Remove ads

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

Reader mode
It should take most of the next month to ship them down to SD. If we do the Westhaven training center the next month we can them "ship" them out there (and then instead ship them to Tyrosh), and it'll help keep disruptions with our own citizens down, as they know their lodgings outside SD is temporary. It'll certainly help sell the idea we're not quite ready. I think it's okay to tell them we're going to be using them for an assault on Tyrosh, since the secret there is our timing, not that we're heading in that direction at this point.

Also, is that Ibbenese chieftain's daughter we rescued from the circus still in our kingdom, or did she find her way home? @DragonParadox?
 
BeepSmile said:
Hmmm. I've been thinking about looting, and worse, torching cities (and i really have confused for why that happens, but then again, people are confusing, so eh.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm sorry for what will be a digression: my ADHD latched on to this question and wouldn't let go.

Soldiers would do it to minimize risks during looting, and you'd loot because that was the way to actually get paid more than a pittance. Since it's finders keepers, when you loot, it's every man for themselves. You'd bring a few guys you trusted, but that would essentially be it. Civilians can't fight an army, but they can bar doors against a handful of looters. Solution for the looters is fire, to give the townsfolk something else to deal with. Sure, 90% of the stuff might burn up, but that's OK: how much loot can four soldiers carry anyway? Lastly, all that aggression you built up during the fighting may not have gone away, and venting it on defeated civilians is a common impulse.

Generals would order looting to punish a city, to prevent pursuit, or to get their army up and moving again (there's nothing quite so motivating as fire).

Finally, medieval-style cities are fire hazards because they grow organically, and fire is everywhere. Looting may well set off fire, and if the citizens are busy running or fighting, that fire might catch and spread.

So there are reasons why cities might go up in flame. All the intentional ones run counter to what we're trying to accomplish (which I presume is relatively civilized conduct, hearts-and-minds, and a solid reputation for enlightened autocracy). Any benefits it would have can be worked around, and its drawbacks include the destruction of infrastructure and goodwill. Doing that boils down to a new code of conduct and a massive overhaul of logistics, to guarantee soldiers decent recompense for not behaving like animals.

(Apologies if this is tangential or rambling, I was in a hurry.)
 
Okay, we need these guys as impressive looking armed soldiers in important locations to minimize mundane resistance to our attack and we need them as boots on the ground for garrison-duty.
We will take over the actually dangerous parts.

Perhaps tell them that? Easy money as long as they do their job, easier than actually fighting armies.
 
Eleas said:
I'm sorry for what will be a digression: my ADHD latched on to this question and wouldn't let go.

Soldiers would do it to minimize risks during looting, and you'd loot because that was the way to actually get paid more than a pittance. Since it's finders keepers, when you loot, it's every man for themselves. You'd bring a few guys you trusted, but that would essentially be it. Civilians can't fight an army, but they can bar doors against a handful of looters. Solution for the looters is fire, to give the townsfolk something else to deal with. Sure, 90% of the stuff might burn up, but that's OK: how much loot can four soldiers carry anyway? Lastly, all that aggression you built up during the fighting may not have gone away, and venting it on defeated civilians is a common impulse.

Generals would order looting to punish a city, to prevent pursuit, or to get their army up and moving again (there's nothing quite so motivating as fire).

Finally, medieval-style cities are fire hazards because they grow organically, and fire is everywhere. Looting may well set off fire, and if the citizens are busy running or fighting, that fire might catch and spread.

So there are reasons why cities might go up in flame. All the intentional ones run counter to what we're trying to accomplish (which I presume is relatively civilized conduct, hearts-and-minds, and a solid reputation for enlightened autocracy). Any benefits it would have can be worked around, and its drawbacks include the destruction of infrastructure and goodwill. Doing that boils down to a new code of conduct and a massive overhaul of logistics, to guarantee soldiers decent recompense for not behaving like animals.

(Apologies if this is tangential or rambling, I was in a hurry.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Lol. Tangential or rambling? This is exactly what I was hoping for. Thank you.

Ok, so... threat of being found out via Divination, anddd the carrot in the form of a 20% bonus on top of the usual rates or whatever numbers best fit... basically a bribe not to burn
 
BeepSmile said:
Lol. Tangential or rambling? This is exactly what I was hoping for. Thank you.

Ok, so... threat of being found out via Divination, anddd the carrot in the form of a 20% bonus on top of the usual rates or whatever numbers best fit... basically a bribe not to burn
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
As long as we can take Tyrosh by storm and not by siege the chances of our men starting out of control fires is quite low.
 
DragonParadox said:
Viserys has no idea. He lost track of her after handing her some money and wishing her well.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ah well. Can't keep an eye on everything. We're not Bloodraven.

Whelp. I think the key points are:
1) What we're hiring them for (I'd frame it as supporting our own troops, and holding ground while we shatter the defenders will with magic), that is taking Tyrosh
2) Make it clear there will substantial bonus pay if there isn't a sack, but it's forfeit for all companies if any one company breaks it (no need to loot, I'm paying you well + keep an eye on those other sellswords for me). I'd be willing to pay out what Uthero already paid if it means no sack (double pay).
3) Also make it clear that they aren't exempt from laws while in our lands. If they cause trouble for our citizens, we are not afraid to hang offenders.
 
Goldfish said:
There won't be much to do for this level up. At 4th level, he gets the Endurance feat and some skill points. We do, however, need to decide on his new spell loadout.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm just hoping we can level him quickly enough that we'll be able to send him and his dinosaur off to the Stormlands to hunt that Wild Hunt stag. It'd be just our luck if Robert or a Lannister got to it first. :mad:
 
Goldfish said:
There won't be much to do for this level up. At 4th level, he gets the Endurance feat and some skill points. We do, however, need to decide on his new spell loadout.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah; it's "Theon; you're a bloody Mystic Ranger. This is Lelia, Lelia here has done more for Sorcerer's Deep than I can measure, ontop of saving the life of one of my dearest friends. Teach her... spells from your spell list. All of them."

But, yeah, tangent aside, we should talk to the dude again :).
 
BeepSmile said:
Yeah; it's "Theon; you're a bloody Mystic Ranger. This is Lelia, Lelia here has done more for Sorcerer's Deep than I can measure, ontop of saving the life of one of my dearest friends. Teach her... spells from your spell list. All of them."

But, yeah, tangent aside, we should talk to the dude again :).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Completely forgot about that.

But I'd only want that to happen under supervision from someone. I don't have faith in Theon to handle himself appropriately, and Leila is getting better but still pretty fragile.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top