Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
My Lord,

I hope this letter—and the script contained within—finds you and yours in the finest of health.

As per your instructions, I have completed my tour of the theatre circuits of the central and eastern Empire, and have composed what I consider to be the definitive version of "The Hunter Count's Shadow". The full script is perhaps my finest work, and it could not have been completed without your most generous patronage.

As you are aware, the play is a retelling of the deeds and legacy of both Electors Van Hal, and how they brought the cursed province of Sylvania to heel. It originated among the performing troupes of Stirland, with each troupe performing their own variation of the play, depending upon the size of the cast, the resources at their disposal, and the tastes and attitudes of their audiences. Whilst the play can accommodate any number of players, smaller troupes typically boil the cast down to four key members: The Hunter Count, his daughter the Grand Countess, Baron Blutdorf, and the Dämmerlichtreiter. Amongst many of the performers who practice this play, it is considered bad luck to speak the true name of the Dämmerlichtreiter. In deference to this superstition, I too will refrain from speaking her name in this letter.

Whilst I have no doubt that you will peruse my definitive edition at your leisure, allow me to provide a summary below, along with some of my own notes.

The play opens with a monologue by the former Elector of Stirland, Count Alberich II Haupt-Anderssen, where he waxes lyrical about the misfortunes of his house. One variant, popular in Altdorf, features a young "Empress Heidi" fleeing into the shadows beneath the Dämmerlichtreiter's cloak, but otherwise Alberich stands alone on the stage. It ends with the former Count begging for any power to save him. He then departs stage left, where a cacophony of laughs and screams can be heard. Some of the more ambitious troupes use powders to create brightly coloured smoke, although on at least one occasion this resulted in the stage catching fire.

Of an important note is that in all future scenes set in Eagle Castle, the cast will only enter and exit from stage right—stage left is barred, and considered to be bad luck should an actor accidentally follow Count Alberich to his doom.

The play then introduces our principal cast—Elector Count Abelhelm, Baron Blutdorf, and the Dämmerlichtreiter. The Hunter Count cuts a strong, noble, and heroic figure, as befitting the main character of the play. The Dämmerlichtreiter occupies one of two roles—either she is following behind the Count, silently copying his every action, or she exists upstage, behind the acting area, where she can be seen dueling foul cultists, arresting corrupt merchants, or kidnapping traitorous nobles. Throughout this, she speaks not a word, and yet exhibits an unmistakable presence upon the stage.

Baron Blutdorf, meanwhile, is her complete opposite—dressed in bright colours and bells, he is, to put it succinctly, the clown of the performance. At first glance he is a witless fool, and yet his every action results in a favourable result for himself and the Count, belying a cunning wit beneath his humourous facade. A popular character amongst the people, and one that adds much needed joviality to the play.

Act 1 can end in a variety of ways—in Stirland, the death of Count von Stolpe and a declaration of war against Sylvania is always popular, whilst Ostland favours the destruction of the corrupt Stirlandian League (to the point where performances that omit this subplot are liable to result in riots). I believe I have threaded the needle between these two plot beats most artfully.

Act 2 then picks up with Count Van Hel amassing a great army to lead into Sylvania. This act has little in the way of dramatic speeches, being little more than reenactments of famous battles from the Hunter's Hills campaign. I have taken it upon myself to elevate this section above the base violence typically seen in less cultured depictions. I hope you will find my original piece, the "Ballard of the Singing King", most entertaining.

The crescendo of act 2 is, of course, the tragic assault on Drakenhof. I am sure historians will have many complaints about how there were actually two battles of Drakenhof—one at the town, and one at the castle—but for artistic reasons I have merged them into a single battle. It is here, of course, that Count Van Hel takes his fatal wounds at the hands of Countess von Carstein, before herself falling to an enraged Dämmerlichtreiter, wielding the Orc Hewer in her liege lord's place.

The final scene of act 2 returns to Eagle Castle, where Van Hel's secret daughter, Grand Countess Roswita, is introduced. The Countess, in her naivety, curtly dismisses the Dämmerlichtreiter, who leaves without a word. The scene ends with Baron Blutdorf giving a scathing retort to the Countess, casting off his bells and wiping away his face paint—a gesture which symbolises the sudden tone shift into horror and despair in the third act.

The final act is the darkest and most harrowing act of the play. The Countess, alone and isolated, attempts to secure her father's sacrifice into a lasting victory, but her every effort is countered by the machinations of a nameless vampire. You will not find this vampire in the dramatis personae, for no actor will take on this role. Instead, this character is only known through the consequences of their unseen plans—traitorous servants, butchered guards, and a growing sense of darkness and isolation around the Countess.

Some variants attempt to draw a parallel between the trials faced by the Countess here, and the trials faced by the late Count Alberich, who perished in dishonour at the start of the play.

I have rejected this interpretation as disrespectful towards the Countess, and have rewritten it to present her as a strong and stoic hero, defying one of humanity's greatest enemies even as it takes everything from her. Her defiance and strength of will in this most darkest of hours is something I feel will inspire and uplift the masses, and creates a hopeful thread through the bloody tragedy of this act. I hope your Lordship will find my interpretation agreeable.

The play ends very suddenly—the Dämmerlichtreiter will simply appear onstage, the head of the unseen vampire in one hand, and a proclamation from the Emperor promising reinforcements in the other. This is typically the only time the Dämmerlichtreiter speaks—reciting the words of the Emperor himself, rather than voicing her own words.

I find the moral of the play most obvious—the silent and steadfast loyalty of the Dämmerlichtreiter wins the day, and shows how loyalty doesn't just reward those who exhibit that finest of qualities, but also rewards those who cultivate loyalty in their followers. I did draft a speech by the Countess hammering this point home, but test audiences were far too drunk by the end of the play to truly appreciate it. It also places emphasis on the role of the Emperor, granting him both the power and the grace to solve the problems plaguing the Countess. Some versions even go further, and specifically name the Orders of Magic as the saviors of Stirland. This isn't a popular version, as it presents a distrust of magic as a tragic flaw, but there are enough former soldiers in Stirland who have fought alongside wizards who appreciate the practicality of the matter, even if they themselves have not quite overcome their own discomfort.

I expect that this play will draw criticism from the usual quarters—from the Ulricans for being pro-Emperor, from the Sigmarites for being pro-magic, from the nobility for the overreach of the Grey Order, and from witch hunters for depictions of dark powers. And yet I expect these objections to cancel each other out, as the Hunter Count's legacy is historical fact, and the Dämmerlichtreiter—the real one, not the character in the play–holds much influence in halls of power across the Old World. By presenting these two characters in a flattering light(along with Countess Roswita), it would be easy to deflect criticism of the play as criticism of the individuals in question—an insult few would be foolish enough to speak out loud.

Should you find my work agreeable, then you would be pleased to know that I have already begun to compose a sequel—"The Shadow of the Mountain King", which follows the Dämmerlichtreiter's journey to the realm of the dwarves and her war against the greenskin menace. Such an endeavour of course requires me to make that pilgrimage myself, and your continued patronage would be most appreciated towards that end.

I eagerly await your reply,

Your loyal servant.

---​

All the talk of dramatic troupes and "Lady Sotto Voce" made me wonder what an in-universe dramatisation of the Stirland arc would look like, and then the Muses put me in a headlock and forced me to write the above. Also I wrote half of it drunk, half of it hungover, and all of it on my phone's notes app, so any errors are entirely of my own making.
Brava, Nerdasaurus.
 
My Lord,

I hope this letter—and the script contained within—finds you and yours in the finest of health.

As per your instructions, I have completed my tour of the theatre circuits of the central and eastern Empire, and have composed what I consider to be the definitive version of "The Hunter Count's Shadow". The full script is perhaps my finest work, and it could not have been completed without your most generous patronage.

As you are aware, the play is a retelling of the deeds and legacy of both Electors Van Hal, and how they brought the cursed province of Sylvania to heel. It originated among the performing troupes of Stirland, with each troupe performing their own variation of the play, depending upon the size of the cast, the resources at their disposal, and the tastes and attitudes of their audiences. Whilst the play can accommodate any number of players, smaller troupes typically boil the cast down to four key members: The Hunter Count, his daughter the Grand Countess, Baron Blutdorf, and the Dämmerlichtreiter. Amongst many of the performers who practice this play, it is considered bad luck to speak the true name of the Dämmerlichtreiter. In deference to this superstition, I too will refrain from speaking her name in this letter.

Whilst I have no doubt that you will peruse my definitive edition at your leisure, allow me to provide a summary below, along with some of my own notes.

The play opens with a monologue by the former Elector of Stirland, Count Alberich II Haupt-Anderssen, where he waxes lyrical about the misfortunes of his house. One variant, popular in Altdorf, features a young "Empress Heidi" fleeing into the shadows beneath the Dämmerlichtreiter's cloak, but otherwise Alberich stands alone on the stage. It ends with the former Count begging for any power to save him. He then departs stage left, where a cacophony of laughs and screams can be heard. Some of the more ambitious troupes use powders to create brightly coloured smoke, although on at least one occasion this resulted in the stage catching fire.

Of an important note is that in all future scenes set in Eagle Castle, the cast will only enter and exit from stage right—stage left is barred, and considered to be bad luck should an actor accidentally follow Count Alberich to his doom.

The play then introduces our principal cast—Elector Count Abelhelm, Baron Blutdorf, and the Dämmerlichtreiter. The Hunter Count cuts a strong, noble, and heroic figure, as befitting the main character of the play. The Dämmerlichtreiter occupies one of two roles—either she is following behind the Count, silently copying his every action, or she exists upstage, behind the acting area, where she can be seen dueling foul cultists, arresting corrupt merchants, or kidnapping traitorous nobles. Throughout this, she speaks not a word, and yet exhibits an unmistakable presence upon the stage.

Baron Blutdorf, meanwhile, is her complete opposite—dressed in bright colours and bells, he is, to put it succinctly, the clown of the performance. At first glance he is a witless fool, and yet his every action results in a favourable result for himself and the Count, belying a cunning wit beneath his humourous facade. A popular character amongst the people, and one that adds much needed joviality to the play.

Act 1 can end in a variety of ways—in Stirland, the death of Count von Stolpe and a declaration of war against Sylvania is always popular, whilst Ostland favours the destruction of the corrupt Stirlandian League (to the point where performances that omit this subplot are liable to result in riots). I believe I have threaded the needle between these two plot beats most artfully.

Act 2 then picks up with Count Van Hel amassing a great army to lead into Sylvania. This act has little in the way of dramatic speeches, being little more than reenactments of famous battles from the Hunter's Hills campaign. I have taken it upon myself to elevate this section above the base violence typically seen in less cultured depictions. I hope you will find my original piece, the "Ballard of the Singing King", most entertaining.

The crescendo of act 2 is, of course, the tragic assault on Drakenhof. I am sure historians will have many complaints about how there were actually two battles of Drakenhof—one at the town, and one at the castle—but for artistic reasons I have merged them into a single battle. It is here, of course, that Count Van Hel takes his fatal wounds at the hands of Countess von Carstein, before herself falling to an enraged Dämmerlichtreiter, wielding the Orc Hewer in her liege lord's place.

The final scene of act 2 returns to Eagle Castle, where Van Hel's secret daughter, Grand Countess Roswita, is introduced. The Countess, in her naivety, curtly dismisses the Dämmerlichtreiter, who leaves without a word. The scene ends with Baron Blutdorf giving a scathing retort to the Countess, casting off his bells and wiping away his face paint—a gesture which symbolises the sudden tone shift into horror and despair in the third act.

The final act is the darkest and most harrowing act of the play. The Countess, alone and isolated, attempts to secure her father's sacrifice into a lasting victory, but her every effort is countered by the machinations of a nameless vampire. You will not find this vampire in the dramatis personae, for no actor will take on this role. Instead, this character is only known through the consequences of their unseen plans—traitorous servants, butchered guards, and a growing sense of darkness and isolation around the Countess.

Some variants attempt to draw a parallel between the trials faced by the Countess here, and the trials faced by the late Count Alberich, who perished in dishonour at the start of the play.

I have rejected this interpretation as disrespectful towards the Countess, and have rewritten it to present her as a strong and stoic hero, defying one of humanity's greatest enemies even as it takes everything from her. Her defiance and strength of will in this most darkest of hours is something I feel will inspire and uplift the masses, and creates a hopeful thread through the bloody tragedy of this act. I hope your Lordship will find my interpretation agreeable.

The play ends very suddenly—the Dämmerlichtreiter will simply appear onstage, the head of the unseen vampire in one hand, and a proclamation from the Emperor promising reinforcements in the other. This is typically the only time the Dämmerlichtreiter speaks—reciting the words of the Emperor himself, rather than voicing her own words.

I find the moral of the play most obvious—the silent and steadfast loyalty of the Dämmerlichtreiter wins the day, and shows how loyalty doesn't just reward those who exhibit that finest of qualities, but also rewards those who cultivate loyalty in their followers. I did draft a speech by the Countess hammering this point home, but test audiences were far too drunk by the end of the play to truly appreciate it. It also places emphasis on the role of the Emperor, granting him both the power and the grace to solve the problems plaguing the Countess. Some versions even go further, and specifically name the Orders of Magic as the saviors of Stirland. This isn't a popular version, as it presents a distrust of magic as a tragic flaw, but there are enough former soldiers in Stirland who have fought alongside wizards who appreciate the practicality of the matter, even if they themselves have not quite overcome their own discomfort.

I expect that this play will draw criticism from the usual quarters—from the Ulricans for being pro-Emperor, from the Sigmarites for being pro-magic, from the nobility for the overreach of the Grey Order, and from witch hunters for depictions of dark powers. And yet I expect these objections to cancel each other out, as the Hunter Count's legacy is historical fact, and the Dämmerlichtreiter—the real one, not the character in the play–holds much influence in halls of power across the Old World. By presenting these two characters in a flattering light(along with Countess Roswita), it would be easy to deflect criticism of the play as criticism of the individuals in question—an insult few would be foolish enough to speak out loud.

Should you find my work agreeable, then you would be pleased to know that I have already begun to compose a sequel—"The Shadow of the Mountain King", which follows the Dämmerlichtreiter's journey to the realm of the dwarves and her war against the greenskin menace. Such an endeavour of course requires me to make that pilgrimage myself, and your continued patronage would be most appreciated towards that end.

I eagerly await your reply,

Your loyal servant.

---​

All the talk of dramatic troupes and "Lady Sotto Voce" made me wonder what an in-universe dramatisation of the Stirland arc would look like, and then the Muses put me in a headlock and forced me to write the above. Also I wrote half of it drunk, half of it hungover, and all of it on my phone's notes app, so any errors are entirely of my own making.

The relationship between artist and patron, and the varying degrees to which it is entirely for the patron's amusement, whether it's 'simply' to embellish reputations, and the times with which it is a tool to manipulate public perceptions, and the ambiguities and grey areas between those cases, is a fascinating dynamic that really rewards exploration. I really enjoyed that you've left not just the motivations of the writer ambiguous, but also the instructions that the writer was working under. It can be read as an entirely artistic endeavour to create a synthesis that appeals as widely as possible, or as a high-level attempt to try to 'mainstream' all the variations that are going in potentially dangerous directions into a single version that gives safer moral lessons, or written with an explicitly pro-magic or even pro-Mathilde agenda. There might even be a hypothesis that 'My Lord' is Mathilde herself.

Personally, I suspect Anton. The depiction of Roswita being mostly respectful but still highlighting her error with Mathilde feels like where he'd have ended up on the matter.

I think just the quote without the explanation would fit best. It feels more.... poignant. Even if a significant portion of the audience doesn't get the reference it still stands on it's own.

EDIT: Might piss off the Ulricans though

The term 'Sigmar's Holy Empire' is explained by Ulricans to have been the Empire founded by Sigmar and made holy by Ulric's blessing. Sigmar was an Ulrican, and the two Cults not getting along is more a political matter than a religious one.

Wait, do dwarven archives have records on the recepients of tge Runefangs beyond "the Empire"?

They didn't call him Alaric the Diligent Bookkeper.

I don't think we ever asked Boney how exactly Boris Goldgather got Crow Feeder and gave it to Nordland, though? I can't imagine Marienburg/the Westerlands of the time would have been very pleased with the idea that their Runefang, symbol of independence, would be given to a new province.

Maybe Boris Goldgather gave the nascent Nordland Beast Slayer or Grudge Settler, and then when Marienburg split off there was a shuffle of Runefangs because it was argued that the Nordlanders would have had a better claim of the Endals Runefang, or something?? I don't know, that feels like a stretch.

There's a canonical ambiguity about whether Marienburg and Westerland was settled by Jutones or Endals, and the confusion this raises about Runefangs is heightened by the whole 'there are seven competing lists of who the electoral provinces actually are' thing. I've picked the 'correct' version for DL (while throwing in the 'some scholars argue the other thing' as a nod to it, as I often do with these things) but that didn't actually solve the Runefang question. I ended up coming up with a resolution to it back here:

Nordland was not one of the founding provinces of the Empire - its Runefang, Crow Feeder, was originally granted to the Endals. But Middenland brought it into the fold by force during the March to the Frontiers as a vassal, bleeding it of silver until the era of Drakwald Emperors, where Emperor Boris Goldgather granted Nordland independence and a Runefang to weaken his family's ancestral rivals in Middenland. This independence came just in time for the Black Death, and Norscans migrated in large numbers to the towns and villages of Nordland cleared out by disease and likely would have conquered all of Nordland outright, had the Skaven Wars not arrived. Norscan and Nordlander put aside their differences - and, according to the more dramatic recountings of the history, the siege of Salzenmund - in the face of the invasion from below. When the dust had settled the Norscans decided to make a permanent peace with the Nordlanders, foreswear the Chaos Gods in favour of Ulric, and swear fealty to the Elector Count of Nordland. How much of that was due to kinship forged in battle and how much was due to the arrival of a freshly-crowned Emperor Mandred Skavenslayer at the head of the Imperial Army is open to interpretation. But though the Norscans had saved Nordland, their incorporation into the province and eventually the intermingling of their customs and bloodlines with that of Nordland drove another wedge between them and the Middenlanders, with their beliefs in the superiority of unmixed descent from the Imperial Tribes in general and the Teutogens in particular.

I am, however, entertaining the question of whether that's a historical fiction and perhaps there's a more direct route that something might have disappeared from Marienburg, a place well known for being sacked by Norscans at regular intervals, and appearing somewhere that just had fealty sworn to it by a bunch of Norscans.

You could also raise the question of why the Ostagoths got a Runefang when Ostermark only became a province much later in the Empire. One possible answer is that the Ostagoths of Sigmar's time were arguably nomadic (they did have towns, but they could break them down and load them onto wagons very quickly when necessary) and so they couldn't be incorporate into an Empire until later.
 
I am, however, entertaining the question of whether that's a historical fiction and perhaps there's a more direct route that something might have disappeared from Marienburg, well known for being sacked by Norscans, and appearing somewhere that just had fealty sworn to it by a bunch of Norscans.
I've always wondered if it might have something to do with inheiritance.

Nordland has some kind of entirely unexplained feudal claim on Marienburg/the Wasteland, I figure some kind of feudal ties to the Barons of Westerland that also saw them inheirit the Runefang would work.
 
All the talk of dramatic troupes and "Lady Sotto Voce" made me wonder what an in-universe dramatisation of the Stirland arc would look like, and then the Muses put me in a headlock and forced me to write the above. Also I wrote half of it drunk, half of it hungover, and all of it on my phone's notes app, so any errors are entirely of my own making.
My friend, be proud! You are following in the footsteps of many a famous playwright!
 
The crescendo of act 2 is, of course, the tragic assault on Drakenhof. I am sure historians will have many complaints about how there were actually two battles of Drakenhof—one at the town, and one at the castle—but for artistic reasons I have merged them into a single battle. It is here, of course, that Count Van Hel takes his fatal wounds at the hands of Countess von Carstein, before herself falling to an enraged Dämmerlichtreiter, wielding the Orc Hewer in her liege lord's place.

But where is the Great Earth-Shattering Kaboom?

I suppose we must wait for Warhammer Michael Bay to be born to get the truly definitive adaptation, where the Dämmerlichtreiter is striking down Countess von Carstein even as the greatest assembly of land artillery in the Old World's history smashes Castle Drakenhof to pieces in the background :p
 
Last edited:
I've always wondered if it might have something to do with inheiritance.

Nordland has some kind of entirely unexplained feudal claim on Marienburg/the Wasteland, I figure some kind of feudal ties to the Barons of Westerland that also saw them inheirit the Runefang would work.

There's at least three versions of the early history of Westerland and Nordland. The simplest is that the Endals became Westerland and the Jutones became Nordland and that's the end of it, and that's the version that makes the feudal claim between the two confusing. There's also a version where the Jutones (sometimes the Was Jutones) founded Westerland but the Endals founded Marienburg, and the two were forcibly united during the Drive to the Frontiers. Then there's a version where the Jutones founded Westerland and Marienburg and the Endals are never mentioned at all - this is where Marienburg's early name of Jutonsryk comes from, where other sources say it was Marburg.

The version of events I ended up going with for DL was kind of a synthesis of the ambiguity, and detailed in an earlier paragraph of the post I quoted:

The roots of the schism, you mentally summarize as you go through a deskful of papers that have been set aside for you, run parallel to the history of the Nordland Hedgewise. During the time of Sigmar, the tribe of people that would become Nordlanders split in two, with some staying within the Forest of Shadows and remaining loyal to their patron Goddess Halétha and others following King Marius into the lowlands of Westerland in an attempt to claim it as the Jutonsryk. Historians are divided as to whether they settled those lands and Marienburg was named after Marius, or whether they were trying to invade the lands of the Endals and Marienburg was named after King Marbad. In either case, the Endals were eventually victorious, and the Jutones were forced to return to the Forest of Shadows. But they did not do so directly - they passed through the lands of the Teutogens, ancestors of the Middenlanders, and while doing so converted to their God, Ulric. Instead of returning in shame to a land and Goddess they abandoned, they returned as conquerors. The Haléthan loyalists, now called the Was Jutonians, were split into two groups as some survived on the outskirts of Jutonian society and some fled east into the lands of the Udosians, and they would go on to become the Nordland and Ostland Hedgefolk. This set the stage for the Jutonians to become the Nordlanders, and also laid the foundations for the complicated relationship with their coreligionists in Middenland.

This would give Nordland a claim to Westerland if the 'Jutones founded it, Endals conquered it' version is true, but not if the Endals founded it and the Jutones tried and failed to conquer it. Some people like to treat 'we tried really hard to conquer it' as a legitimate claim but it rarely gets recognized as such.
 
I am, however, entertaining the question of whether that's a historical fiction and perhaps there's a more direct route that something might have disappeared from Marienburg, a place well known for being sacked by Norscans at regular intervals, and appearing somewhere that just had fealty sworn to it by a bunch of Norscans.
...That's a funny as hell idea.
 
The relationship between artist and patron, and the varying degrees to which it is entirely for the patron's amusement, whether it's 'simply' to embellish reputations, and the times with which it is a tool to manipulate public perceptions, and the ambiguities and grey areas between those cases, is a fascinating dynamic that really rewards exploration. I really enjoyed that you've left not just the motivations of the writer ambiguous, but also the instructions that the writer was working under. It can be read as an entirely artistic endeavour to create a synthesis that appeals as widely as possible, or as a high-level attempt to try to 'mainstream' all the variations that are going in potentially dangerous directions into a single version that gives safer moral lessons, or written with an explicitly pro-magic or even pro-Mathilde agenda. There might even be a hypothesis that 'My Lord' is Mathilde herself.

Personally, I suspect Anton. The depiction of Roswita being mostly respectful but still highlighting her error with Mathilde feels like where he'd have ended up on the matter.

It's interesting that you picked up on that, because that ambiguity is both accidental and intentional.

When I started writing, I had no idea on the nature of the "lord" in question, nor did I consider it a question that needed to be asked in the first place. Honestly, I was more worried about trying to answer the question of who the writer was (is it a canon character? An OC? Myself as an OC donut steel self-insert? Answers on a postcard, please).

But as I was writing, I couldn't help but begin to speculate upon the nature of the patron, and that did leak into the text a little. Whilst there is no "official" answer to who the lord was, I did come up with two headcanons for who it could be (yes, I know I'm the writer, but I get to headcanon whatever I want).

The first possibility is Anton. The second is Algard—or at least, Algard-by-proxie, via one of his Hands. Both would have the means, motive, and opportunity to commission such a work, and whilst their aims might be slightly different, the results are near identical.

I did briefly consider whether Heidi might be behind it, but she's not the sort who would plan such a scheme, and she'd probably find dozens of competing and contradictory variations of the same story hilarious.

Anyway, once I had a firm idea that the writer and the patron had motives—even if I didn't allow myself to know what those exact motives were—it made the whole thing a lot more fun to write, and it makes me glad to see someone pick up on that.

(There is, of course, a third answer to the question—that I am the patron, and that I designed the play to fit my own tastes).
 
As per your instructions, I have completed my tour of the theatre circuits of the central and eastern Empire, and have composed what I consider to be the definitive version of "The Hunter Count's Shadow".
Personally, I suspect Anton. The depiction of Roswita being mostly respectful but still highlighting her error with Mathilde feels like where he'd have ended up on the matter.
Perfect addition to an already excellent concept.
 
Anton does have enough of a sense of humor about himself to appreciate being played as comic relief
Really being played a comic relief that is also portrayed as having hidden depths and a sharp wit is really the best of all worlds when it comes to reputation. It allows for respect without constraining your actions at all.

It's also a really great reputation to have if you aren't actually amazingly smart.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting that you picked up on that, because that ambiguity is both accidental and intentional.

When I started writing, I had no idea on the nature of the "lord" in question, nor did I consider it a question that needed to be asked in the first place. Honestly, I was more worried about trying to answer the question of who the writer was (is it a canon character? An OC? Myself as an OC donut steel self-insert? Answers on a postcard, please).

But as I was writing, I couldn't help but begin to speculate upon the nature of the patron, and that did leak into the text a little. Whilst there is no "official" answer to who the lord was, I did come up with two headcanons for who it could be (yes, I know I'm the writer, but I get to headcanon whatever I want).

The first possibility is Anton. The second is Algard—or at least, Algard-by-proxie, via one of his Hands. Both would have the means, motive, and opportunity to commission such a work, and whilst their aims might be slightly different, the results are near identical.

I did briefly consider whether Heidi might be behind it, but she's not the sort who would plan such a scheme, and she'd probably find dozens of competing and contradictory variations of the same story hilarious.

Anyway, once I had a firm idea that the writer and the patron had motives—even if I didn't allow myself to know what those exact motives were—it made the whole thing a lot more fun to write, and it makes me glad to see someone pick up on that.

(There is, of course, a third answer to the question—that I am the patron, and that I designed the play to fit my own tastes).

My immediate head cannon was actually that the "Lord" in question is Regimand. I just hadn't decided if he was doing it to boost her reputation, because he's super proud of Mathilde, or to embarrass her. Or all 3 of course...
 
The relationship between artist and patron, and the varying degrees to which it is entirely for the patron's amusement, whether it's 'simply' to embellish reputations, and the times with which it is a tool to manipulate public perceptions, and the ambiguities and grey areas between those cases, is a fascinating dynamic that really rewards exploration. I really enjoyed that you've left not just the motivations of the writer ambiguous, but also the instructions that the writer was working under. It can be read as an entirely artistic endeavour to create a synthesis that appeals as widely as possible, or as a high-level attempt to try to 'mainstream' all the variations that are going in potentially dangerous directions into a single version that gives safer moral lessons, or written with an explicitly pro-magic or even pro-Mathilde agenda. There might even be a hypothesis that 'My Lord' is Mathilde herself.

Personally, I suspect Anton. The depiction of Roswita being mostly respectful but still highlighting her error with Mathilde feels like where he'd have ended up on the matter.
Personally I feel like Anton would have insisted Mathilde have at least few actual lines or something beyond just parroting the Emperor's proclamation or at least something to humanise her. He's both her friend and doesn't strike me as being as impressed or concerned with Mathilde's "silent, mysterious and terrifying" reputation.

What I'm saying is that Anton's version would insist on keeping the weird as shit Act 2 subplot where Asarnil's character appears the Dämmerlichtreiter detaches herself from the Hunter Count's shadow to follow him around comedically scribing down his words as he recites a few lines of epic poetry to introduce himself. Then keeps dropping a book on the corners of minor character's desks in a few of the earlier, less important battles leading up toward the tragic final bttle of Drakenhoff (tailing off as the mood becomes more somber).

This is never explained. :p

Anyway, what I'm saying is that it's clearly Wihelmina.
 
Last edited:
I did briefly consider whether Heidi might be behind it, but she's not the sort who would plan such a scheme, and she'd probably find dozens of competing and contradictory variations of the same story hilarious.
Heidi the Heist-puller might be that sort of person, but I think Heidi the Mother and Empress is different. She might actually plan such a scheme, given she actually has a reason now to try and push a pro-magic agenda. Wizard Emperor might remain a distant dream for Mandred, but at the very least smoothing the way for Wizard Elector will be on Heidi's mind. If Heidi's not behind the whole idea of the play itself, she might be behind the Altdorf variant.

Personally, my thought is on one of the Van Hals who remain in the shadows, or one of their associates. I imagine Roswita must have communicated the possibility of her becoming Empress to them already, or one among them must have realized it ahead of her, and the play is one among many attempts to rehabilitate the Van Hal name to the populace at large.
 
The scene from the play that's most vivid for me is Roswita dismissing her shadow. Up until this point, Mathilde has been a very literal shadow to Abelhelm to the point of mimicking his movement. When she acts alone it's in the background and as the aggressor, never acknowledged by the characters who are the focus of the scene.

And then Roswita breaks that rule. She turns to her shadow, addresses it, and in doing so kills the goose that lays the golden eggs. I almost wonder whether some productions would go so far as to have Mathilde be the one to arrive with Alkaseltzer's head rather than the Dämmerlichtreiter, because the Dämmerlichtreiter is gone and will never return.
 
The Dämmerlichtreiter was dismissed from her post, moved onto greener pastures. And yet, criminals still pay tribute to Ranald, necromancers still keep an eye out for the telltale hat, and no noble would dare be remiss in their obligations. The Dämmerlichtreiter may no longer be present, but she is no less there.
 
Back
Top