. What you are saying @TotallyNotEvil about the merchants and nobles taking a dim view of this isn't wrong, but it's also very far from my intent, especially when you kept yelling about seizing property and banning inheritances.

What my core argument here is, is that the steward worked as an independent economic actor. There was no oversight or influence from the actual owner, so in effect, he was running a private business that was owned in turn by the lord. What I would really like to do is to rule that this is the case. That the steward has, by right of custom, the ownership of the estate as Steward Incorporated, but that Steward Incorporated is still owned by the lady. Which means she gets the profits from the steward or whatever share the lord was getting, but she can't fire him.

 

[tarrangar]

The problem isn't so much from a moral standpoint, as much as how it'd ruinously ostracize the majority of the most powerful slice of our population.

You essentially outlaw dynastic ownership, not only your nobles will rise up, your merchants will rise up.

And after you stomp that, the next generation, be those the disgruntled heirs or even the peasants you put in their place, will also rise up.

The forcing is the issue. Because it implies awful things to not only individual people, but entire castes of them.

What happens when people completely ignore this by rotating their managers every five years? Do we engange in an ever-escalating legalese battle?

Click to shrink...

I think you are underestimating how much neglect the rule would say was needed, it wouldn't be that if you are a merchant, then unless you sail with every single ship you have, the captains can buy them from you, it would be that if you own a merchant company, but your actual interaction with it, was limited to finding a competent fellow 30 years ago, and telling him to take care of it and send you the profits.

You don't have to oversee everything yourself, but you do need to have shown an interest in your property, beyond collecting rent once in a while, whether that interest was being involved in the budgets, finding costumers, helping with hiring new servants, occasionally doing inspections, to see if there's anything you could think off to improve things, or otherwise just generally showing that you consider this your land, as opposed to considering it just an investment that give excellent interest.

 

[Crake]

Guys one thing to consider is that the optics are not as absolute as you have been making it out to be. A precedent here will not have magisters worried that you outlawed heredity both because the idea is so alien and because there are extenuating circumstances. You just conquered Tyrosh, this guys took the chance to make your job easier. If you had outright given him the land there would have been grumbling sure but little real unrest would have come of it.

Click to shrink...

Viserys has said it before though, you need to be absolutely thorough in former legal proceedings so that you can quote based on precedent, because this makes your case look much buffer when you do it again and it is high profile. If you say "I have presided over such cases before, and here was my ruling on them", then people cannot argue that it can't be done, because quite clearly a number of people in the realm have done so, and to overturn it would create an entire faction aligned against either the singular individual, or the party of individuals pressing the case.

 

[tarrangar]

[X] First Case: The lady has clear and legal right to the inheritance and thus the estate. However, in recognition of the steward cooperating with the Legion and treating his slaves well while effectively administrating the estate independently for decades, we would request the lady to give him the chance to buy the property from her at a reasonable price, the Imperial Administration being able to offer a estimate for the market value of the estate. 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 does not in any way or form impact the noble titles of the widow or grant such to the steward. This is merely a property transaction.

[X] Second Case:
-[X] On magic: It is self-evident that Glyllo was not bespelled as he claims, thus he has no right to an annulment on that basis. 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.
-[X] For the future: The law will be amended so that before a marriage, both partners have to state all permanent or temporary magical effects they possess. Failure to do so is a valid reason for an annulment, though not in of itself a crime. It can be however used as evidence to prove malicious intent and fraud, if other evidence of such is present.

[X] Septon: "I take it then that you do not agree with the High Septon, for he has crowned the Ursuper in the name of your gods. I have heard from many Septons many different things. Some decry all magic as fiendish work, others even going so far as wishing to bring back the Faith Militant and seeking to put a High Septon on the Iron Throne to spreed the faith with the blade. Before I answer your question Septon, answer mine. What is it that you believe?"

I altered the vote to not annul the marriage, I think making future marriages under such pretenses illegal is a good idea, but I don't think the marriage should be annulled, under current law it wasn't illegal, and we aren't in the business of retroactive laws, as I got told when we conquered Tyrosh and I wanted all cruel slavers hung.

He can seek a divorce of course, but the marriage shouldn't be annulled, she hasn't been proven to have acted in bad faith, and the marriage was almost certainly consummated, which in this society would leave her shamed if the marriage was annulled, he was the fool so the shame should be his.

Having your marriage annulled is a big shame, by doing that we are essentially destroying her social status, and it wont actually do a lot to repair his, I would prefer not to ruin her life, so I will vote against an annulment.

 

[TotallyNotEvil]

There was no oversight or influence from the actual owner,

Click to shrink...

Herein lies the problem: how to measure and define that.

This fellow was medically incapable of visiting his property.

Who's to say he did not send orders, or directions, or didn't religiously read each and every report, and analyze the returns?

Wherever we draw the line will by definition be arbitrary. And therein lies a ton of problems.

The anti-Mathusalah laws need to be made, yeah. But this as was was far too ripe for abuse.

 

[zxzx24]

@Azel I would still rather address this issue more fully later.

This is the kind of law that the kingdom should know is coming ahead of time. Perhaps years ahead of time.

 

[zxzx24]

Herein lies the problem: how to measure and define that.

This fellow was medically incapable of visiting his property.

Who's to say he did not send orders, or directions, or didn't religiously read each and every report, and analyze the returns?

Click to shrink...

I would say that's ridiculous... but I had a relative who did exactly that. Even on his deathbed.

Have you seen similar cases or...?

 

[Mormont]

Why are you all siding with the idiot in the 2nd case? An enchanment like that is the exact same as makeup. She applied it only to herself and did not affect him on the slightest. It's his fault that he married someone that he didn't actually know. She convinced him to think with the wrong head and know he has to pay for it. This case is the most clear cut part of this vote!

 

[TotallyNotEvil]

At are you all siding with tbe idiot in the 2nd case? An enchanment like that is the exact same as makeup. She applied it only to herself and did not affect him on the slightest. It's his fault that he married someone that he didn't actually know. She convinced him to think with the wrong head and know he has to pay for it. This case is the most clear cut part of this vote!

Click to shrink...

IMO, it's a matter of scale. She all but had a magical mask on.

In-character, she was a different person, the Charisma manifesting mostly overtly in how she acted.

 

[T_of_A]

At are you all siding with tbe idiot in the 2nd case? An enchanment like that is the exact same as makeup. She applied it only to herself and did not affect him on the slightest. It's his fault that he married someone that he didn't actually know. She convinced him to think with the wrong head and know he has to pay for it. This case is the most clear cut part of this vote!

Click to shrink...

Vote for Azel then.

 

[zxzx24]

At are you all siding with tbe idiot in the 2nd case? An enchanment like that is the exact same as makeup. She applied it only to herself and did not affect him on the slightest. It's his fault that he married someone that he didn't actually know. She convinced him to think with the wrong head and know he has to pay for it. This case is the most clear cut part of this vote!

Click to shrink...

Depends on what the charisma bonus actually did.

Which is kind of a thorny issue because "+6 enhancement bonus to charisma" is right about small/medium sized potatoes in the diplomacy game.

On the other hand, we dont know how much it actually affected her.

You know what. Hang the mechanical effect.

@DragonParadox what did she trade for? Exactly, hopefully one of the fae she was trading with kept records...

 

[TotallyNotEvil]

Vote for Azel then.

Click to shrink...

Or don't, and actually vote by block, as Azel is currently going for "this isn't enchantment, but I will grant the annulment under what's essentially fraud. No crime, tho."

I would say that's ridiculous... but I had a relative who did exactly that. Even on his deathbed.

Have you seen similar cases or...?

Click to shrink...

Nah, the implications just sprung to mind.

I do worry about my older brother leaving me, my mother and aunt and my younger brother virtually destitute, tho.

 

[Crake]

At are you all siding with tbe idiot in the 2nd case? An enchanment like that is the exact same as makeup. She applied it only to herself and did not affect him on the slightest. It's his fault that he married someone that he didn't actually know. She convinced him to think with the wrong head and know he has to pay for it. This case is the most clear cut part of this vote!

Click to shrink...

The problem here is that there is no legal precedent yet for such matters, and to avoid this ever having to be brought to trial again (the ideal, if not always acquired, resolution for legislation), then following this case we have to clearly define the terms of a marriage agreement into law, in this case involving the declaration of any magical effects either party is making use of beforehand.

And even then, I feel this whole thing is slightly sketchy, there's no moral highground to lean upon in either direction since the woman began her seduction of the Magister during the odd sequence of events following our annexation when he was on his deathbed, essentially. He would have still been on his death bed a few days later, had we not tended to him. Possibly beyond all reason during that timeframe, rather than cognizant enough to agree to a marriage with someone he had just met (but had been utterly charmed by), and the enhancement itself is a good deal better than just makeup, it makes you look more presentable, in all facets that define "charisma".

While I would not go so far as declaring what the woman did a crime, neither would I argue that what she did is aboveboard. Her motives were and still are suspect.

 

[tarrangar]

@Azel I would still rather address this issue more fully later.

This is the kind of law that the kingdom should know is coming ahead of time. Perhaps years ahead of time.

Click to shrink...

Okay that I can agree with you in regards to, it's not really yet time for this kind of law.

IMO, it's a matter of scale. She all but had a magical mask on.

In-character, she was a different person, the Charisma manifesting mostly overtly in how she acted.

Click to shrink...

Yeah but he can get a divorce for that, we can make sure she don't get too much of his money, but an annulment is just cruel to her, that's the kind of thing that make a woman a pariah in a medieval society.

 

[Duesal]

Why are you all siding with the idiot in the 2nd case? An enchanment like that is the exact same as makeup. She applied it only to herself and did not affect him on the slightest. It's his fault that he married someone that he didn't actually know. She convinced him to think with the wrong head and know he has to pay for it. This case is the most clear cut part of this vote!

Click to shrink...

+6 Charisma is not the same as makeup. It also greatly aids in deceiving people and leading them by the nose.

 

[Azel]

Herein lies the problem: how to measure and define that.

This fellow was medically incapable of visiting his property.

Who's to say he did not send orders, or directions, or didn't religiously read each and every report, and analyze the returns?

Wherever we draw the line will by definition be arbitrary. And therein lies a ton of problems.

The anti-Mathusalah laws need to be made, yeah. But this as was was far too ripe for abuse.

Click to shrink...

Well, that's the part where a court has to make a ruling. Also, to be clear, read that post again. My desired outcome would be to encapsulate the estate as a legal entity with the steward at the helm to insulate him from any meddling by the lady. She still indirectly owns the land and she still gets the profits, but the state of affairs as it was, namely that the steward is in charge of it with no oversight, would be legally protected.

I altered the vote to not annul the marriage, I think making future marriages under such pretenses illegal is a good idea, but I don't think the marriage should be annulled, under current law it wasn't illegal, and we aren't in the business of retroactive laws, as I got told when we conquered Tyrosh and I wanted all cruel slavers hung.

Click to shrink...

It's not a retroactive law. It's a court ruling that is then passed into law.

Why are you all siding with the idiot in the 2nd case? An enchanment like that is the exact same as makeup. She applied it only to herself and did not affect him on the slightest. It's his fault that he married someone that he didn't actually know. She convinced him to think with the wrong head and know he has to pay for it. This case is the most clear cut part of this vote!

Click to shrink...

Because I'm generally in favor of marriage annulment being a thing when hasty decisions are made. I have no sympathy with him either, but this ruling makes it easier for later victims of actual fraud to get out of that mess.

 

[Crake]

Because I'm generally in favor of marriage annulment being a thing when hasty decisions are made. I have no sympathy with him either, but this ruling makes it easier for later victims of actual fraud to get out of that mess.

Click to shrink...

Exactly, this, the legal precedent will be very useful, largely outweighing any victimization of either party here, who I feel neither side is better or worse off than they were before the annexation of Myr than they would be if they hadn't married.

Edit: Yes, I would say "better", too, seeing as how if we ruled the man had to stay married to the woman, that is likely to be a very dangerous situation to be in for one or both parties, leading to yet more impinging upon our time. Possibly because of a murder and the potential controversy following it due to the two being linked to a case we presided over.

 

[T_of_A]

IMO, it's a matter of scale. She all but had a magical mask on.

In-character, she was a different person, the Charisma manifesting mostly overtly in how she acted.

Click to shrink...

I act differently around a date than around anyone else though. "How you act" changes all the time: it's called free will.
I also act more confident when I feel beautiful and charismatic, and of course if I were seducing someone I would be doing all I could to appear that way.
Either he wasn't of sound mind, in which case she was preying on the vulnerable and that's a crime. Or he was of sound mind, in which case it was his responsibility not to fall for this.

 

[tarrangar]

The problem here is that there is no legal precedent yet for such matters, and to avoid this ever having to be brought to trial again (the ideal, if not always acquired, resolution for legislation), then following this case we have to clearly define the terms of a marriage agreement into law, in this case involving the declaration of any magical effects either party is making use of beforehand.

And even then, I feel this whole thing is slightly sketchy, there's no moral highground to lean upon in either direction since the woman began her seduction of the Magister during the odd sequence of events following our annexation when he was on his deathbed, essentially. He would have still been on his death bed a few days later, had we not tended to him. Possibly beyond all reason during that timeframe, rather than cognizant enough to agree to a marriage with someone he had just met (but had been utterly charmed by), and the enhancement itself is a good deal better than just makeup, it makes you look more presentable, in all facets that define "charisma".

While I would not go so far as declaring what the woman did a crime, neither would I argue that what she did is aboveboard. Her motives were and still are suspect.

Click to shrink...

That they most definitely are, but they are merely suspect not proven malicious, and that means she don't deserve to be punished, and an annulment is most definitely a punishment, it would utterly tank her marriage prospects, make her a social pariah, and just generally make life suck for her, because she would be seen as spoiled, as they probably consummated the marriage on the wedding night, and she would be seen as a near criminal, because it got annulled as opposed to divorced.

A divorce divide the shame between them, an annulment puts all the shame on her.

 

[TotallyNotEvil]

Which is kind of a thorny issue because "+6 enhancement bonus to charisma" is right about small/medium sized potatoes in the diplomacy game.

Click to shrink...

@TotallyNotEvil she didnt use a mask she used something to alter her personality.

Click to shrink...

She likely went from "fairer side of average" to "one of the most enthralling women in the world".

Charisma encompasses more than just plain looks.

I act differently around a date than around anyone else though. "How you act" changes all the time: it's called free will.
I also act more confident when I feel beautiful and charismatic, and of course if I were seducing someone I would be doing all I could to appear that way.
Either he wasn't of sound mind, in which case she was preying on the vulnerable and that's a crime. Or he was of sound mind, in which case it was his responsibility not to fall for this.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, but see above.

A jump of six points in charisma... is the farthest thing from trivial.

In the end, a clean break but no crime sounds like the best solution, with clear law being put in place to prevent this.

A divorce that's an annulment in all but name would do it, too. Don't know if Tarrangar has the right of it just yet.

 

[tarrangar]

Because I'm generally in favor of marriage annulment being a thing when hasty decisions are made. I have no sympathy with him either, but this ruling makes it easier for later victims of actual fraud to get out of that mess.

Click to shrink...

Couldn't we make it so future cases like this will cause annulment, but because this marriage was before the law, he merely have the right to a divorce mostly on his term, that way we don't utterly ruin her reputation.

 

[Crake]

I act differently around a date than around anyone else though. "How you act" changes all the time: it's called free will.
I also act more confident when I feel beautiful and charismatic, and of course if I were seducing someone I would be doing all I could to appear that way.
Either he wasn't of sound mind, in which case she was preying on the vulnerable and that's a crime. Or he was of sound mind, in which case it was his responsibility not to fall for this.

Click to shrink...

I actually understand and see this as valid, but we would more or less effectively be leveraging this ruling to help us deal with future situations where it was blatantly fraud or otherwise malicious intent involved in the matter. Which will no doubt happen, absolutely for sure.

 

[Azel]

Personally, I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that she was going for the princess with fairy help thing here. Especially since she knew that he was on his deathbed and thus his heirs would have contested a marriage anyway, if we hadn't healed him, so gold digging can't have been her only reasoning.

As it stand, my read is that she went to the Fey to get a CHA boost to confess to her crush before he bought the farm.

 

[DragonParadox]

@DragonParadox what did she trade for? Exactly, hopefully one of the fae she was trading with kept records...

Click to shrink...

You have no idea IC