Remove ads

Warhammer Fantasy: Divided Loyalties - an Advisor's Quest

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Reader mode
Voikirium said:
I distinctly recall it being more good faith on the part of mortals than that would imply,
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Considering mortals are the lowest rung in the Chaos ladder they are the ones that is being lied to. There is no truth in what Chaos says beyond what they can use as introductionary step to corrupt you in to doing bunch of thing too horrible to name.

Freedom, Mercy, Truth and Valor have no place in Chaos except perhaps things to corrupt which is a delight for Chaos Gods.

You can consider it a form of fattening the animals for food I suppose. Chaos Gods fattens mortals with Freedom, Mercy etc so they can eat them and fatter they are better. Then Chaos Gods shit out new deamons who goes around to stink up the Warp and smell seeps in to reality as well.

But supporting Chaos Gods doesn't get you more virtues like truth or valor, only more shitty deamons.
 
Parabola said:
The relevant section when Mathilde proposed it says that one of the two towers is on the ruins of a Middenland town...



...But, Mathilde's first proper entry into Laurelorn notes that it was abandoned by the Graf's decree; and from one of the same turn's social actions we can assume he felt comfortable doing so (and presumably giving that land to the Eonir) because it was poor and small enough that it didn't show up on most maps.



It seems quite likely that both towers will end up controlled by Laurelorn. But who knows, since the first quote above says that they're fine with the infrastructure as long as they can destroy it in case of some treason, maybe they'd accede to letting the Vorbegwerk tower be held by Middenland?

I wouldn't count on it, though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The towers will be built so that the laurelorn tower will be critical to holding the bridge up, which means laurelorn will be able to destroy the bridge at will, at that point they don't need to man (elf?) a small outpost outside their natural defenses.l
 
More Khazalid from the 4ed Dwarf Player Guide.

Baraz Kron - Book of Debts, both honour and monetary.
Gromthi Kron - Book of Ancestors, just a genealogy book
Kuni - Cousin (this is unfortunate)
Nez - Niece which is telling, because does that mean Sniz, the older word, is actually a compound?
Nanavn - "No-name"
Blidazdurakaz - Lightining Pick-axe which I mentioned earlier
Durugenritak - The Ritual of Passage created by Gazul, quite literally mentioned once and nowhere else. :^)
Agrilhandaz - Silverhand
Onkegruni - 'Widow-Maker'
 
Tasoli said:
Considering mortals are the lowest rung in the Chaos ladder they are the ones that is being lied to. There is no truth in what Chaos says beyond what they can use as introductionary step to corrupt you in to doing bunch of thing too horrible to name.

Freedom, Mercy, Truth and Valor have no place in Chaos except perhaps things to corrupt which is a delight for Chaos Gods.

You can consider it a form of fattening the animals for food I suppose. Chaos Gods fattens mortals with Freedom, Mercy etc so they can eat them and fatter they are better. Then Chaos Gods shit out new deamons who goes around to stink up the Warp and smell seeps in to reality as well.

But supporting Chaos Gods doesn't get you more virtues like truth or valor, only more shitty deamons.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes, like looking at at Beastmen and the Daemons from this edition makes it clear that the Four are still bad for anything resembling a coherent reality, but the mortals who follow them have some nuance in a "nobody ever really thinks they're the bad guy" kind of way.
 
Wonder how the chaos gods would taste like. Nurgle would likely taste awful, and Slaanesh would taste like a well cooked but highly eccentric dish, that, or an extremely spicy one (which may convert me, as I love spicy stuff). Khorne would likely taste like something bloody, possibly like rare steak. No idea about Tzeench.
 
Last edited:
Tobtorp said:
The towers will be built so that the laurelorn tower will be critical to holding the bridge up, which means laurelorn will be able to destroy the bridge at will, at that point they don't need to man (elf?) a small outpost outside their natural defenses.l
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The thing is, look at the quest-canonical map of Laurelorn's formal territory claims:
Boney said:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And look at where Vorbegwerk is, on 4e's map:

Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Though the map itself is not canonical for the quest, as far as I can tell it is the only one where Vorbegwerk shows up, meaning its location as being somewhat north of the Old Dwarf Road should be roughly accurate.

So Vorbegwerk almost certainly was in part of the Schadensumpf territory claimed by Laurelorn. That's probably why the Graf ordered it abandoned at all - helping reassert Laurelorn's territorial claims would have included the places where his own people were! It's quite possible that Middenland exiles that ended up forming Ulrikadrin also included people who lived in Vorbegwerk.

...Maybe it's a bit like how Laurelorn hasn't pressed their claims over Nordland's coastline, and maybe they similarly wouldn't have done so with Vorbegwerk? But the point stands: the land effectively is the Eonir's, whether they have elves there or not. Maybe House Fanpatar/Laurelorn as a whole will accede to having Middenlanders handle the Vorbegwerk tower, since it'd be less work for them and be a nice gesture for their alliance, but they could very easily handle it all themselves.
 
Parabola said:
The thing is, look at the quest-canonical map of Laurelorn's formal territory claims:


And look at where Vorbegwerk is, on 4e's map:



Though the map itself is not canonical for the quest, as far as I can tell it is the only one where Vorbegwerk shows up, meaning its location as being somewhat north of the Old Dwarf Road should be roughly accurate.

So Vorbegwerk almost certainly was in part of the Schadensumpf territory claimed by Laurelorn. That's probably why the Graf ordered it abandoned at all - helping reassert Laurelorn's territorial claims would have included the places where his own people were! It's quite possible that Middenland exiles that ended up forming Ulrikadrin also included people who lived in Vorbegwerk.

...Maybe it's a bit like how Laurelorn hasn't pressed their claims over Nordland's coastline, and maybe they similarly wouldn't have done so with Vorbegwerk? But the point stands: the land effectively is the Eonir's, whether they have elves there or not. Maybe House Fanpatar/Laurelorn as a whole will accede to having Middenlanders handle the Vorbegwerk tower, since it'd be less work for them and be a nice gesture for their alliance, but they could very easily handle it all themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Though it will certainly be an interesting question of how they handle it.

By necessity, this is going to become the first settlement of Eonir (particularly Cityborn) outside of Tor Lithanel, I imagine? If they're going to be administering and fortifying at minimum their side of the road, and definitely the other side, then I imagine they're going to need permanent settlements. I doubt they're going to leave it in the hands of the Forestborn to handle. Or humans.

And the two end points on a route like this certainly seem like the places that towns would development just naturally over time.
 
Mopman43 said:
Though it will certainly be an interesting question of how they handle it.

By necessity, this is going to become the first settlement of Eonir (particularly Cityborn) outside of Tor Lithanel, I imagine? If they're going to be administering and fortifying at minimum their side of the road, and definitely the other side, then I imagine they're going to need permanent settlements. I doubt they're going to leave it in the hands of the Forestborn to handle. Or humans.

And the two end points on a route like this certainly seem like the places that towns would development just naturally over time.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Obviously, the answer is to make Vorbegwerk a Freistadts, and have both Tor Lithanel and Middenland write up their own charter for it.

So that both can say that the other doesn't control it, because they say so.

Just need a third party to give it too: ideally one that is already invested in it and the continued trade…
 
deathofrats0808 said:
That's not fucking ominous at all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It also is weird etymologically.

I BELIEVE the word may be a compound.

"Ong" for the number one, followed by the signifier "ak" or "k" in this case to show its the concept of one.
Gruni, which i can only guess is a mutation of "Grungnaz," to make or create and the signifier "-i," which denotes a specific thing. That ones a stretch for me but idk what else it could be.

So. The maker of one. In the context that it turns what is the concept of more than one, into an individual. Oblique, but also actually cool.
 
Last edited:
soulcake said:
It also is weird etymologically.

I BELIEVE the word may be a compound.

"Ong" for the number one, followed by the signifier "ak" or "k" in this case to show its the concept of one.
Gruni, which i can only guess is a mutation of "Grungnaz," to make or create and the signifier "-i," which denotes a specific thing. That ones a stretch for me but idk what else it could be.

So. The maker of one. In the context that it turns what is the concept of more than one, into an individual. Oblique, but also actually cool.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
... "The maker of one" is one hardcore name for a weapon... Like, holy shit that is a cool name...
 
Okay, but... what enemy was in mind when it was named 'Widow-Maker'? Because the Dwarves do have a lot of enemies, but I'm having trouble pointing at one where marriage is a widespread cultural institution.
 
Boney said:
Okay, but... what enemy was in mind when it was named 'Widow-Maker'? Because the Dwarves do have a lot of enemies, but I'm having trouble pointing at one where marriage is a widespread cultural institution.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's one of Grimnir's axes.

The first is where the warrior Ancestor God is dressed in the ancient Dwarf armour with his mighty axes, Az-Dreugidum ('Waraxe of Doom')and Onkegruni ('Widow-Maker') raised for attack. The second, and more famous, Slayer depiction is of Grimnir's bare chest and arms ritually scarred and elaborately tattooed, wearing the spiked orange crest typically seen with Slayers, and only wielding his remaining axe, Az-Dreugidum.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Given that it's not the axe he's depicted with as a Slayer, it's the one he gave to Morgrim and that has been wielded by the High Kings since.

...Maybe it's about Urmskaladrak's widow?
 
Mopman43 said:
It's one of Grimnir's axes.


Given that it's not the axe he's depicted with as a Slayer, it's the one he gave to Morgrim and that has been wielded by the High Kings since.

...Maybe it's about Urmskaladrak's widow?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That would be long before any strife with elves, other dwarfs or even humans... Who did grimnir widow?

Edit: or maybe it's from a dwarven pov
 
Last edited:
Mopman43 said:
It's one of Grimnir's axes.


Given that it's not the axe he's depicted with as a Slayer, it's the one he gave to Morgrim and that has been wielded by the High Kings since.

...Maybe it's about Urmskaladrak's widow?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Do dragons even have marriage, I feel like probably have preferred mates sure but marriage? I guess it could be the dwarfs projecting their culture onto enemies.
 
Boney said:
Okay, but... what enemy was in mind when it was named 'Widow-Maker'? Because the Dwarves do have a lot of enemies, but I'm having trouble pointing at one where marriage is a widespread cultural institution.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Term could just be an approximation, less accurate translation for DL. Can't really say what it would be otherwise.

I could say I was deliberate and say its why I named it "Foefeller" in my quest instead, but I just liked that name better and I can't recall this name coming up anywhere before this? Maybe third edition, I didn't look too hard there.
 
soulcake said:
Term could just be an approximation, less accurate translation for DL. Can't really say what it would be otherwise.

I could say I was deliberate and say its why I named it "Foefeller" in my quest instead, but I just liked that name better and I can't recall this name coming up anywhere before this? Maybe third edition, I didn't look too hard there.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To the best of my knowledge, it's only ever been 'the Axes of Grimnir'.

Edit: Actually, I just checked- these are the names straight from 1e Stone and Steel. So it was already established.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top