Remove ads

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

Reader mode
...
@Goldfish, any specific recommendation on how to best capture Maelor's asshole dad?

Perhaps a vote?
:rolleyes:
 
Deliste said:
The borrowing equivalent didn't occur in that scenario.

This was not fraud, he was just an idiot, if you have to tell your partner everything you are influenced by perhaps we should also strip people down, bathe them thoroughly and have them debate relevant topics in front of said partner without their knowledge so that you can see what they actually look like, what they actually think and how they actually conduct themselves if we so thoroughly believe in a "real version" of a person.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don't tend to get involved in player debates unless sit is to give an IC perspective, but since the vote is done I feel freer than usual in this regard.

I feel your argument might be a tad reductionist. While someone can be reasonably expected to understand and compensate for the effects of all those mundane advantages courting people can give themselves, magic is both new to the scene and by its very nature mysterious and hard to account for by people with no requisite lore.
 
Azel said:
For the record, I'm all for making him more killy, but poison claws is all kinds of unappealing to me.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not attached to the idea of poison claws, it just randomly popped up in my head when I was brainstorming various methods to make Amrelath harder to kill.

By the way, @DragonParadox, will Lya be experimentally incorporating Runecrafting into the Harbinger in some fashion?
 
If we make our unit of
Erinyes​
i wonder If we can give the Erinyes a type of banner that improves there combat potential and applies to their pride I would call it the banner of Desolation after the dark angels one from Warhammer 40k as the Erinyes are kind of like dark angels ​
 
Duesal said:
I'm not attached to the idea of poison claws, it just randomly popped up in my head when I was brainstorming various methods to make Amrelath harder to kill.

By the way, @DragonParadox, will Lya be experimentally incorporating Runecrafting into the Harbinger in some fashion?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Considering how powerful that thing is she is probably going to need Rune-craft to help make it within the specifications you planed for
 
DragonParadox said:
Considering how powerful that thing is she is probably going to need Rune-craft to help make it within the specifications you planed for
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That is going to look so cool. :D

Does this mean we'll already have a hefty amount of progress down with putting runes on Valyrian Steel, and can use that progress towards upgrading Dark Sister and Oathkeeper?
 
Deliste said:
The borrowing equivalent didn't occur in that scenario.

This was not fraud, he was just an idiot, if you have to tell your partner everything you are influenced by perhaps we should also strip people down, bathe them thoroughly and have them debate relevant topics in front of said partner without their knowledge so that you can see what they actually look like, what they actually think and how they actually conduct themselves if we so thoroughly believe in a "real version" of a person.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Except this isn't about this particular case. This is a landmark decision on the usage of social buffs in the realm, so it needs to use broader context. And in the broader context, we decidedly do not want, say, a Night Hag disguising herself as a beautiful princess and marrying a lord under false pretenses and then have that marriage be legally binding.
 
DragonParadox said:
I don't tend to get involved in player debates unless sit is to give an IC perspective, but since the vote is done I feel freer than usual in this regard.

I feel your argument might be a tad reductionist. While someone can be reasonably expected to understand and compensate for the effects of all those mundane advantages courting people can give themselves, magic is both new to the scene and by its very nature mysterious and hard to account for by people with no requisite lore.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Then they are to learn because magic is as much a part of life now as any of those are, it is the fault of the user that some are slow on the uptake?

Besides these mundane advantages people are expected to understand and compensate for can have magical implications anyway.

What's to stop someone from presenting themselves as a Dragonseed or descendant of the Rhoynar with mundane effects, there are bloodline implications there without claiming to be from a specific family or of means you don't truly have, they need not even specifically state as such, just give themselves recognisable features. Is this fraud?

It is just very odd to draw the line at magic when all it does is improve the self, we drew the line at compulsion for a reason and now because some slow people don't like it we jump back to a more conservative line.
 
Azel said:
Except this isn't about this particular case. This is a landmark decision on the usage of social buffs in the realm, so it needs to use broader context. And in the broader context, we decidedly do not want, say, a Night Hag disguising herself as a beautiful princess and marrying a lord under false pretenses and then have that marriage be legally binding.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That could be fraud but the use of magic would not be the fraudulent part, it merely facilitated the fraud that would be the factors around it, she could make herself prettier and still present as herself, still have a loving relationship etc.

Exceedingly unlikely given the motivations of a Night Hag but the lines shouldn't be drawn on spell slots.

And accounting for the realities of the situation, anyone that would be a target of such a being should invest in the means to detect them, we aren't worried about Night Hags marrying bakers so the Baker doesn't need to be able to afford items of detection, making that a reasonable assumption and mitigating factor in the effected population.
 
Last edited:
Azel said:
It's being crafted this turn.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I had missed that. In that case next turn the Sword updates will be easier.

Deliste said:
Then they are to learn because magic is as much a part of life now as any of those are, it is the fault of the user that some are slow on the uptake?

Besides these mundane advantages people are expected to understand and compensate for can have magical implications anyway.

What's to stop someone from presenting themselves as a Dragonseed or descendant of the Rhoynar with mundane effects, there are bloodline implications there without claiming to be from a specific family or of means you don't truly have, they need not even specifically state as such, just give themselves recognisable features. Is this fraud?

It is just very odd to draw the line at magic when all it does is improve the self, we drew the line at compulsion for a reason and now because some slow people don't like it we jump back to a more conservative line.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
  1. Yes, but it has not been a part of life for long hence why people are not as socially immunized against it. Even once time has passed it is going to be hard for someone with no magical training to spot the effects of buffs, hence why their are going to be looking to magical solutions like detect magic devices
  2. No, but then neither of those things guarantees power or magic. You can look like a dragonseed (half of Essos does) and be as magical as a brick
 
@DragonParadox So the next time our verdict on something sketchy happens comes to pass, the objectively correct answer is "you should have been better informed, all of you are in a brave new world, you have a responsibility to protect yourself, not be protected by the law".

RIGHT.

That will go over really well. I imagine warlike tribal leaders have engaged their client and tribute states with more delicacy than that.
 
Deliste said:
That could be fraud but the use of magic would not be the fraudulent part, it merely facilitated the fraud that would be the factors around it, she could make herself prettier and still present as herself, still have a loving relationship etc.

Exceedingly unlikely given the motivations of a Night Hag but the lines shouldn't be drawn on spell slots.

And accounting for the realities of the situation, anyone that would be a target of such a being should invest in the means to detect them, we aren't worried about Night Hags marrying bakers so the Baker doesn't need to be able to afford items of detection, making that a reasonable assumption and mitigating factor in the effected population.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So you are basically saying that, if foul play occurs, it's the victims fault for not taking precautions. That's like saying that it's your own fault for not carrying a weapon when you are robbed and giving the thief legal claim on what he took from you.

Again, the law doesn't stipulate that failure to disclose magic effects on yourself is in of itself a crime. It states the exact opposite. What it does state is that you have legal recourse to annul the marriage if this information was not disclosed to you.

To use a trade example:
You buy a used car. The thing breaks down after 5 km, due to prior damage to the engine that the dealer had not disclosed to you.

Do you think it's the buyers fault for not being a mechanic and checking the engine or should you have the right to return the car with a full refund, due to the dealer being dishonest to you?
 
DragonParadox said:
No, but then neither of those things guarantees power or magic. You can look like a dragonseed (half of Essos does) and be as magical as a brick
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You missed my point a little, perhaps your partner was factoring in that one day your children could settle along the Rhoyne or Sarnori lands etc, we know there are locations that care who your ancestors were.
 
Azel said:
So you are basically saying that, if foul play occurs, it's the victims fault for not taking precautions. That's like saying that it's your own fault for not carrying a weapon when you are robbed and giving the thief legal claim on what he took from you.

Again, the law doesn't stipulate that failure to disclose magic effects on yourself is in of itself a crime. It states the exact opposite. What it does state is that you have legal recourse to annul the marriage if this information was not disclosed to you.

To use a trade example:
You buy a used car. The thing breaks down after 5 km, due to prior damage to the engine that the dealer had not disclosed to you.

Do you think it's the buyers fault for not being a mechanic and checking the engine or should you have the right to return the car with a full refund, due to the dealer being dishonest to you?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Once again, @Azel reaches into my brain case and plucks from the vine distillate precisely what I was thinking.
 
Azel said:
So you are basically saying that, if foul play occurs, it's the victims fault for not taking precautions. That's like saying that it's your own fault for not carrying a weapon when you are robbed and giving the thief legal claim on what he took from you.

Again, the law doesn't stipulate that failure to disclose magic effects on yourself is in of itself a crime. It states the exact opposite. What it does state is that you have legal recourse to annul the marriage if this information was not disclosed to you.

To use a trade example:
You buy a used car. The thing breaks down after 5 km, due to prior damage to the engine that the dealer had not disclosed to you.

Do you think it's the buyers fault for not being a mechanic and checking the engine or should you have the right to return the car with a full refund, due to the dealer being dishonest to you?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I guess it depends how much you consider the person themselves a commodity, I am stating that fraud can be facilitated by magic but is not the magic itself, I find the ruling a problematically imperfect proxy.
 
Deliste said:
I guess it depends how much you consider the person themselves a commodity, I am stating that fraud can be facilitated by magic but is not the magic itself, I find the ruling a problematically imperfect proxy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
And this is pretty much exactly what we ruled. The magic itself is perfectly legal, but we acknowledge that it can be used for fraudulent purposes.

However, fraud is hard to define legally, as it requires both an initial deception (which the magic arguably provided, as it concealed something that might be regarded as the real truth) and a economic gain from the action (which is, in a marriage, pretty much the default state, as you now share resources with your partner). So you could argue that all marriages in which any truth was concealed are fraudulent and thus void. What matters more here is the intent. But intent is, even with magic, hard to prove and even more so in a marriage as resources are expected to be shared.

Therefore, we made a ruling that requires disclosure of the thorny pat of magic. When the magic has been disclosed, truth was no longer concealed as the partner could now make a informed decision. If it was not disclosed, you have with absolute certainty concealed information and while that alone does not constitute fraud, it provides reasonable doubt about your intent, thus allowing annulment.

Let's assume the woman in the case in question had stated before her marriage that she had made that Fey pact to become more presentable. He could have no either reconsidered or he could have gone ahead with the marriage. Had he gone ahead, the marriage would have been legally binding.

I really don't see the issue with this.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top