Green Flame Rising (Exalted vs Dresden Files)
- Thread starter DragonParadox
- Start date
- Crossover Fantasy
- Location
- Who knows?
[X] Harden the door as much as it's needed that Lydia might take what hounds wish with her. You will have words with Amoracchius-that-is-Excalibur and perhaps with others and then you will find some way to right this ancient wrong one way or the other.
Okay Arthur got ditched by Excalibur since he wanted to do an Imperialism and the other three decided a going to another country and throwing murderous hissy fits that they won't give you their greatest treasure is the order of the day. Something most people here would agree is Imperialism.txt. The only thing I can vaguely see happening is just outright killing them and sending their souls to wherever, but the idea is that souls are held in stasis for judgement day anyways so they're kinda like already there?
Also I am incredibly leery of any argument that Exaltations are somehow geared towards selecting people with Good Boy morals. Yeah meta wise I'd say most people wanna play the "good guys" vs absolute assholes but I don't see any reason why "greatness" need be associated with "goodness" in universe.
Okay Arthur got ditched by Excalibur since he wanted to do an Imperialism and the other three decided a going to another country and throwing murderous hissy fits that they won't give you their greatest treasure is the order of the day. Something most people here would agree is Imperialism.txt. The only thing I can vaguely see happening is just outright killing them and sending their souls to wherever, but the idea is that souls are held in stasis for judgement day anyways so they're kinda like already there?
Also I am incredibly leery of any argument that Exaltations are somehow geared towards selecting people with Good Boy morals. Yeah meta wise I'd say most people wanna play the "good guys" vs absolute assholes but I don't see any reason why "greatness" need be associated with "goodness" in universe.
BoredMan
Maintaining the Agenda is our top priority
Again if we are leaving Chicago our mission may very well transition into something else with higher stakes. Something to keep in mind when planning our party for missions out of city in future along with how that may effect the rest of the monthly plans if at all. Don't think that because X is the plan X is all we will be doing. That clearly isn't written in stone.
It would be a waste to have Lydia let them pass on if we could determine that they don't intend Britain any harm by way of conquest and are willing and able to adapt to the changed age to be a net gain for humanity instead of a liability. So what it really comes down to is their ambitions after being brought up to speed and their willingness to shift priorities and methods.
If those centuries of imprisonment also preserved his mental faculties he's not likely to approve of the current state of vampires preying on humanity and the like so in the most ideal result he focuses on the bigger picture instead of being a King and a warlord as he did during his life. Of course he may also come to the conclusion later on that doing so is the best way for him to make a difference. I also can't help but wonder how he'd react to the White Council since they've got a guy called Merlin on staff.
If this does devolve into violence with us telling him that he needs to leave Britain be and getting shot down because we don't make the rolls (no idea what Arthur's dice will be like when it comes to what may be an intimacy especially) and that's where his ambitions lie, Daniel needs to not be around because I doubt with his one attack that he isn't going to get killed or become a hostage or something if he throws himself against people described as "exalted". At least Olivia has her notice me not effect and teleportation to fall back on if she needs to bail.
Our other option is that we wait and gather more background information on what happened which led to him putting the Sword down from the Angel in the Sword which likely knew Arthur better than most, his relationship with Fey and whatever else. We'd receive more context and build a better profile on this Arthur which we could do with since his mythos is blurry to begin with and things are even odder here since Merlin had a thing with Mab and Arthur was also a KOTC. It could help us immensely in determining how likely he is to cause problems for the stability of the modern age (in a bad way) willfully or otherwise while our back is turned. Although it's impossible to say with any certainty considering how out of context this situation would be.
He may very well decide to live his life differently in this new age and come to the conclusion that he no longer has a right to rule Britain and it's current people. He could also reach a different realization altogether. We can't really take the words of a prisoner who wants out entirely at face value either. He was able to get Summer to preserve his body so it seems he'd have some immediate political power and possibly Fey resources at his disposal upon revival.
The worst case scenario is that they seem fine at first but then we have to double back later on to deal with the ripple effects of an issue we created because we rushed and didn't investigate further before releasing them on earth while lacking crucial context.
At any rate it seems like the majority don't think we need more context on his relationship with the Fey the Sword or anything else so... Unless the hounds or Arawn have something more to say on the Quest version of King Arthur and his knights, I doubt we'll be getting any more from a non-prisoner before releasing said prisoners. Thems the brakes.
[X] Harden the door as much as it's needed that Lydia might take what hounds wish with her. You will have words with Amoracchius-that-is-Excalibur and perhaps with others and then you will find some way to right this ancient wrong one way or the other.
@DragonParadox To clarify since Lydia has the option of letting them pass on that means none of them have bodies yes? Except for Arthur who's body was preserved by Summer a la sleeping beauty but is nowhere nearby.
It would be a waste to have Lydia let them pass on if we could determine that they don't intend Britain any harm by way of conquest and are willing and able to adapt to the changed age to be a net gain for humanity instead of a liability. So what it really comes down to is their ambitions after being brought up to speed and their willingness to shift priorities and methods.
If those centuries of imprisonment also preserved his mental faculties he's not likely to approve of the current state of vampires preying on humanity and the like so in the most ideal result he focuses on the bigger picture instead of being a King and a warlord as he did during his life. Of course he may also come to the conclusion later on that doing so is the best way for him to make a difference. I also can't help but wonder how he'd react to the White Council since they've got a guy called Merlin on staff.
If this does devolve into violence with us telling him that he needs to leave Britain be and getting shot down because we don't make the rolls (no idea what Arthur's dice will be like when it comes to what may be an intimacy especially) and that's where his ambitions lie, Daniel needs to not be around because I doubt with his one attack that he isn't going to get killed or become a hostage or something if he throws himself against people described as "exalted". At least Olivia has her notice me not effect and teleportation to fall back on if she needs to bail.
Our other option is that we wait and gather more background information on what happened which led to him putting the Sword down from the Angel in the Sword which likely knew Arthur better than most, his relationship with Fey and whatever else. We'd receive more context and build a better profile on this Arthur which we could do with since his mythos is blurry to begin with and things are even odder here since Merlin had a thing with Mab and Arthur was also a KOTC. It could help us immensely in determining how likely he is to cause problems for the stability of the modern age (in a bad way) willfully or otherwise while our back is turned. Although it's impossible to say with any certainty considering how out of context this situation would be.
He may very well decide to live his life differently in this new age and come to the conclusion that he no longer has a right to rule Britain and it's current people. He could also reach a different realization altogether. We can't really take the words of a prisoner who wants out entirely at face value either. He was able to get Summer to preserve his body so it seems he'd have some immediate political power and possibly Fey resources at his disposal upon revival.
The worst case scenario is that they seem fine at first but then we have to double back later on to deal with the ripple effects of an issue we created because we rushed and didn't investigate further before releasing them on earth while lacking crucial context.
At any rate it seems like the majority don't think we need more context on his relationship with the Fey the Sword or anything else so... Unless the hounds or Arawn have something more to say on the Quest version of King Arthur and his knights, I doubt we'll be getting any more from a non-prisoner before releasing said prisoners. Thems the brakes.
[X] Harden the door as much as it's needed that Lydia might take what hounds wish with her. You will have words with Amoracchius-that-is-Excalibur and perhaps with others and then you will find some way to right this ancient wrong one way or the other.
@DragonParadox To clarify since Lydia has the option of letting them pass on that means none of them have bodies yes? Except for Arthur who's body was preserved by Summer a la sleeping beauty but is nowhere nearby.
Last edited:
No, the three still have their bodies, they had them when they were thrown in. Lydia is just fine with stabbing them until that is not a problem anymore if it comes to it.
- Location
- Estonia
I'm not saying there wasn't a social expectation that Heracles should have just taken it, but Linus wasn't his father, guardian or owner. I don't think most people at the time would have expected to see the letter of the law of self-defense invoked by a student against their teacher, but it wasn't just dismissed as something that just can't be used for a defense in this particular situation, either.
And I repeat my point about modern audiences. Even if back then the point of the story would have been about how Heracles can't control his wrath, modern people aren't going to see a child, who kills somebody beating them, as a murderer.
I doubt anybody saw what Linus did as some universal transgression, but simply as something that gave Heracles a valid justification to kill them.
Take duels, for example, about this sort of attitude in a later era. If some famous artist insulted someone and died in a resulting duel, people could still mourn them without caveats (because the transgression was private business), and without also considering their killer a murderer.
- Location
- Who knows?
Okay I admit I'm not following the debate about Heracles right now, but what I see in story is a bunch of some very powerful men who use that power to murder people when told no. I'm personally really not interested in playing Maniac Pixie Redemption Girl for them here.
I personally am not unwilling to listen?
But for a case that involved the Fae Courts, potentially multiple divine pantheons and a Sword of the Cross, I really want to get some second and third opinions from other people BEFORE doing anything.
You cannot undo stuff that you have already done.
Also, its a good example for Olivia and Daniel that you dont rush into stuff if you have the time for a second or third opinion.
Because they will be taking cues from us.
No they tried to steal a cauldron of Resurrection from a god of death who had exactly zero use for it. When weapons were drawn an innocent got caught in the crossfire. That is a pretty extreme difference from murdering people when told no. Never mind the fact 1500 years for murder as a sentence is too goddamn long no matter how powerful they were.
No it doesn't. You are attempting to conflate the court of public opinion with the court of law. He was mourned because he was a famous and popular musician. Heracles was acquitted because he was in the right legally. Popular people are capable of being in the wrong legally. Or do you think that Trump was found guilty because of political persecution?
Unless you can find the quotations that the "Law of Rhadamanthus" didn't apply to the situation, you are inventing nepotism wholecloth here. I wasn't able to find the text of said law, by the way.
Not what happened. After Excalibur supported conquest of Britain, Arthur decided to keep bringing order to the world by expanding to Rome. Excalibur disagreed, and they parted amicably. Time passed, and Arthur was mortally wounded, requiring fae to preserve his body, as they were unable to restore his health fully (he likely had an Favor, like ours, with them). HIs trusted friends sailed to find a way to resurrect him using divine artifact of resurrection. They were denied, because the chances of this turning out good were 1 in 81. Here they acted badly, yes, and broke guest rights not taking no for an answer. They were punished - most of them killed, and three, who were able to escape, imprisoned for eternity. Now, the question is - is eternal imprisonment a just punishment? I think not, and 1.5 millenia of jail time for murder and theft is the point at which release should at least be considered.
It's important to note that the talking option is not the release option. It's the parole interview option. We need to know if they are fit enough to be released into society. For that, we need to talk to them.
The talking option is not the release option. It's the parole interview option. We need to talk to them to check if they are fit to be released. The "harden" option doesn't involve talking to the prisoners at all.
We can vote to harden the prison after we talk to them.
- Location
- Norway
Yes, obviously. Would you like to reconsider your example?
No, I think I am good. He is a politically divisive enough figure that he illustrates my point well. Point being that "a lot of people mourned [bad thing] happening to a famous person" does not in any way prove or demonstrate that the famous person couldn't do [another bad thing connected to the bad thing happening to them]
EDIT: Perhaps the example is, indeed, not the best one. Still, I maintain my position that "the passing of a famous musician was widely mourned" does not in any way mean "Heracles was legally in the wrong, but was acquitted anyway due to nepotism".
Last edited:
BoredMan
Maintaining the Agenda is our top priority
*Looks at the last few pages* I don't think that most of the people who are voting for it are operating with that same logic in mind Yog. This seems to effectively be the same as choosing to release them now if possible as quite a few have plainly stated that intent.
I understand and agree that the choice is more in line with "release them now, this is unjust". But the vote itself is not "release them". It's "talk to them, to see if they are fit to be released". And I think that's important. We got the hounds' and Arawn's side of the story. Now we should get the prisoners' side of the story.
OK, looks like we are off the Wonderful land of Oz Annwfn 
BoredMan
Maintaining the Agenda is our top priority
*Looks at the last few pages a second time* We'll see how relevant that fact is sooner rather than later I guess.
BoredMan
Maintaining the Agenda is our top priority
That isn't what I was trying to say, or what anyone is as I understand it*. To start, there's a difference between all exalts and the particular guys we're dealing with right now. The four people we're talking about are actually petty tyrants who ran their own ethnostate and wanted to upgrade to an empire. They had moral standards, but they were ones that allowed for that.
There are multiple different general risks for exalts that interact with but are not necessarily dependent on one another; these range from outright bad actors to people with incompatible beliefs they're willing to enforce. Which yes is somewhat controlling, but that's a paradox of tolerance thing. I'm sure these 6th century knights are great to have around when you need to kill some vampires. I'm less enthused about their probable opinions about women in politics for example.
* Though some type of exaltation a clearly meant for it, like the Abyssal castes with the explicit call outs for them.
Again, the lore on this is wonky. Only a handful of gods ever knew this was a problem before the end, therefore it had to be something people could explain by other means and got worse in a boiling the frog kind of way. The solars might have engineered society not to annoy them, but they couldn't explicitly be working against their limit break because they didn't know it worked like that.
Also, I think long term reshaping of society to avoid the quirks of your superhuman leaders undercuts your point about long term impacts vs immediate consequences.
Personally I think the base limit break rules make more sense as a model for older exalts and as a part of PC solars being extra special even by their standards. Like how training time for charms gets house ruled away. If it's supposed to be degenerative and largely unknown for most of the age of legends, which it is, then something that obvious right away is very weird.
- Location
- Brazil
That's precisely why I don't want to vote to talk to them, according to the voting patterns and justifications that others give, what they want is to totally free them not to talk. And saying otherwise is just a lie.
The first page after the update was almost full of everyone saying "not releasing him is being inhumane!".