Remove ads

Warhammer Fantasy: Divided Loyalties - an Advisor's Quest

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Voting is open
Reader mode
BeepSmile said:
You are arguing down paths that have lost before. Your argument is one of scale, not "right Vs wrong"

I was being cutesy in some of my posts because I am very, very tired.

If you think that "it might be a threat" is going to actually get a "strike first" type vote going, you'll be arguing against every single bit of eloquence and focus I have come tomorrow.

Please also note that while I am hopeful to make friends, I also voted to have Kragg the Grimm on hand for the cordon, just for the chance this person who is a dragon is hostile to us (Mathilde/Dwarves) also.

There is a difference between hope and naivety.

Consider what you want to have us try. Consider the risks of your desires being attempted. And if a vote to attack wins, and the attack itself wins, consider the cost in lives to kill this one person. Consider weather trying to argue for attempted murder based on fear is worth your effort.

Edit: tl,Dr: your response question was dumb and bad.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It is a vote of right vs wrong, and the dragon is a threat, maybe not an enemy, but 100% a confirmed threat.

And if I vote to attack, it would be minimizing risks, like dropping 2 anvils of doom with half a dozen caster on dispel duty while he fights a Waaagh.
 
das_slash said:
Amm, stop completely humanizing the dragon then? I am not fantasising or anything, I just think it's the best course of action, I would vote to kill him even if he didn't had a coin to his name.
It's not about killing him, it's about protecting the Karak, proactively.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not humanizing it. I'm recognizing that it's a sapient person. I believe that sapient people have rights and that you aren't allowed to kill them outside of circumstances like "a state of war exists between you." I did not expect this to be a hot take.
wrecksalot said:
please stop defending the person who is in the process of commiting mass murder because someone accidentally disturbed his or her nap.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't know about you but I feel like chemical weapons are a hostile act.

(Also, like, when it comes to mass-killing of skaven, we have zero ground to stand on.)
 
das_slash said:
Amm, stop completely humanizing the dragon then? I am not fantasising or anything, I just think it's the best course of action, I would vote to kill him even if he didn't had a coin to his name.
It's not about killing him, it's about protecting the Karak, proactively.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Even if you decide that the risk posed by someone as powerful as this dragon makes it reasonable to consider murdering them, it's almost certainly not going to happen without a massive fight. Which means that to avoid a powerful person maybe attacking K8P, you want to attack them and get into a big fight, guaranteeing that they attack us. This seems like a pretty poor strategy, overall.
 
das_slash, I think I can see why you chose the S9 as your avatar.

Edit: This is just me noting the coincidence of the avatar and das_slash's relatively drastic course of action. Basically the guy with the S9 avatar wants to kill someone, how funny. Please don't try to read deeper, I haven't written it deeper.
 
Last edited:
Prospalz said:
It is a sentient being.

You are not winning this argument if this comes to the point of mod intervention.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I feel like people are baiting for mod intervention, by repeatedly minimising the risks the dragon posses and selling his humanity.
We have killed literally thousands of people this turn, at least 50 of them likely complete innocents.

Every vote for "murder the brood mothers" was just as bad a killing the dragon.

You can argue "but they were chaos worshippers" or whatever,.but that is no more of an argument that "it is a dragon".
 
wrecksalot said:
please stop defending the person who is in the process of commiting mass murder because someone accidentally disturbed his or her nap.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Uh....I don't really have a horse in this race, but I feel like I should point out that killing someone who woke you up from your nap, and killing someone who leaked poison gas into your bedroom which woke you from your nap, are two very different things. One is murder and the other is entirely justified self defense.
 
Last edited:
adaer said:
Even if you decide that the risk posed by someone as powerful as this dragon makes it reasonable to consider murdering them, it's almost certainly not going to happen without a massive fight. Which means that to avoid a powerful person maybe attacking K8P, you want to attack them and get into a big fight, guaranteeing that they attack us. This seems like a pretty poor strategy, overall.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not saying we charge at it right now, I'm saying if we have a chance to kill it with relative safety, we take it.

adaer said:
I don't agree with them either, and this may be a joke, but going "you seem like an evil serial killer" still seems rather rude.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Last edited:
Redshirt Army said:
As long as we're counting our omlettes before we confirm the existence of any chickens, here's my pie-in-the-sky deal that I'd hope to negotiate with the dragon:

Article:
BARRING such greviances against the dwarf peoples as to incur a Grudge, unknown to either party at the time of the agreement, it is established that:

• The Ice Dragon shall not act against the dwarven kingdom of Karak Eight Peaks, including but not limited to the form of razing said kingdom or its armies to the ground.
• The Ice Dragon shall limit its territories within Karak Eight Peaks to the locations listed within this agreement, or with future agreements with rulers of the kingdom.
• The Ice Dragon shall allow the kingdom of Karak Eight Peaks to claim any items within its hoard of cultural or historical (but not magical or runic) significance, in exchange for twice said items weight in diamonds (of equal size to any jewelled portions) and gold (for any other portion).

• The Kingdom of Karak Eight Peaks shall allow the Ice Dragon unrestricted remit to establish its territory within all parts of the mountain Karak Zilfin that lie above the City of Pillars, for a period of no less than one thousand years.
• The Kingdom of Karak Eight Peaks will make no demands of the Ice Dragon nor disturb it should it enter slumber, and will guard the dragon against any intruders that would disturb its rest.
• The Kingdom of Karak Eight Peaks shall guard the dragon's hoard against all outside intrusion or theft, and will pursue any thieves that do attempt to steal from the dragon's hoard to the ends of the world.
• The Kingdom of Karak Eight Peaks, in exchange for the Ice Dragon's assistance in the reclamation of the Eight Peaks, grants the dragon legal rights to all dwarven gold and crafts already within its hoard, in addition to ten thousand ingots of silver.

MATHILDE WEBER, Thane of Karak Eight Peaks
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A bit overly generos, don't you think?
 
EVA-Saiyajin said:
I personally think all this talk of deals and treaties to be decidedly premature.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This very much so. We don't know enough about the dragon yet, and even if we did know its temperament, I'd still wait until Belegar or Kazrik have arrived to deal with the dragon. Mostly on account of their higher diplomacy scores, and not making a deal without Belegar's consent.

Also, counting chickens before they've hatched and all that.
 
das_slash said:
Every vote for "murder the brood mothers" was just as bad a killing the dragon.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think the dragon is about to break down such that death by our hands is a mercy kill.

If that changes, feel free to bring this up again.

(I do also feel the need to point out, at no point did we vote for the Rat-Mothers to die. We voted for who would do it. That they were going to die was out of our hands.)
 
Last edited:
If this conversation persists, the odds that it gets mod intervention is really high. I don't know about you, but I don't want this thread to get locked during war turns. So, in a spirit of iterated prisoner's dilemmas, I am unilaterally disarming. Let us change the subject.

I noticed the tag "this train is made of boxcars" was added, which made me laugh. If building the Temple to the Gambler unlocks a followup action, do we want to try to get that in the coming turns? I feel like after this war interlude is a great strike-while-the-iron-is-hot opportunity to proselytize for Ranald.
 
das_slash said:
I feel like people are baiting for mod intervention, by repeatedly minimising the risks the dragon posses and selling his humanity.
We have killed literally thousands of people this turn, at least 50 of them likely complete innocents.

Every vote for "murder the brood mothers" was just as bad a killing the dragon.

You can argue "but they were chaos worshippers" or whatever,.but that is no more of an argument that "it is a dragon".
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Do not fucking pull this shit
Mors destruction was necessary because they were an active threat
The caretakers death was necessary because they were fanatically hostile and taking them alive simply wasn't feasible
The broodmothers were a flat out mercy kill, we couldn't have kept them alive if we honestly wanted to, their bodies were literally going to fail them and thats skipping over how utterly tortured their existence was

The Dragon is an unknown, it may well be hostile and unreasonable, forcing us to have to take hostile action, but it may well not be
The situation is not equivalent to Mors and the Skaven and you should damn well know that

Do not blatantly twist the facts this way
 
In the interest of maintaining peace, I will stop now, let the votes and dice decide when it comes to that.
I just want people to know that my interest is in protecting the Karak at any cost, that's what I care about, we just disagree on what to do to that end.
 
Luminous said:
A bit overly generos, don't you think?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It formally rids dwarves of having to reclaim its hoard (good for us, because the dragon would never agree to that), sets up an exchange for swapping out items of sentimental value, and agrees that neither of us should bother the other. The deal is sealed with a fraction of Asarnil's standard price.
picklepikkl said:
I noticed the tag "this train is made of boxcars" was added, which made me laugh.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It is pretty funny. We got the Box Cars on the tower, and we decided that it'd be a temple to the Gambler, and on the turn that we're going to actually build the temple we got Box Cars again. Perhaps it's a sign? :V
 
So, because people are going to ignore the entirety of either side's argument based on just one part, I feel like I have to be the middleman. @das_slash killing someone just because they're a threat to you is just plain immoral and can lead to the rationalization of pretty much any form of murder. It's also probably against the board rules, so I would suggest laying off before someone steps in. Hostile factions are one thing, but just a person with the capability of threatening you? Not okay.
Everyone else, on the other hand, should also note that they had a fair point about not paying the dragon. Sure, making it a friend would be cool, sure, if it ends up doing something for us is cool, but essentially paying a person so that they don't kill you is basically subjecting yourself to slavery.
 
I feel it's worth pointing out that the dragon is probably the most dangerous thing in the whole of k8p at the moment. It's not going to be as simple as "kill the dragon".
I mean, just look at what it did to skyre. The thing went and hunted down every single skaven in a wholeass mountain, and then went to hunt more of them in other mountains. If we poke it wrong it'll do the same thing to us, or at least try to, which will undoubtedly cost us more lives than we can afford to spend, and for very little gain to boot(relatively speaking).
 
Ericwinter said:
So, because people are going to ignore the entirety of either side's argument based on just one part, I feel like I have to be the middleman. @das_slash killing someone just because they're a threat to you is just plain immoral and can lead to the rationalization of pretty much any form of murder. It's also probably against the board rules, so I would suggest laying off before someone steps in. Hostile factions are one thing, but just a person with the capability of threatening you? Not okay.
Everyone else, on the other hand, should also note that they had a fair point about not paying the dragon. Sure, making it a friend would be cool, sure, if it ends up doing something for us is cool, but essentially paying a person so that they don't kill you is basically subjecting yourself to slavery.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This thread moves fast, but they already stopped arguing. No need to keep worrying at the issue.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Voting is open
Remove ads
Back
Top