Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Voting is open
So, the ideas for the Deceiver so far:
1) You'll get your life and freedom
2) We are a cultist of the Horned Rat
3) Eshin are after you
4) We need his services as an alternative to paying our rivals in the College
5) Mors captured intact an unusual amount of Moulder resources and now pressure Skryre. We want the language to act against Mors (reasons somewhat different depending on which of 1-4 we use)

Some of them are compatible, some are exclusive. All have benefits and drawbacks:

1) Powerful motivator, but imposes a time limit
2) I don't know enough about relationship between Skaven and Yellow Fang cultists to judge
3) May make him less cooperative if he is a true believer, otherwise protection from Eshin serves as similar motivator to (1) but without the time limit
4) Lowers his reluctance to share the language, but doesn't actually motivates him to do so. Needs a complementary lie to motivate him.
5) Only motivates him if his Mors-hate is not feigned and in that case he may be reluctant to share the language if he thinks it is religious secret. Needs a complementary lie to lower reluctance.

Proposal: Use 4+5 at first. If he is a patriot of Skavendom/fanatic of HR then that should be enough to motivate him. If 5 doesn't motivate him, then he is unlikely to react badly to 3 and we can use that.
 
Last edited:
So, the ideas (mostly exclusive) for the Deceiver so far:
1) You'll get your life and freedom
2) We are a cultist of the Horned Rat
3) Eshin are after you
4) We need his services as an alternative to paying our rivals in the College
5) Mors captured intact an unusual amount of Moulder resources and now pressure Skryre. We want the language to act against Mors (reasons somewhat different depending on which of 1-4 we use)

Some of them are compatible, some are exclusive. All have benefits and drawbacks:
1) Powerful motivator, but imposes a time limit
2) I don't know enough about relationship between Skaven and Yellow Fang cultists to judge
3) May make him less cooperative if he is a true believer, otherwise protection from Eshin serves as similar motivator to (1) but without the time limit
4) Lowers hi reluctance to share the language, but doesn't actually motivates him to do so. Needs a complementary lie to motivate him.
5) Only motivates him if his Mors-hate is not feigned and in that case he may be reluctant to share the language if he thinks it is religious secret. Needs a complementary lie to lower reluctance.

Proposal: Use 4+5 at first. If he is a patriot of Skavendom/fanatic of HR then that should be enough to motivate him. If 5 doesn't motivate him, then he is unlikely to react badly to 3 and we can use that.

Supplementary lie for 4): "it would be difficult to keep feeding him regularly if we had to take lessons in Altdorf."
 
That sounds like a clock starter. Why would Eshin come after him, if not hired to do it? If Eshin already think him a traitor, he is doomed, so he might as well try and take us with him. Or you try and break him so bad he betrays the Horned Rat. Pretty sure Eshin are among the most loyal, and that they serve the Council mostly directly. So telling him Eshin came after him is telling him his God does not want him to live. That sounds like a dangerous idea to plan in his head, that he is unworthy of life, for a true believer.

Not really, it only requires that prisoners being taken is known about for Eshin to kill them to remove the potential information leaks.

Also based on what he said I don't think he's a horned rat patriot, notice how he worries that the skaven will fail to kill and remove Mors and Pestilens before the horned rat intervenes again. That's pretty suggestive.
 
Fundamentally the fief vote isn't about the fief, it's about responsibility. It's about Mat meeting her oaths, and holding to them. She get's to call herself Dame over that thing. It means stuff, it's her noble title and even with a cactus she is obliged to check in on occasion, or she is failing them and herself.
What oaths exactly? The vote she gave is about defending Stirland and van Hals. It pretty much has nothing to do with our fief.

Which is a bit strange, greanted, but I am not aware of any oath betweem Math and fief.
 
2) We are a cultist of the Horned Rat
Alternatively, "we're willing to ally with skaven for personal gains". Easier to sell, not involving divinities, less potent implications.
Which is a bit strange, greanted, but I am not aware of any oath betweem Math and fief.
The closest thing the locals have to a leader (apart from yourself, of course) is a man with a slightly larger herd and a slightly larger hut, and representatives from the hill clans gather there to give you their oaths.
 
Last edited:
What oaths exactly? The vote she gave is about defending Stirland and van Hals. It pretty much has nothing to do with our fief.

Which is a bit strange, greanted, but I am not aware of any oath betweem Math and fief.
Is the argument that a feudal lord doesn't have a responsibility to their tenants really the one you want to go with?

Even if that's true in the universe out of universe we should endeavour to be better than that. Like others have said it's a potted cactus but even a potted cactus needs watering and new soil occasionally and we will only find out if it needs that if we keep half an eye on it.
 
What oaths exactly? The vote she gave is about defending Stirland and van Hals. It pretty much has nothing to do with our fief.

Which is a bit strange, greanted, but I am not aware of any oath betweem Math and fief.
The fief is directly related to the Knight Oath. The one she took when she became a Knight. Part of it is protecting and helping and caring for the people on her fief. She is in Feudal Contract between the Stirland Elector Count/ess and Knight Weber, of the House of Weber, who's words are "Unseen, But Not Unfelt" and the fief. She is factually, legally, the noble of that fief, it's Knightly House. That carries feudal responsibilities. Like, if it was ever attacked by Beastmen or the Undead, Mat would be expected to protect it, or to have had arranged for it's protection, or to at least avenge them after the fact, and bring their killers to justice.

EDIT: Basically, a social action every other turn isn't too much to ask for. Once for the factory, the other for the fief. That means we visit each of them once every two years. That isn't unreasonable, is it? Since it is part of our job, as Knight/Dawongr. We negotiated the deal with Zulfbar, remember. If our Niter becomes not good enough, that's a Grudge against Mat. Espetially if dwarves die because she wasn't paying attention, and it turned into sub-standard gunpowder.
 
Last edited:
The big whoops when someone in the library overhears Mathilde delivering a DIVINE LIE about how she's willing to serve the Horned Rat and a just fully believes we're a corrupt asset now.
 
The thing with the deceiver is that it is not a "press button to brainwash" device, you still need to do the legwork to actually convince anyone of anything with it.

Here's an example.

You are at a nice dinner party, and your conversation partner talks about how Elvis is still alive, he just got abducted by aliens, and then staged his own death.

You ask them to repeat themselves, and they do, with absoloute conviction.

Do you:
A: start making the huge mental shifts to work "the whole elvis thing" into your brain without parts of your worldview colliding.
or
B: nod and smile, then back away from the lunatic and try to never meet them again.
 
Also based on what he said I don't think he's a horned rat patriot, notice how he worries that the skaven will fail to kill and remove Mors and Pestilens before the horned rat intervenes again. That's pretty suggestive.

He is probably Skavendom patriot, though. He is indignant that Pestilence got away with civil war two times and really doesn't want to let them live after the third.


Well Gilding never had rules on the tabletop but if you'll forgive me for speculating.

Most of the affects of Gilding are below the level of abstraction for the wargame, so I would rule it as providing a Scaly Skin (the special rule for armour that is part of the models body) save of 5+. Equivalent to heavy armour like incomplete plate with chainmail. A standard Orcs & Goblins Army Giant costs 200 points and has no armour, it can be upgraded to have magic warpaint, for an additional 20 points, if it's army includes any Savage Orc shamans. Savage Orc Warpaint provides a 6+ Ward save, meaning that the save roll cannot be modified by armour piercing effects. Therefore, I would rate a possible Gilding as costing 25 points.
There are two more effects (besides armor) that are translatable to TT:

Gilding both arms grants +10% Strength in the RPG, which is translatable to +1S on TT.
Gilding both legs grants +2 Move, which is straight-up +2M

Page 166, "You permanently substitute one of your body parts with a replacement of gold." It's replaced. You're right that it's all straight upgrades, with the debatable advantage of gilding your heart removing your ability to feel emotional pain.

Weight of gold required as reagent is too small for it to be a complete replacement (especially for bigger body parts). 400 gc is 40 encumbrance, which is analogous to things like rapier, foil or swordbreaker. It is significantly lesser volume than an arm or a leg.
 
@BoneyM

Not sure how reasonable this suggestion is but maybe the better ideas provided in the thread for how to use the coin should be sub votes listed under the deceiver as a sort of Mathilde approved potential suggestion. After all we're not intrigue masters and Mathilde is. The exact details of how we do something isn't usually up for voting and it kind of feels like we're going to make dumb mistakes otherwise due to not having the mindset or information that Mathilde would know instinctively.
 
Last edited:
Is the argument that a feudal lord doesn't have a responsibility to their tenants really the one you want to go with?

Even if that's true in the universe out of universe we should endeavour to be better than that. Like others have said it's a potted cactus but even a potted cactus needs watering and new soil occasionally and we will only find out if it needs that if we keep half an eye on it.
You close your eyes and let memory bring you back to the day that you were knighted, and the words leap to your lips as readily as when Anton taught them to you. "This day do I render homage and fealty to my Lord, the Elector Count Abelhelm Van Hal of Stirland, who will, from this day forward, be my Liege. I will remain true in all ways, serving him faithfully - this do I swear, by my life and by my Gods." You wipe at your burning eyes with a sleeve, angry at yourself. "So say I, Mathilde Weber."
this one.
 
I'm pretty sure the QM has literally said the first line.

If you're talking to someone and they say something that they believe but you don't think is right, 4/5 times you'd rationalize it as them being mistaken, mislead or mad before you accepted it unless it was especially convincing.
Quote or it didn't happen.

First assumption: That the person lied to wouldn't think it is right. Why would the skaven even think we have superiors or that the superiors care or know about him?
Second assumption: That the literal divine blessing doesn't make you especially convincing. It explicitly lets you convince someone that the lie you were telling was the truth.

Your response to using the deceiver to convince him that we might let him go basically was:
That's the thing with the coin, it would make him think we believed our own words; but we could have just been lied to by a superior.
Whereas the GM's was:
Convincing him that not just continued life but freedom is a possibility may very well increase his level of cooperation, but it does start a clock ticking down to the point where you have to either follow through or sour any accumulated goodwill.
There is a fundamental disconnect between your argument and WOG. You essentially using a technicality to argue here that doesn't apply. Yes, we need to think about our deceptions. That doesn't mean what can go wrong, will go wrong.
 
What are you talking about, Of course Elvis is alive. A sat in between him and bigfoot when Jimmy Hoffa picked me up last night in his space ship.
 
EDIT: Basically, a social action every other turn isn't too much to ask for. Once for the factory, the other for the fief. That means we visit each of them once every two years. That isn't unreasonable, is it? Since it is part of our job, as Knight/Dawongr. We negotiated the deal with Zulfbar, remember. If our Niter becomes not good enough, that's a Grudge against Mat. Espetially if dwarves die because she wasn't paying attention, and it turned into sub-standard gunpowder.

Keep in mind if no Councillor vote wins this turn, it means that for many voters, a social action every turn in Stirland is too much, because it comes at the expense of getting to know Mathilde's current colleagues better, something I'm sure that those who urged the thread to vote for a Council member would come back to press for even harder next social turn. Honestly, the best compromise I can see is for one Stirland Social action, and one Councillor interaction vote to get in every social turn, with the other three being reserved for Unique/Significant actions such as witnessing the birth of the likely future Emperor.
 
Last edited:
The fief is directly related to the Knight Oath. The one she took when she became a Knight. Part of it is protecting and helping and caring for the people on her fief. She is in Feudal Contract between the Stirland Elector Count/ess and Knight Weber, of the House of Weber, who's words are "Unseen, But Not Unfelt" and the fief. She is factually, legally, the noble of that fief, it's Knightly House. That carries feudal responsibilities. Like, if it was ever attacked by Beastmen or the Undead, Mat would be expected to protect it, or to have had arranged for it's protection, or to at least avenge them after the fact, and bring their killers to justice.

EDIT: Basically, a social action every other turn isn't too much to ask for. Once for the factory, the other for the fief. That means we visit each of them once every two years. That isn't unreasonable, is it? Since it is part of our job, as Knight/Dawongr. We negotiated the deal with Zulfbar, remember. If our Niter becomes not good enough, that's a Grudge against Mat. Espetially if dwarves die because she wasn't paying attention, and it turned into sub-standard gunpowder.
It boild down to me having a brainderp. I vaguely remembered there being nothing in the oath about defending the Empire, but I was wrong.
 
The thing with the deceiver is that it is not a "press button to brainwash" device, you still need to do the legwork to actually convince anyone of anything with it.

Here's an example.

You are at a nice dinner party, and your conversation partner talks about how Elvis is still alive, he just got abducted by aliens, and then staged his own death.

You ask them to repeat themselves, and they do, with absoloute conviction.

Do you:
A: start making the huge mental shifts to work "the whole elvis thing" into your brain without parts of your worldview colliding.
or
B: nod and smile, then back away from the lunatic and try to never meet them again.
The key to avoid that is crafting lies about things that are a reasonable possibility, we are in a position to know, are not easily disproved, and don't sound crazy. Most of the options we made fit, except maybe cultist thing - that does sound crazy.
 
Current tally. It really is a knifefight, with 112-110-109 Edda-Fief-Rosie. I am impressed...
Adhoc vote count started by FlyingScanian on Nov 7, 2019 at 7:10 AM, finished with 1052 posts and 245 votes.
 
Quote or it didn't happen.

First assumption: That the person lied to wouldn't think it is right. Why would the skaven even think we have superiors or that the superiors care or know about him?
Second assumption: That the literal divine blessing doesn't make you especially convincing. It explicitly lets you convince someone that the lie you were telling was the truth.

Your response to using the deceiver to convince him that we might let him go basically was:

Whereas the GM's was:

There is a fundamental disconnect between your argument and WOG. You essentially using a technicality to argue here that doesn't apply. Yes, we need to think about our deceptions. That doesn't mean what can go wrong, will go wrong.

Neither of those statements are at all contradictory.

My statement was about how likely such an action was to succeed, his was about how even if it succeeded, it would still be limited in it's success.

I'm not, and have never, said that in every case the subject will default to believing us mistaken; rather that they'd choose whichever option seemed likeliest to them, the chances of us having this correct information vs. the chances of us being mislead/mistaken/mad.
 
The thing with the deceiver is that it is not a "press button to brainwash" device, you still need to do the legwork to actually convince anyone of anything with it.

Here's an example.

You are at a nice dinner party, and your conversation partner talks about how Elvis is still alive, he just got abducted by aliens, and then staged his own death.

You ask them to repeat themselves, and they do, with absoloute conviction.

Do you:
A: start making the huge mental shifts to work "the whole elvis thing" into your brain without parts of your worldview colliding.
or
B: nod and smile, then back away from the lunatic and try to never meet them again.
Right, I absolutely agree. Now explain to me how any of this applies to using the coin to convince the skaven that we would let him go after he cooperates with us.
 
There are two more effects (besides armor) that are translatable to TT:

Gilding both arms grants +10% Strength in the RPG, which is translatable to +1S on TT.
Gilding both legs grants +2 Move, which is straight-up +2M

Hmm. In that case I think the upgrade would cost an even hundred points. What do you think? That would make the giant movement eight, as fast as an unbarded horse, and strength seven, as powerful as a bolt thrower. Although, Giants do use a special attack table which means they don't use their strength as often As other units so that might discount the price slightly.

Posted from my iPhone. Please forgive any typos.
 
Right, I absolutely agree. Now explain to me how any of this applies to using the coin to convince the skaven that we would let him go after he cooperates with us.
because, especially to someone with a skaven's outlook on spycraft, the chances of it being a comforting lie told to a middle-man interrogator is higher than it being true?
 
Voting is open
Back
Top