I mean again if the Tyrells are not as loyal to us as Manderly is to the Starks what do we keep them around for?
"If you are not as faithful to me as literally the memetically loyal House that the entirety of Westeros recognizes for their loyalty to the exclusion of most everything else, why even fucking exist?"

Normal People: "That's an unfair standard!"

Viserys: "When you've betrayed my House as much and as often as they have? The fuck it isn't."
 
The point isn't our position regarding the Tyrells, it's the way we expressed it. Bluntly threatening them with fiery death isn't really our usual style - generally we make some vague pretense at a soft glove ;)
It's an interesting shift for Viserys. He's clearly sick of their shit at this point.
 
It's an interesting shift for Viserys. He's clearly sick of their shit at this point.
Viserys overtly did "velvet glove over iron fist" diplomacy by buying up an enormous debt on their behalf, with the implicit statement that while we would use that as leverage over them, there was a way to work things out without winding up with crippled finances, so long as they played ball.

Instead... they doubled down on the treachery. Unanimously, apparently, since even Wilas, who accused us of being willing to burn the Reach to the ground, was in on it!

And what do you know. We didn't burn the Reach to the ground, just the people who went beyond the pale with their cloak and dagger bullshit.
 
A thought: part of Viserys' characterization in the last few months' chapters comes from the exasperation of the playerbase. Remember how we reacted when questioned in the Kingsmoot? With the Tyrells? Early Viserys would have been angry but would have tried for a more Diplomatic approach. Almighty Viserys gets a little sloppy now that he can afford it.
On the other hand this is perfectly fitting behavior for an overworked Sorcerer-King who's getting sick of this petty mortal bullshit, so I'm not complaining either.
I think the frustration comes from the fact that NOW we are said nearly immortal dragon sorcerer-king with the largest empire on the planet (western provinces pacification pending) and yet they still treat us like some kind of upstart noble swinging a sword and buffing our chest like an overgrown hamster.

It's not like we conquered the three daughters and then had both Volantis AND Bravos swear fealty to us when the last attempt by the Blackfyre ended much more pitifully.

And it's not like we're known for being generous to our allies and utterly savage against our enemies.

If you're STILL playing petty politics at this point it's time to use the stick, and ours have so many enhancements on it, it already counts as an Epic Artifact.
 
Last edited:
A thought: part of Viserys' characterization in the last few months' chapters comes from the exasperation of the playerbase. Remember how we reacted when questioned in the Kingsmoot? With the Tyrells? Early Viserys would have been angry but would have tried for a more Diplomatic approach. Almighty Viserys gets a little sloppy now that he can afford it.
On the other hand this is perfectly fitting behavior for an overworked Sorcerer-King who's getting sick of this petty mortal bullshit, so I'm not complaining either.
It's not a new development though. In Braavos, when we outgrew Gorthos crew, we treated him the same way. Later we did the same with minor nobles all over Essos. Yet later, we did so with major nobles. Now we do it to people who used to be some of the most powerful leaders of Westeros.

The difference is not the "what", but the "who".
 
It's not a new development though. In Braavos, when we outgrew Gorthos crew, we treated him the same way. Later we did the same with minor nobles all over Essos. Yet later, we did so with major nobles. Now we do it to people who used to be some of the most powerful leaders of Westeros.

The difference is not the "what", but the "who".
So eventually that'll be Mythic PCs, and after that, minor deities? :V
 
A lot of things got dictated by the thread's desires over Visrys' IC'ness over the years.

The follow-up on the Wisps happening et al after the literal years.

Sticking the nose personally in every littlest detail possible (see all MAs done for years until recently).

Pokemon'ing named characters (see how we used to treat Starks at middle of the quest. Now we are better pragmaticism-wise, but we used to have many crying out "don't kill Robery, or Ned would be sad!")

The way he raided the libraries of Westeros for books for months to no end, in person, despite having never shown much (nowhere near Lya's level, anyway) care for that.

Decisions on policies after Syrax-vision, and flipping back on those just a bit later (notifying the Watch of the cultists in a half a month, giving Inquisition more freedom to act/spy/kill with all of the units we handed them, in a year)

Etc.

The questing base had outgrown most of the impulses and OOC'ness it had years ago.
Got new ones, too.

(And me being personally partially-to-entirely-responsible for all examples given dosnt make it any less true. Hypocritical perhaps, but not untrue)
 
Last edited:
So eventually that'll be Mythic PCs, and after that, minor deities? :V
If they are uppity... 🤷‍♂️

The unifying feature of the people on the receiving end of the nail-stick is that they were very much beneath us in power, but still acted as if they were superior to us. I mean, we are actively disdainful of grovelling, but you still got to beat the disrespect out of people if they challenge you.
 
man

if the Tyrels ever fuck up again i want to Turtle the tyrel responsible and keep them in a glass tank in the throne room as an example
 
man

if the Tyrels ever fuck up again i want to Turtle the tyrel responsible and keep them in a glass tank in the throne room as an example
Viserys: "What did I say?" 😑
Mace: "That I should not scheme."
Viserys: "And what did you do?"
Mace: "Scheme a lot." 😔
Viserys: "I'm afraid you will have to serve as time then."
Mace: "Serve my time? You will throw me in prison?" 😱
Viserys: "No. To the kitchens." *casts Desert Binding - Sand in the Hourglass*
Mace: ⏳
 
We're only five Mythic Tiers from Mass Turtlification powers.

And if you think a one mile radius is impressive, all it takes is a Widen Spell Metamagic to double that to a two mile radius.

"My, but there are an unusual number of turtles in this abandoned city..."
 
So what kind of effects should we put on Hijinks? i'm curious couse i don't know a lot of 3.5 spells but i'm curious asto what kinda things we are going to give her acces to
 
Hijinks (Minor Artifact)
This set of seven dice appears completely ordinary and harmless to the observer. Even spells to detect magic, identify items or similar effects will react to them as if they were completely mundane. To notice the magic innate to these dice, a person must carefully study them for 10 minutes and then pass a DC 25 Will Save, followed by a DC 35 Spellcraft check to identify their abilities. The owner of the dice is always aware of their abilities.

The shape, material, texture and other aspects of the dice can be changed by the owner at will and can even mimic coins, though under careful examination, these coins would be identified as exceptionally good forgeries. When rolled or flipped, Hijinks will always land exactly as the owner wants them to, performing even impossible feats such as perfectly balancing on a corner or having a six sided die show a seven.

While in possession of Hijinks, the owner gains the Feat Deceitful as a Bonus Feat. If the owner already has this feat, he instead gains any one feat that has Deceitful as a prerequisite and can change his pick once every seven days. The owner also receives a +10 Bonus on all Bluff checks made to appear innocent, harmless or unimportant.

Lastly, the owner can activate one of the following effects seven times a day:
- Use one of the Feats Conceal Spell, Feign Curse, Intoxicating Flattery, even if you do not fulfill their prerequisites.
- Re-roll any one roll you made as a Swift Action.
- Force an enemy to re-roll a skill check, save or attack roll made against you or to resist an effect you caused as an Immediate Action. A creature can only be affected by this ability once in a seven day period.
- Cast Greater Magic Aura or False Vision as if you were a Bard of your level.

Merely physically possessing Hijinks does not confer true ownership over the dice. As long as the current owner still lives, taking these dice from them invokes a strong curse on the thief. For every full seven hours that a person that is not the owner possesses the dice, they take a penalty of -1 to all dice rolls they make and are hounded by ever worse luck. Once they get rid of the dice, the bad luck ends, but should they retake them, it returns in full force. If no creature is actively keeping the dice on their person, they will disappear from their current location in 1d6 hours and return to their owner in some lucky happenstance after another 1d6 hours have passed.

To become the owner of Hijinks, the dice must be taken from the previous owner by besting them in a game of chance or successfully tricking them in some fashion to hand them over willingly. When the owner is killed, roll 7d6. If the creature dealing the killing blow has equal or more HD then the sum of the rolled dice, then that creature becomes the new owner. If not, the dice disappear and either seek out a new owner on their own or wait for their previous owner to be resurrected and return to them.
 
Last edited:
Great artifact. I especially like he inheritance device, very whimsical.

Good night guys, see you tomorrow as we get into the ritual and attempt to steal power from the Gods (and Those who puppeteer gods)
 
@Goldfish, may I assume your cat-rating means you think the mechanical effects of Hijinks are fine like that?
It's a neat artifact, lots of flavor without being overpowered.

The only thing that seems a bit much is the ability to use what amounts to Alter Fortune up to seven times per day with few limits and no penalty. Not a big deal, I would just give it a range limit and make sure it includes an action type to use. In this case, an Immediate Action seems appropriate.
 
It's a neat artifact, lots of flavor without being overpowered.

The only thing that seems a bit much is the ability to use what amounts to Alter Fortune up to seven times per day with few limits and no penalty. Not a big deal, I would just give it a range limit and make sure it includes an action type to use. In this case, an Immediate Action seems appropriate.
Range limit would be a bit awkward and I limited it to affecting a creature only once within 7 days and only for stuff that the owner causes to prevent our usual AF-spam tactics.

Adding the Immediate Action requirement, which was intended, but forgot to add it.
 
So like... this is the new normal over here, now.
My entire day has been spent stewing in impotent rage confined to my bed as I watch a terrorist incursion on the United States capitol go unanswered, from fucking Twitter.

Never before have I so clearly understood the desire for bloodshed that some Americans feel. Until today.
 
Back
Top