Also point for fact I would probably rephrase the above vote a bit to reflect what I mentioned... Lucan made this personal even if that wasn't his intention. Negligence is just cause for reprisal, too, considering the stakes.
 
Also point for fact I would probably rephrase the above vote a bit to reflect what I mentioned... Lucan made this personal even if that wasn't his intention. Negligence is just cause for reprisal, too, considering the stakes.

That's the intent. We can understand if he didn't mean to, but that doesn't change the results. And to be fair, it was already personal before Baelor decided to try and smite us. He was clearly summoned to directly counter us, with no attempt made to actually, you know, reach out and talk.
 
That's the intent. We can understand if he didn't mean to, but that doesn't change the results. And to be fair, it was already personal before Baelor decided to try and smite us. He was clearly summoned to directly counter us, with no attempt made to actually, you know, reach out and talk.

I don't blame him for summoning some help to try to counter us, but summoning Baelor, and what it lead to, is absolutely a "party foul", so to speak. This would not be a black mark if he had summoned some other angel, who had actually listened to him, and acted against us using diplomacy.
 
I don't blame him for summoning some help to try to counter us, but summoning Baelor, and what it lead to, is absolutely a "party foul", so to speak. This would not be a black mark if he had summoned some other angel, who had actually listened to him, and acted against us using diplomacy.

We're agreed on that. Sorry, working on vote, but my brain is pulling me towards HT as well. It's difficult trying to prioritise.
 
[X] Plan "When Summons go rogue, the Dragon King gets testy."
-[X] "Even the Old Valyrians, my unlamented ancestors, who committed atrocities you cannot likely imagine, had better sense than to Call beings from other Spheres whom they could not control."
-[X] "I must admit, Lady Danelle, that it is quite worrisome to learn Lucan, the Chosen of the Father, could make so grave an error in judgement. But that is another matter entirely, albeit not forgotten or simply forgiven."
-[X] "There is much we have to discuss, and little of it pertains to Lucan Longfield, save that he too should hear what I have to say. I will gladly release his people, if he agrees to a peaceful parlay."
 
[X] Snowfire

On another note, I didn't want to call people out in this thread as all words has been spoken these last couple of days, but this past few pages had been a huge disaster that I need this aired out.

How could you? Like really! I trusted you @Tomcost! Now you have some explaining to do!


How dare you compare me to the Great Devourer?

Don't you see that I have no mouth?

*Suspiciously doesn't deny the horrible feet truth*
 
Thread: This guy disapproves of us
Thread: HONE IN ON HIS VULNERABILITIES FOR MASSIVE PERSONAL SATISFACTION

People, what do we actually want here?
I don't see what Goldfish's vote is bringing us apart from a moment of smugness.

What I want is:
  • Talk to Lucan about the danger of a strong Faith
  • Talk to Lucan about the Lannister enslaving their mages -> get him riled up if possible
  • Get Dannelle to raise the issue of Particularism during the Conclave
Anything else?
 
What I want is:
  • Talk to Lucan about the danger of a strong Faith
  • Talk to Lucan about the Lannister enslaving their mages -> get him riled up if possible
  • Get Dannelle to raise the issue of Particularism during the Conclave
Priorities (ie, who's the more dangerous foe to take care about first. We won't eat all human (souls).)
 
I think that a good point would be to actually tell them that Baelor is not suffering in green hell or anything, but living an eternal dream of peace.

First point of order, we are not an asshole. Even if he wanted to murderize our ass. He was still kin. We don't actually decree eternal punishment on anybody as a matter of fact. Suffering for its own sake is wasteful. Don't we also sedate sacrifices, if possible? Our way of thinking might be alien to hear, but we aren't malicious.
 
Thread: This guy disapproves of us
Thread: HONE IN ON HIS VULNERABILITIES FOR MASSIVE PERSONAL SATISFACTION

People, what do we actually want here?
I don't see what Goldfish's vote is bringing us apart from a moment of smugness.

What I want is:
  • Talk to Lucan about the danger of a strong Faith
  • Talk to Lucan about the Lannister enslaving their mages -> get him riled up if possible
  • Get Dannelle to raise the issue of Particularism during the Conclave
Anything else?

Yeah, point.
 
his plan was to play several demonic, devilish, or otherwise outright evil factions against each oth in a supernatural war... for the good of Westeros. If that doesn't just spell out idiotic i dont know what is. The man was clever, perhaps, but intelligent? I wouldn't say so.
He was daring, yes. But that doesn't mean he's stupid.
Varys was a desperate man in a very desperate situation. And his plan could actually have worked if he'd managed to get us out of the way, you know.

Remember the Fourteen gods of Valyria? Their plan was even more insane, but they won for ages. Were they stupid?

All of these factions were already enemies. He just wanted to angle things so that they all fought each other in a way that was convenient for him, and then that the Seven came out on top of the inevitable shitshow. Risky, but he was skilled and influential and must have hoped that it could work.
When you know that Lucan could summon a Planetar (the strongest outsider seem on this plane so far, except for the Sultana and she didn't stick around) this seems a little less insane.
 
Thread: This guy disapproves of us
Thread: HONE IN ON HIS VULNERABILITIES FOR MASSIVE PERSONAL SATISFACTION

People, what do we actually want here?
I don't see what Goldfish's vote is bringing us apart from a moment of smugness.

What I want is:
  • Talk to Lucan about the danger of a strong Faith
  • Talk to Lucan about the Lannister enslaving their mages -> get him riled up if possible
  • Get Dannelle to raise the issue of Particularism during the Conclave
Anything else?

If you want to talk about particularism you probably want to make time to talk to septon Donnar in some way.
 
Thread: This guy disapproves of us
Thread: HONE IN ON HIS VULNERABILITIES FOR MASSIVE PERSONAL SATISFACTION

People, what do we actually want here?
I don't see what Goldfish's vote is bringing us apart from a moment of smugness.

What I want is:
  • Talk to Lucan about the danger of a strong Faith
  • Talk to Lucan about the Lannister enslaving their mages -> get him riled up if possible
  • Get Dannelle to raise the issue of Particularism during the Conclave
Anything else?
I think my vote establishes the root of our grievances with Lucan, but seeks to move past that in order to establish a dialogue.
 
@Crake, I'm honestly not sure how your points would be addressed in practice.

Well. Except taking back a lot of characterization power to the DM to enable more nuanced presentation. Then again, Viserys did get a bit... flat over the years. And disjointed.

Maybe it's worth stepping back from direct speech votes entirely, as I personally think a bullet point as @Snowfires plzn includes to talk about Baelor is inherently easier to weave organically into the narrative.

Making @Goldfish style conditional combat trees for social votes is a bit impossible without boxing the NPC into a few stock responses. Frankly, many of our past social votes kinda power-emoted the NPC into a track...

So... vote on speech goals instead of content? Unless it's holding an actual speech with no one who could react anyway.

/rambling
So, go back to the days before "speechifying" was a thing?
 
I'm going to have to ask how you think we can, in any scenario, continue to have access to the Conclave? As in, how you would go about keeping it. Because Dywen is done.
Magic?
We're done speaking publicly, but we certainly can speak to him in private and layer him with a few buffs before he goes to talk. And he should be getting diplomacy bonuses because of his sincerity and the validity of some of his points (in this quest's Diplo rules).

I think my vote establishes the root of our grievances with Lucan, but seeks to move past that in order to establish a dialogue.
I disagree. I fear that Dannelle will respond and we'll get dragged into a quibble about Lucan being better than the ancient Valyrians or something.

Mammon was stronger our Azata about equal and the Rakshasa are Outsiders too (though native).
Mammon's summoning was a special case. And IMO Lucan could summon and beat Mammon now too, if Mammon agreed to be summoned into such a stupidly dangerous setup again (against prepared enemies, alone, with little gear, etc).
The Azata was weird, but IMO a Planetar could just kill it. Ward itself against fire (it's a high-level Cleric on a tough outsider chassis, it can do that) and then fly up and beat her to death.

So, go back to the days before "speechifying" was a thing?
No!
We aren't done with speeches. I'll fight anyone who says so (and it would be massively OOC).
We just won't be barging in with speeches at every Diplomacy opportunity. Speeches are for public events, things like that.
 
Tentative plan, looking for opinions.

[] What is Personal
-[] "It was not an experience I would wish to repeat, to be left little choice but to see him simply...stopped. But given the power he had been invested with, I had few options."
--[] Explain how you did not seek to rend Baelor's soul, nor damn him to a hell of the Old Gods' making. The blessing, perhaps curse, he had called down upon himself would have continued to return him to life no matter how many times you defeated him. You can at least be thankful that he was given peace in death. "Made my enemy by circumstance of the power he bore he might have been, but he was still my kin, Danelle." Stealth reference to Rina. She's going to be extremely relevant later on.
--[] "But this is more a discussion for the summoner, and perhaps the ones whose words set my ancestor so irrevocably against me." If the second half gets a reaction, I'm really not going to be happy, but I'm also not going to be surprised.
-[] Express your desire to speak to both her and Lucan, tonight if possible, under oaths of parlay. You have clearly misinterpreted the man in some things, and you would like to rectify that in the hopes of finding some common ground or compromise. Entirely truthful.
--[] You will release two of those you took as a show of good faith, with the others to be released upon a peaceful resolution to the parlay.

I feel referencing Old Valyria is a bit much here. Especially when she probably doesn't know nearly as much about it as we do. She'll have the "Blood! Fire! Death!" interpretation that you get from whatever counts as a Westerosi education system. We want to make this more personal, because it was. Having to fight Baelor wasn't fun on a personal and emotional level.

I expect she will ask/demand to know here why we didn't just ask for a parlay by, y'know, asking, but I want her to do so as an update-end instead of writing up something that might suit the situation in this vote, only to find it completely tone-deaf.

Oh and before anyone asks, we're probably letting the Knights go and mindripping the mages over the afternoon.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top