Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
There are 'Imperial' Dwarf Clans older than the Empire and some Major Holds, but Clans that aren't part of the Karaz Ankor don't count as Clans for Karaz Ankor purposes. But it's not a judgey 'the Ancestor Gods disapprove of your lifestyle' thing, it's just how the Clan system works.
I thought the Clanless/Clan divide was (presented as being) about the lack of anyone vouching for them when they want to be included into the inner workings of Karaz Ankor daily life. So since Dwarves put a lot of weight into the quality of your ancestors and such I thought that, just like the offspring of high reputation non-Dwarves could have a leg up when dealing with the Dwarves (as long as they don't throw it away), so too could non-Karaz Ankor Dwarf Clans establish a good enough relation that members of said Expat Clan who want to return to the Karaz Ankor after all would be relatively welcome while even temporary visitors from those storied Expat Clans could be treated with more respect than pretty much anyone else who isn't Clan usually is.

Though I don't actually know what concrete on paper benefits Karaz Ankor Clan members have that make the divide wide enough that even good standing isn't enough. Like, other than prestige, honor and respect, what did the members of Clan Huzkul gain? And what will be forever denied to Mathilde if she doesn't let any Clan adopt her?
No, they were free to migrate to the surviving Holds. The Clans outside the Karaz Ankor are the Clans that deliberately left it.
Ah. I guess Clans that decide to live among Umgi without being officially considered as rejecting or being rejected by the Karaz Ankor are not a thing? Like, what's Clan Dourback's story?

Have whole Clans ever been exiled?

By the way, the big post where you share your notes on the K8P Clans and Karags is not threadmarked. I don't know if that's on purpose. I was looking for it trying to remember Clan Dourback's name and ties to Empire breweries.
(Of course, if you try explaining the real structure to the dwarves: "there's actually eight separate Wizard's Guilds, and they're all in Altdorf, and they're independent from one another except in the ways that they aren't, and one Grandmaster from one of them gets to be in charge of all of them, but they maintain their own internal structures and Guild secrets,"
Just explain that Wizard Guilds of each of the eight Winds aren't in the same Guild for the same reason that Hammerers, Carpenters and Blacksmiths aren't in the same Guild just because they all swing a hammer. Though explaining why then they all ultimately follow a single Grandmaster of Grandmasters who commands all eight even if they belong to only one will become tricky again. It would be like having river shipwrights and sea shipwrights be at the same time two Guilds with separate secrets and have the same Grandmaster.
From the Dwarf perspective, the Altdorf Wizard's Guild is weird that's it's in charge of all Wizards, and all Wizards have to be part of the Altdorf guild no matter what hold they're currently residing in, and their status in the Altdorf guild is usually more important than their status in the local guild, because of manling foolishness. Is that roughly correct?
Well, if a couple of Dwarven master craftsmen from different Holds take up residence in a new Hold that has no other craftsmen of their kind, do they automatically have to found a ne Guild? And as long as/if they don't, are they Guildless? What if they are only helping out and staying indefinitely but not permanently? I'd take Kragg the Grim as an example, except that he is a terrible fit for generalization.
But I also have to add that, although the etymology of human and humane is linked, the meaning isn't really. Humans can act monstrously just as often as they can act humanely.
People from a class associating virtues to themselves that they don't actually have is nothing new. "Noble" and "chivalrous" say hello.
2. Go to... I don't even know, it's probably a vote. Go to Belegar? Got to Thorgrim? Go to Kragg the Grim? To Thorek? We'd have to decide who on the dwarven side we want to be the one pushing this and then convince them it's a good idea, and I can see arguments for all sides. Belegar would be easiest to convince, Thorgrim is High King and knows something, and the runelords are the ones with the relevant knowledge.
3. Go to the colleges and....
We go to Belegar for funding and eventual access in exchange for information sharing, to Thorek do gauge interest in participation and ask for references to other Runesmiths that might be interested, to the Colleges for staff and more funding and to the Eonir for information (and maybe funding) in exchange for access.
Barring a major success with the Eonir, we start out with studying Waystones in the Empire proper and graduate to Dwarven Waystones if enough trust can be built and/or Belegar pushes for it.
Hmm. This project might take us further from K8P than I thought after all, at least initially.
Personally, I feel like it'd be easier to take over one or both of said population center (through bribery, assassination, or military force) than to try and start a new town from scratch. Why do that when the best spots are no doubt already host to towns? Get some reliable mercs, Winter Wolves, and a few other people like Johann involved, tell the bandits to gtfo or die (or maybe just skip to die, depending), figure out what to do with the Tilean mercs (hire? Chase away? Kill? Negotiate?), boom, steps 1, 2, 4 skipped as redundant.
First visit the bandit capital alone and anonymously. Instigate some kind of unrest. Assassinate the leader and make it look like an inside job.
Then roll up with a besieging army that has been recruited in the mean time and set up a traditional siege.
Personally infiltrate the city again and assassinate whoever became the new ruler, whoever we gauged to be their main rival during the struggle of taking the previous Border Prince's place, and multiple key generals and advisors (but not all advisors).
Have the populace open the gates due to complete lack of leadership (a very scary thing in the Border Prince region). Use the existence of at least some Dwarven forces as reassurance that we didn't come here to loot.
Make sure looting doesn't in fact happen.

By the way, how does Barak Varr handle/excuse being the financiers of a war of aggression with the goal of conquest? I assume outstanding grudges against banditry.
How we deal with the mercenary polity depends on diplomatic possibilities and the sensibilities of our Dwarven benefactors. Them deciding to get hired by our enemy could be a blessing in disguise.
 
Or, you know, we could do none of those things and instead found another community closer to the pass and let them stay exactly where they currently are.
The whole point of the Border Princess gig is fighting pirates on the Howling River.

So we'd have to fight the pirates on the Howling River.
 
Or, you know, we could do none of those things and instead found another community closer to the pass and let them stay exactly where they currently are.
I don't think the community led by bandits is going to be okay with our "preventing bandits" approach. Nor the one led by mercenaries who we'll be taking the job from.

When the fighting folk stop getting anything from the location, they'll either move on or start attacking us. Either way we'll end up with a couple of towns that are unprotected and having to choose between "abandon them to die" or "take over at swordpoint"
 
The whole point of the Border Princess gig is fighting pirates on the Howling River.

So we'd have to fight the pirates on the Howling River.

Sure, but that doesn't require kicking farmers out their homes or conquering them at the point of a sword. It will require putting an end to the cozy little bandit/mercenary cooperative relationship they've got going, but those armed robbers and the actual people farming and otherwise making a living off the land are not necessarily the same people. I'm just saying; there are ways to do that don't involve conquest or forced assimilation!

I don't think the community led by bandits is going to be okay with our "preventing bandits" approach. Nor the one led by mercenaries who we'll be taking the job from.

It really depends on who the "them" is in this statement:

It's that, kick them out of their homes entirely at spearpoint, or kill them outright.

I'm not sure how much loyalty I expect from the people who actually have homes to be kicked out of to the bandits.
 
By the way, how does Barak Varr handle/excuse being the financiers of a war of aggression with the goal of conquest? I assume outstanding grudges against banditry.
They're keeping a nice step removed from everything - they're "willing to aid" someone in doing it, not actually doing anything themselves or even hiring someone to do it.

They wouldn't pay us to do it, they'd give us money because we need their aid in establishing our new polity.

Sure, but that doesn't require kicking farmers out their homes or conquering them at the point of a sword. It will require putting an end to the cozy little bandit/mercenary cooperative relationship they've got going, but those armed robbers and the actual people farming and otherwise making a living off the land are not necessarily the same people. I'm just saying; there are ways to do that don't involve conquest or forced assimilation!
The borderlands are not a nice safe region. Get rid of the soldiers in the town and you don't have a peaceful town - you have a target.

I'm not sure how much loyalty I expect from the people who actually have homes to be kicked out of to the bandits.
Doesn't matter about their loyalty. If the bandits leave they either get conquered or have to leave, because the bandits will not have left them with a surfeit of non-bandit protectors.
 
The whole point of the Border Princess gig is fighting pirates on the Howling River.

So we'd have to fight the pirates on the Howling River.
Yeah. Establishing some kind of town next to them first, just to then fight endless skirmishes against an enemy polity or two whenever they decide to do piracy stuff sounds tiresome, inefficient and even dangerous. I'd rather do them like Belegar did the squatters of K8P. Form an expedition of some size and krump a good strategic target. Except of course we are fighting Humans, so we try to preserve as many civilians as possible and make surrender palatable to men at arms that aren't in command as well. Hell, I'd be in favor of making the commander(s) surrender too, if Mathilde's skillset didn't make other options much more juicy.

Though... Ranald might frown upon murder here. And we also have more than enough tools for a bloodless takedown of at least the Border Prince. Like putting him in to sleep in an abandoned cellar somewhere.
Sure, but that doesn't require kicking farmers out their homes or conquering them at the point of a sword. It will require putting an end to the cozy little bandit/mercenary cooperative relationship they've got going, but those armed robbers and the actual people farming and otherwise making a living off the land are not necessarily the same people. I'm just saying; there are ways to do that don't involve conquest or forced assimilation!
Why would we displace the civilians? I'd rather keep the local workforce and tax base and only import military and administrative staff.
 
I don't think the community led by bandits is going to be okay with our "preventing bandits" approach. Nor the one led by mercenaries who we'll be taking the job from.

When the fighting folk stop getting anything from the location, they'll either move on or start attacking us. Either way we'll end up with a couple of towns that are unprotected and having to choose between "abandon them to die" or "take over at swordpoint"

Look @kingreaper , if I could sum up?

I think there's a way to play the quest taking this path that does not leave us players feeling too icky because we're forcefully conquering a bunch of farmers at swordpoint or driving them off their land. Is that clear enough what my actual concerns are? Rather than a hypothetical argument about in-world strategies, consider me to be making a meta statement about, "I am sure BoneyM isn't going to be forcing the thread into a position where we have to go, 'wait are we the colonialists'?"

EDIT: If you want to argue further, let's at least hash it out on that level before going back to whatever you think makes the most sense in-world.
 
Last edited:
I thought the Clanless/Clan divide was (presented as being) about the lack of anyone vouching for them when they want to be included into the inner workings of Karaz Ankor daily life. So since Dwarves put a lot of weight into the quality of your ancestors and such I thought that, just like the offspring of high reputation non-Dwarves could have a leg up when dealing with the Dwarves (as long as they don't throw it away), so too could non-Karaz Ankor Dwarf Clans establish a good enough relation that members of said Expat Clan who want to return to the Karaz Ankor after all would be relatively welcome while even temporary visitors from those storied Expat Clans could be treated with more respect than pretty much anyone else who isn't Clan usually is.

Such a relationship is theoretically possible and might exist somewhere, but that's not part of the formal Clan system, that's just reputation and preconception. Any wholesale migration into a Dwarfhold would be negotiated with the King of said Dwarfhold.

Though I don't actually know what concrete on paper benefits Karaz Ankor Clan members have that make the divide wide enough that even good standing isn't enough. Like, other than prestige, honor and respect, what did the members of Clan Huzkul gain? And what will be forever denied to Mathilde if she doesn't let any Clan adopt her?

An automatic place within a Dwarfhold for life and the knowledge that they unambiguously belong somewhere, unless they do something truly heinous or deliberately repudiate it, and the same for all of their descendants. And being able to pursue membership of a Guild.

And what will be forever denied to Mathilde if she doesn't let any Clan adopt her?

A Clan.

Ah. I guess Clans that decide to live among Umgi without being officially considered as rejecting or being rejected by the Karaz Ankor are not a thing? Like, what's Clan Dourback's story?

Their story is K8P is hideously underpopulated and the normal rules don't apply if a King is willing to rubber-stamp you.

Have whole Clans ever been exiled?

Every living member of a Clan, yes. At times that's only been one or two Dwarves. The Clan itself, there's no mechanism for that.

By the way, the big post where you share your notes on the K8P Clans and Karags is not threadmarked. I don't know if that's on purpose. I was looking for it trying to remember Clan Dourback's name and ties to Empire breweries.

It's not threadmarked because it's notes, not canon. Everything in it is subject to change.

By the way, how does Barak Varr handle/excuse being the financiers of a war of aggression with the goal of conquest? I assume outstanding grudges against banditry.

They're not. They made a general statement about possible support they might give to a theoretical independent third party at some vague point in the future.
 
I think there's a way to play the quest taking this path that does not leave us players feeling too icky because we're forcefully conquering a bunch of farmers at swordpoint or driving them off their land. Is that clear enough what my actual concerns are? Rather than a hypothetical argument about in-world strategies, consider me to be making a meta statement about, "I am sure BoneyM isn't going to be forcing the thread into a position where we have to go, 'wait are we the colonialists'?"
I'm sure he won't force us into that position.

But voting to run either Borderlands or Sylvania is voting to be in that position.

When you vote for "lets run the conquest/colonisation of a region" you should expect to end up being a conqueror and/or colonialist.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure he won't force us into that position.

But voting to run either Borderlands or Sylvania is voting to be in that position.

When you vote for "lets run the conquest/colonisation of a region" you shouldn't surprised-pikachu if you end up being a conqueror and/or colonialist.

There is a lot of genuinely empty land in the Borderlands that does not need to be taken away from anyone.

Sylvania is a different kettle of fish, but I think you can at least make an argument for Roswita's legal jurisdiction and in any case we haven't gotten the in-world pitch for that one so I'm reluctant to get too deep into discussing it.
 
There is a lot of genuinely empty land in the Borderlands that does not need to be taken away from anyone.
Sure. And if we just wanted to settle "somewhere in the Borderlands" that'd be fine. But we'd be going for a valuable part that we know is already in use.

EDIT:
Sylvania is a different kettle of fish, but I think you can at least make an argument for Roswita's legal jurisdiction
Legal jurisdiction declared by what is essentially a foreign power is just a thin veil for conquest. The Empire could easily muster up "legal jurisdiction" over Marienburg if it liked.
 
Last edited:
@kingreaper

If Border Princess wins, the thread will vote on Mathilde's approach and I really doubt that the winner is going to be for her to charge in sword-first and murder whoever moves and enslave whoever doesn't. Most parts of the Border Princes have a new ruler on a yearly basis and Sylvania is literally Sylvania. The historical parallels you're really going out of your way to draw here are not a good fit at all.
 
Last edited:
They're keeping a nice step removed from everything - they're "willing to aid" someone in doing it, not actually doing anything themselves or even hiring someone to do it.

They wouldn't pay us to do it, they'd give us money because we need their aid in establishing our new polity.
I'd really like at least a small throng of Dwarven forces though, even if I wouldn't propose anything as crazy as spending our Boon on it. And Dwarves don't do mercenary work. We'd need some proof of Grudge-worthy behavior.
I think there's a way to play the quest taking this path that does not leave us players feeling too icky because we're forcefully conquering a bunch of farmers at swordpoint or driving them off their land.
It's feudalism. If we clamp down on any form of looting and don't expropriate any land then nothing will change for the farmers in the short term. And I'm pretty sure SV is going to do its best to at least marginally improve their lot in the long term.

I really don't see much difference with what Roswita did to all the Sylvanian farmers, even if "your current lords are vampires and also they started it" is better for PR.
And being able to pursue membership of a Guild.
That's a big one. I forgot just how big of an exception Gotrek was.
Their story is K8P is hideously underpopulated and the normal rules don't apply if a King is willing to rubber-stamp you.
I meant their past. How did they end up in the Empire in the first place?
They're not. They made a general statement about possible support they might give to a theoretical independent third party at some vague point in the future.
This might be the final kick in the butt I needed to recalibrate.

In general this last post was really great to me. Thanks for all the interesting info.
 
Last edited:
The thread will vote on Mathilde's approach and I really doubt that the winner is going to be for her to charge in sword-first and murder whoever moves and enslave whoever doesn't.
Well, I know one frequent poster who will be voting for that part, at least :V

if you interpret "whoever doesn't [move]" as "dead people"
 
Last edited:
The thread will vote on Mathilde's approach and I really doubt that the winner is going to be for her to charge in sword-first and murder whoever moves and enslave whoever doesn't. Most parts of the Border Princes have a new ruler on a yearly basis and Sylvania is literally Sylvania. The historical parallels you're really going out of your way to draw here are not a good fit at all.
I'm not trying to draw any historical parallels, I'm looking at the situations as they stand (entering a region that isn't ruled by the empire, and making it ruled by the empire/by us) and saying that if you want to take over a region you have to take over that region.

I also never suggested charging in sword-first. Briefvoice was saying that taking over a region by forcing out or buying out its current rulers while armed was unacceptable to them, I was arguing that the other options were more violent.
 
Last edited:
There is a lot of genuinely empty land in the Borderlands that does not need to be taken away from anyone.
Surprisingly little, actually. What empty land there is tends to be empty because the land is genuinely worthless by even Border Prince standards.

Direct quote from Renegade Crowns, page 107: "Conquest is the obvious way to increase the strength and size of a principality. Indeed, it is pretty much the only way; very little of the Borderlands is actually empty."
 
Last edited:
By the way @BoneyM , purely theoretical question to which i have no desire to find an answer to in quest but, to what extent are imperial dwarfs dependent on Karaz Ankor emotionally? The sealing of the holds is presented as surefire extinction of dwarfs forever, but the imperial dwarfs apparently make up to 10% of some Imperial cities and stuff. Does this mean that Imperial dwarfs could reasonably rise back again?

Or would the loss of their ancestral places in actuallity, instead of just theory, crush them so deep they would dwindle too.

EDIT: I mean i know it would be a cultural break and technology wise it would be a comparable jump to war of the beard to silver age, but, you know what i meant. Iju st the viability of survival.
 
Last edited:
Alright, so I'm trying to understand this: What is the option in Sylvania that doesn't end up with us being in a situation of "Obey the laws of the Empire, get punished by the laws of the Empire, or leave"?

What is the option in the borderlands that leaves the existing bandit-run polity with the same leadership, without allowing them to remain bandits?
 
Honestly, I am unsure if conquest/colonialism is something that can even apply in an area where the ruler changes every 3 years. Is there even a historical precedent? Wouldn't the farmers and other people just shrug at this point, get informed about the new "laws" and continue on with the program? It's no different than normal, except maybe if we manage to be successful they'll face fewer raids.

Edit: ninja'd by the QM
 
Last edited:
The whole point is to not spend Dwarf lives on it, though?
Well, keep the force small and in reserve? I'd mostly want them to show off just how boned our opponents are during a siege.
But yeah, Dwarves wouldn't much go for that. We could try to get Dwarven manned artillery though. Like just a couple of light canon.
Hell, this might also be the perfect opportunity to convince Karak Kadrin that there is a final legitimate use for the landboat steam wagons after all. relatively fast and raid-resistant artillery for small scale conflicts.

P.S.: The Border Princess option might be growing on me, and the Waystone Project has lost a bit of its luster due to very probably starting off not in K8P, but despite appearances my tier list of choices hasn't really changed yet, except maybe internally in each tier.
Wait, are we going to be voting on that?
I don't think that there are any current plans for that. He was just answering my questions.
 
Alright, so I'm trying to understand this: What is the option in Sylvania that doesn't end up with us being in a situation of "Obey the laws of the Empire, get punished by the laws of the Empire, or leave"?

What is the option in the borderlands that leaves the existing bandit-run polity with the same leadership, without allowing them to remain bandits?
The Orders of Empire are free. Try to come to terms with Elector Count if you are Emperor, try to come to terms with Elector Count if you are noble who is ranked less than Elector Count. We could get away with a lot as noble under Roswita, as long as she sanctioned it. WRT Border Princes, we could absorb them and change their mission goals and parameters, destroy them utterly or, if they are too far for us to exercise power, try to make deals. Until such a time when we can absorb them or destroy them utterly. Until we controlled the entire part of the river we are supposed to.
 
Back
Top