Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
No he wants you to describe how you leave marienburg unable to have any control over the river, because long term that absolutely requires you to defacto conquer the place.
That... is a very different matter from a prolonged siege, and has little to do with any of the options beside the one which actually suggests reconquering the place. Removing the blockade does not equate conquering them, and it definitely doesn't require stopping them from trading, not in the long term at least, and even short term only counts if they throw their merchant vessels into the fight as well.
Even then, as I said in the previous post—admittedly answering you and not them—there are only two places on that map where Marienburg can actually blockade the river main river. Remove those, and you can get through just fine. It sure as hell doesn't require the large-scale destruction people seem to be implying.
 
@BoneyM, something I'm curious about- if Barak Varr has a fleet parked outside Marienburg, and sinks anything they put afloat and any related port facilities, would Marienburg even be capable of receiving foreign trade?

No, but a theoretical blockade-bust would do its best to limit the damage to military targets.

@BoneyM how big is Barak Varr's navy, anyway? We don't tend to think of the Dwarves as a naval power, but their ships are probably the scariest of anyone except the Druuchi's Black Arks, at least on an individual basis.

Small in raw numbers, big in raw tonnage. On their own, Barak Varr can go toe to toe with the navy of entire nations.

@BoneyM : Why isn't the Emperor considering handing the Elves an ultimatum about them either remaining neutral or picking a side? Considering that Marienburg is clearly generating a causus belli and to side with Marienburg would be an act of war against the Empire?

Elvish pride does not react well to being threatened by humans.

@BoneyM , would a more stereo typically Grey Wizard approach not be something we could recommend here, or would it be more something that would be carried out in conjunction with whatever answer we give?

Mathilde is being asked as an expert on the Dwarves, not as a Grey Wizard.

@BoneyM Can Mat even promise Barak Varr's navy?

Promise, no. Give a prediction about whether they'd be willing, yes.

@BoneyM, would The Empire of Man books cover Marienburg or would it be its own subject?

Included in Empire of Man.

Now, I seriously hope that Mathilde doesn't conceal from the Chamberlain that there is a very real possibility that Barak Varr would choose to break the blockade anyway through force and they are fully capable of it..... because concealing something like this and leaving the Chamberlain ignorant of this possibility, could backfire spectacularly, whatever you think about the risks of escalation.

All the negative consequences are falling on the Empire, so it's up to the Empire to decide whether it's a cause for war or not.

@BoneyM Is the High King one of the potential parties who might be asked to make up the loss of trade?

Almost certainly not.

The Grey Wizard assassins would be an utter nightmare for Marienburg without direct support from elven mages...and that would be an act of war against the Empire.

It's not an act of war to defend yourself against assassins.

@BoneyM How does Clan Huzkul fit into the traditional Clan->Profession system?

Warrior Clan. They tend to work differently to other clans in a number of ways, for fairly obvious reasons.

Also, I assume that Clan Angrund has been a specialized Elite Warrior Clan in the last few millenia, what with them being completely decked out in runic armaments. What does a Warrior Clan usually do in times of peace, fleeting as those are for the Dawi?

Train, guard trade routes, and go on minor expeditions.

Realistically though, why would Mathilde be confident that the Dawi will accept the plan?

For the same reason that Barak Varr bankrolled K8P.
 
Last edited:
What if they don't fold because they don't believe we'd be 'dumb' enough to shoot them and risk a war or collateral damage with elves in the city, and feel that they are in the right as they are sovereign over their waters and would expect to be able to control who comes in and out of their city ignoring for a moment that Marienburg has very heavy fortifications bristling with cannons.
Then we bring dwarven ambassadors who swear that if Marienburg doesn't stop, the shooting starts. And dwarves are not known for swearing oaths they will not keep.
 
Changing up trade routes will involve less death than a shooting war. The opposite impression is baffling.
IRL you'd have a point. But this is the Old World, where any place that isn't encircled by fortifications is as dangerous as any warzone. The roads pass through forests constantly full of beastmen, goblins and mythical beasts. The mountain passes have you contending with more goblins, orcs and skaven, possibly even dragon ogres if you are spectacularly unlucky.

Securing consistent trade routes through all that is absolutely going to cost more Imperial and Dawi lives than even if all of the Ironclads sent were to sink with all hands lost.
 
Changing up trade routes will involve less death than a shooting war. The opposite impression is baffling.
No changing trade routes will involve more deaths because all possible routes are rife with Orcs and Beastmen. They need to be cleared which means more death than a few that might die on Ironclads.

A war with Marienburg and Ulthuan isn't likely to strengthen the empire either.
No option in this list strengethen the Empire. We are just choosing where to take the hit.
 
Last edited:
No changing trade routes will involve more deaths because all possible routes are rife with Orcs and Beastmen. They need to be cleared which means more death than a few that might die on Ironclads.
Marching dwarfs though beast men ambush over and area the size of all Central Europe will cost orders of magnitude more lives than shooting at walls from an ironclad.
This, I think, is a claim that really needs to be backed by the GM.

We got a lot of explanations on stuff already, it seems very unlikely to me that something like "mass casualties" would fail to be mentioned.
 
Last edited:
Marching dwarfs though beast men ambush over and area the size of all Central Europe will cost orders of magnitude more lives than shooting at walls from an ironclad.
Otoh they have to do it anyway, there is no way to avoid having to secure trade routes.
And cleaning up roads is something they got to do time to time anyway.

Compared to that, distracting Barak Varr navy to go around entire not!Europe to go get stuck in a fight with Netherlands expy (who may or may not have support of Ulthuan) is a way more avoidable expense.
 
This, I think, is a claim that really needs to be backed by the GM.
It's already backed from the fact that only one of the options outlined flat out states will have both the Karaz Ankor and the Empire significantly weakened for years, and it isn't the option of gunboat diplomacy. Not might weaken, or could weaken, will weaken.
 
Last edited:
Otoh they have to do it anyway, there is no way to avoid having to secure trade routes.
And cleaning up roads is something they got to do time to time anyway.

Compared to that, distracting Barak Varr navy to go around entire not!Europe to go get stuck in a fight with Netherlands expy (who may or may not have support of Ulthuan) is a way more avoidable expense.

Humans would have to do it anyway in the normal run of things and to a lesser scale. Humans breed quicker and are not a dying race spectacularly ill equipped to fight in forests.
 
Otoh they have to do it anyway, there is no way to avoid having to secure trade routes.
And cleaning up roads is something they got to do time to time anyway.

Compared to that, distracting Barak Varr navy to go around entire not!Europe to go get stuck in a fight with Netherlands expy (who may or may not have support of Ulthuan) is a way more avoidable expense.
... you realize the whole point of the canal is so they don't, in fact, have to secure other, much more dangerous options? They're an alternative, not something that's happening anyway.
 
Elvish pride does not react well to being threatened by humans.
*Looks at other elves we've met.*
With our new super plan - namely: throw wood elves at it - absolutely nothing can go wrong!

Meanwhile, one wonders how to get elves and Dwarfs to play ball... Mathilde will be soon to be known as the insane maniac who acts as the go-between for trade deals between Dwarfs / Elves.
 
This, I think, is a claim that really needs to be backed by the GM.

We got a lot of explanations on stuff already, it seems very unlikely to me that something like "mass casualties" would fail to be mentioned.
Here let me get those.

@BoneyM Considering how rich dwarfs are, having the Ankor try to shoulder the Empire's burden presumably weakens them in more ways than just slightly smaller piles of gold, correct?

I am assuming securing new routes would stretch dwarfpower thinly?
As well as costing them influence.
The soft power it would cost them to secure alternate sources for goods the Empire needs, and secure safe passage for those goods from wherever they are to the Empire.
Metals, fabrics, specific kinds of timber, spices, alcohol, weapons. And luxuries aren't vital, but the tax money from them can be.
How important are said weapons? That... may be really crucial.
Depends how peaceful the coming years are.
 
Humans would have to do it anyway in the normal run of things and to a lesser scale. Humans breed quicker and are not a dying race spectacularly ill equipped to fight in forests.
I mean, option's description is "find alternative routes and pay money to Empire", so I am actually not quite sure where the whole "mass casualties" thing came from.

Really, what's up with the idea that economic response is going to be bloodier than naval war? Did I miss some WoGM that the "economic help" option is somehow "Karaz Ankor takes and holds all land and mans every trade post no matter cost in lives"?

Here let me get those.
This does not say mass casualties though? This says "costs influence to reroute trade so that it costs less to Empire to live in Marienburg blockade". Securing routes involves some risk, likely, but this is manifestly not a citation on mass casualties.
If the option involved something like "KaK marches on Sylvania and Badlands and loses thousands to secure trade", or something of similar magnitude, I am rather certain it would be mentioned explicitly, and not as "influence".

Edit: really, idea of economic help being more bloody than, you know, war, is just weird. Wars are not known for being peaceful, even limited ones.
They also have a bad habit of not staying limited, especially once weird alliances are invoked, but that's another matter.
 
Last edited:
I mean, option's description is "find alternative routes and pay money to Empire", so I am actually not quite sure where the whole "mass casualties" thing came from.

Really, what's up with the idea that economic response is going to be bloodier than naval war? Did I miss some WoGM that the "economic help" option is somehow "Karaz Ankor takes and holds all land and mans every trade post no matter cost in lives"?

It's secure land routes though the Old World, the Old World outside fortified bastions of civilizations is filled with an endless stream of murderous monstrosities. That is a fundamental fact of the setting,
 
It's secure land routes though the Old World, the Old World outside fortified bastions of civilizations is filled with an endless stream of murderous monstrosities. That is a fundamental fact of the setting,
This then folds into kind of thing everyone is doing each time they send caravan, and Dawi caravans were manned with Dawi even before, so presenting it as suddenly mass casualties where there where none before makes no sense.
 
Back
Top