Re: Game Discussion

by **Septon Arlyn** Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:00 am

If I could comment on this thread, I might be able to clear up IC confusion / or threatening that may have been seen. IC Septon Arlyn might notice that, even though Ser Raynald meant well, simply trying to get the information shared that we have already offered. If there is any additional information that is more damning then the information that we have gathered, then the situation would look a lot less damning.

The Dulvers have already publicly accounted for their evidence they have gathered in the posts

here

[url:2o48ai1v]http:
//dragonsdance.
forumatic.
com/viewtopic.
php?f=183&
t=1925&
start=130#p56253[/url:2o48ai1v]

and here

[url:2o48ai1v]http:
//dragonsdance.
forumatic.
com/viewtopic.
php?f=183&
t=1925&
start=130#p56279[/url:2o48ai1v]

I know I have already spoken with Baelon about it OOC in PM, but we are looking for collaboration from house coldbrook. Accusing us of withholding information and not wanting to work with other houses feels very metta, considering every action we have taken IC has been in trying to find the facts about what happened.

But instead we are met with accusations and name calling IC, therefore IC we have reacted offended. I understand that the coldbrooks feel justified IC because of something that as happened behind the curtains in their house forms. That is fine, but understand that from an outsider looking in, this situation looks very poorly on them from our houses perspective.

TL;
DR:
Let me intervine with Ser Raynald and attempt to calm him down, I am friends with Lady Corrine and would not be a fan of the way he just treated her.

I think that at least lady Corrine, Ser Raynald, and Septon Arlyn wish to work together, even if IC Ser Raynald acted somewhat intimidatingly.

IC I can explain that Ser Raynald did not mean to threaten Lady Corrine and attempt to mend some bridges.

by **Gwyneth Drakeson** Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:05 am

I know I have already spoken with Baelon about it OOC in PM, but we are looking for collaboration from house coldbrook. Accusing us of withholding information and not wanting to work with other houses feels very metta, considering every action we have taken IC has been in trying to find the facts about what happened.

But instead we are met with accusations and name calling IC, therefore IC we have reacted offended. I understand that the coldbrooks feel justified IC because of something that as happened behind the curtains in their house forms. That is fine, but understand that from an outsider looking in, this situation looks very poorly on them from our houses perspective.

I'd agree the situation deteriorated, and our side didn't come off well. The accusation wasn't meta, it was more out of temperament and reaction. Hot blood. The reality is that both your House and ours knows the same thing, and knew it at more or less the same time frame. Neither of us have had a good interlude to bring it up. The difference is that we decided to act immediately on what we knew...with many unintended consequences.

This will of course all be discussed at the IC meeting.

Your IC reaction seems fine to me, for what transpired. It's my hope we'll be able to make amends.

by **Loreia** Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:11 am

Ser Raynald Dulver wrote:I do not know how to make my point any more clear than this: you're saying that, as my character has this "
seductive air"
around him (he moves swiftly, he is pretty, he has that kind of look on him, he is gracious and all) I can't complain if suddenly one other player considers that my character is seducing his character. What happened is that I unconsciously seduced the PC. Well, of course this is nonsense. If no one here can see what I'm talking about then there is nothing else to do.

If you have a habit of unconsciously making the signals that send the message regardless of who you're talking to, sure, someone might get the idea that you're being suggestive towards them. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're seduced, nor in the previous sense does your behavior mean that Corrine is intimidated whether you intended for her to be or not.

I hope Arlyn won't be against collaboration with us in the future, despite the fallout from the mess in roleplay.

by **Septon Arlyn** Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:20 am

IC I'm going to be tepid about working with any Coldbrooks or drakesons until the situation has been resolved, and apologies have been made ect. But that does not mean that he is not going to work with people from House Coldbrook. He still likes Ser Jorah, although is a little leery about the fact he was at the iron mines and the whole situation appears fishy to him, but I am planning on donating some personal wealth to the rebuilding of the Sept and am still planning on approaching the Dulvers about helping rebuild the Sept, (as well as trying to help with the village of blackbuckle situation). But right now his concern is finding the wildfyre. He also still likes Loriena as he feels she is honorable, and was also not directly involved in the Iron mine debacle so would be much more willing to work with her. Mostly he feels that House Coldbrook and Drakeson had a breakdown in their leadership, so most of my IC animosity will be directed toward Lord Daveth

by **Gwyneth Drakeson** Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:22 am

Understood. We have plans to address such concerns IC.

by **Septon Arlyn** Tue Nov 17, 2015 3:08 am

so pressed if translated into Portuguese means pressionado, when backwords translating it, it also comes out at comprimido which can mean squeeze or tighten, so what I'm thinking he may have meant, for other English speakers, is that Ser Raynald squinted at lady corrine, which I feel is a much more controlled action then the wild eyed look described in the first part of the post. So maybe threatening, but not quite the uncontrolled expression I'm thinking that people may have interpreted it as

translations were courtesy of [url:2u8prckm]http:
//translation.
babylon.
com/english/to-portuguese/[/url:2u8prckm]

by **Lady Corrine Marsten** Tue Nov 17, 2015 3:35 am

If my opinion is worth anything at all, IC Corrine does not feel like she is being directly threatened. To her, Raynald is just being rude and taunting, which she dislikes, but is more inclined to stand up to than be afraid.

by **Ser Raynald Dulver** Tue Nov 17, 2015 3:48 am

Yes, I used hard-pressed to describe almost closed eyes of someone that is trying to read something very small, or in the case, he is looking very hard to Corrine as to read if she's being honest or not. Thank you Septon, even I forgot about that part!

by **Baelon Drakeson** Tue Nov 17, 2015 12:51 pm

Septon Arlyn wrote: I know I have already spoken with Baelon about it OOC in PM, but we are looking for collaboration from house coldbrook. Accusing us of withholding information and not wanting to work with other houses feels very metta, considering every action we have taken IC has been in trying to find the facts about what happened.

But instead we are met with accusations and name calling IC, therefore IC we have reacted offended. I understand that the coldbrooks feel justified IC because of something that as happened behind the curtains in their house forms. That is fine, but understand that from an outsider looking in, this situation looks very poorly on them from our houses perspective.

There is nothing meta about our reactions to House Dulver - actually, it's not even House Dulver as a whole, it's all been the Septon, I believe, but that is coincidental.

First off, and of course this is purely OOC knowledge, the two occasions of not sharing info with the Septon (Ser Jorah and then the mines) were for very, very different IC reasons. If you don't want to take my word for it, Reader has access to our forums and can verify.

With Ser Jorah, we have IC reasons for limiting the information spread of certain investigations. IC I understand that can look like we are trying to hide something, but I'll tell you, for the sake of trying to bring peace to the OOC world, that Ser Jorah was ordered not to reveal certain information because, in modern terms, it is "
part of an ongoing investigation"
. Remember that we've only been in the area for three days. We are only just starting to put a picture together of what has happened. Combine that with reasons to believe that investigators were tampering with evidence, would it really be prudent to share our information with other investigators and risk having very important truths be buried?

With the mines, we completed our investigation mere IC minutes before House Dulver. I chose to act on that information immediately, for various reasons, some IC some OOC, some good and some not so good. It was a complicated mess of motivations. As for our IC reaction, remember, Septon Arlyn appeared on the scene with an accusation on his lips, and consistently acted (IC) in a manner which I (and, I think, others in House Coldbrook) felt was unreasonable and inflammatory. I'm not saying that was your motivation (OOC or IC) but that is how I interpreted it IC - you seemed more interested in pursuing green politics than working with us to find the wildfire, which we view (to use another modern phrase) as a "
clear and present danger"
. How else should we have reacted to that?

One final note, this one quasi-mechanical - intrigue yield offers are completely and totally OOC. They have to be, because they can include things that are not IC negotiable - asking for particular information you OOC but not IC know the other person has, disposition increases, etc. It is a negotiation between players, not characters. There is no IC information learned, no IC communication. There should be no IC reaction. If an offer is accepted, then it takes effect, which might mean that there is some RP of a negotiation, but not necessarily. In fact, a yield might require the opposite.

Regarding the challenge and everything that followed, I suggest retconning out all posts after the Coldbrooks left and restarting from there - the challenge makes no sense with Baelon not there to hear it, and so all the reactions to it seem a bit nonsensical. That said, I enjoyed the way the challenge was phrased, Raynald - very Martinesque. That being said, making a it a duel to the death is a bit over the top. You may think from the events with Athelstan that I the player go in for that sort of thing, but believe me, I don't. Everything that happened in the Athelstan scene sickened me. I don't mind PC vs PC competition, even serious competition, but a fight to the death over a verbal argument? No, that's not something I as a player will deal with.

by **Theomore Tullison** Tue Nov 17, 2015 5:14 pm

The problem with treating yields as entirely OOC is that they would need an IC anchor. Same as intrigue objectives.

I kinda want to comment on a few examples from the thread everyone's talking about:

Athelstan truthfully shares everything he knows about all acts of planting, altering, or removing evidence from all investigation sites, by himself or by others.
Athelstan truthfully shares everything he knows about the wildfire, including it's origin, original location, current location, who (if anyone) helped him move it, who else knows of it's existence and/or location, and what he knows of his own or other people's plans for it.
Athelstan truthfully shares all of his motivations for returning to the mines with Corrine.

Here's my beef: Initimidate has limitations, in this case, winning makes Athelstan amiable, and even an amiable Athelstan is not likely to divulge all of that. Considering that you did not offer any counter, odds are that your objective is at least to get all of that out of him. In frankness, the yield Athelstan offers is probably all you would get had you won this intrigue.

1) Baelon will reveal his investigation results to Septon Arlyn and Lady Corrine Marsten (via PM, with Reader included for verification)
EDIT: Clarification: this would represent an IC private conversation between the three of them.
1b) one logistical caveat - information on Kyle Bracken is not to be shared with anyone else until I have finished my scene with him (and I reserve the right to make him harder to find should I deem it appropriate).
2) Septon Arlyn will agree that Baelon acted appropriately given the gravity of the situation, and will share that opinion freely (now and in the future).
3) Baelon and Septon Arlyn both move to Amiable.

Again, you are asking for far too much, in this case Arlyn decided to just let you get standard charm results, as previously discussed. To get your stated objective in full would require two successful charm intrigues plus a convince.

Objective: Convince Septon Arlyn that Athelstan confessed, then committed suicide rather than be imprisoned, and that confession of falsifying evidence means that we were right to question him. We were right by virtue of *being right*.

That's not a bad objective in and of itself. But this one, I suspect, is an objective that is highly unreasonable to expect that Arlyn can be swayed towards getting behind.

And there's a feeling here where I think that some players are reading the intrigue rules too strict, as has been said before, intrigue isn't mind control, it makes people do what they ordinarily wouldn't, not what they never would do. And I feel as if though there is a bit of a push to enforce an interpretation of intrigue where one character may force another into it, and then try to get too much gain out of intrigue, possibly pushing them out of the scene if they want to quit.

Anyway, that's the backdrop, my view on intrigue is that:
1. Anyone should be allowed to say: No, my character will not engage yours in intrigue.
2. Anyone should be allowed quit an intrigue if they feel like it without having to leave the scene or whatever.
3. Anyone should be allowed to say: Your stated objective is something my character cannot be swayed to do.
All things should be exercised with caution, and should have IC or OOC justifications, and quite possibly repercussions. Number 3 hopefully being the most frequent cause for number 1. Quitting because you are loosing is rude, but if you are making reasonable yield offers and the opponent rejects and makes unreasonable counteroffers then I would say you're justified to quit.

Other things have been briefly discussed before, some characters are more min/maxed for intrigue and will thus benefit more from being able to "
brute force"
their objectives, even though they may have spent less resources on intrigue than others. I kinda also want to note that I think roleplay should be the first thing to come out of the toolbox. There's a tendency among some to take out the dices immediately when there's something they want.

by **Baelon Drakeson** Tue Nov 17, 2015 6:18 pm

Theomore Tullison wrote:The problem with treating yields as entirely OOC is that they would need an IC anchor. Same as intrigue objectives.

Yes, they should be anchored - but not restricted - to IC desires.

Theomore Tullison wrote:
Athelstan truthfully shares everything he knows about all acts of planting, altering, or removing evidence from all investigation sites, by himself or by others.
Athelstan truthfully shares everything he knows about the wildfire, including it's origin, original location, current location, who (if anyone) helped him move it, who else knows of it's existence and/or location, and what he knows of his own or other people's plans for it.
Athelstan truthfully shares all of his motivations for returning to the mines with Corrine.

Here's my beef: Initimidate has limitations, in this case, winning makes Athelstan amiable, and even an amiable Athelstan is not likely to divulge all of that. Considering that you did not offer any counter, odds are that your objective is at least to get all of that out of him. In frankness, the yield Athelstan offers is probably all you would get had you won this intrigue.

The hilarious thing about this that I would have absolutely accepted that yield - it was everything i wanted from the intrigue and then some. So why didn't I accept it? Because it's [url=the counteroffer I made][/url] to [url=his yield][/url] (offered again [url=here][/url]).

Theomore Tullison wrote:

1) Baelon will reveal his investigation results to Septon Arlyn and Lady Corrine Marsten (via PM, with Reader included for verification)
EDIT: Clarification: this would represent an IC private conversation between the three of them.
1b) one logistical caveat - information on Kyle Bracken is not to be shared with anyone else until I have finished my scene with him (and I reserve the right to make him harder to find should I deem it appropriate).
2) Septon Arlyn will agree that Baelon acted appropriately given the gravity of the situation, and will share that opinion freely (now and in the future).
3) Baelon and Septon Arlyn both move to Amiable.

Again, you are asking for far too much, in this case Arlyn decided to just let you get standard charm results, as previously discussed. To get your stated objective in full would require two successful charm intrigues plus a convince.

It's a negotiation. You might have thought I was asking too much, but also offered information that Arlyn wanted. It was up to him to decide whether or not I asked for too much;
evidently he thought so, but there was nothing wrong with my offer. Remember, this was when I thought my objective would actually be followed through on:
"
Objective: "
Friendship"
: Believe that Baelon is a true knight, acting righteously for the greater good"

Theomore Tullison wrote:Anyway, that's the backdrop, my view on intrigue is that:
1. Anyone should be allowed to say: No, my character will not engage yours in intrigue.
2. Anyone should be allowed quit an intrigue if they feel like it without having to leave the scene or whatever.
3. Anyone should be allowed to say: Your stated objective is something my character cannot be swayed to do.
All things should be exercised with caution, and should have IC or OOC justifications, and quite possibly repercussions. Number 3 hopefully being the most frequent cause for number 1. Quitting because you are loosing is rude, but if you are making reasonable yield offers and the opponent rejects and makes unreasonable counteroffers then I would say you're justified to quit.

Other things have been briefly discussed before, some characters are more min/maxed for intrigue and will thus benefit more from being able to "
brute force"
their objectives, even though they may have spent less resources on intrigue than others. I kinda also want to note that I think roleplay should be the first thing to come out of the toolbox. There's a tendency among some to take out the dices immediately when there's something they want.

Here's the thing. In a game like this, words are weapons. They have real and sometimes deadly effects. Anything said or changed about about intrigues should be applied to combats as well.
If someone were to stab Baelon, would I be justified in saying "
No, my character will not engage yours in combat"
?
Should someone be able to flee an attacker without leaving the scene?

We should remember why there are there are mechanics at all. Our characters can do things we cannot. Baelon is a much better warrior than I am or will ever be.
Apply that reasoning to words - some of us are playing characters much more persuasive than the player is or could ever be. Mechanics level that gap.

The contrary is also true. Some of us, such as yourself, Theo, are naturally quite persuasive. I have more than once watched you RP someone to your perspective without a single die being used.
But maybe the other player in that scene is much more gullible than their character. Maybe their character would have the presence of mind or insight to see through your wordplay.

I can understand why you feel we should limit intrigues, though. It's a huge benefit to those of us whose characters are trying to cover up their crimes.

One final note - if you are going to make an ad hominem attack against me, have the guts to actually say it and not just make snide comments like "
some characters are more min/maxed for intrigue and will thus benefit more from being able to "
brute force"
their objectives, even though they may have spent less resources on intrigue than others"
. I accepted the limitations on charm. Baelon is hardly min/maxed for intrigue though. He's not even the most effective charmer, and I think we can all agree that Charm is his intrigue specialty.

I'm getting really sick of your OOC and IC targeting of me at every turn lately. I don't know what your objective is or what I've done to piss you off, but just please stop.

by **Theomore Tullison** Tue Nov 17, 2015 7:12 pm

I kinda consider everyone with persuasion 5 as min/maxed for intrigue. Baelon is min/maxed for charm/seduce primarily, and will have trouble against those with persuasion 5 and other intrigue stats to bring to the party. He's mechanically awesome at networking, not so much at getting people to agree with his point of view. You are perhaps the one most often (and most vocally) pushing what I see as the boundary, but you're not the only one.

The difference between combat and intrigue is that combat is straight forward, you get hurt, physically. Intrigue deals with the insides of one's head. And that's very much not straight forward, and where combat have a handful of possible consequences of defeat, there's an endless amount for intrigue, and intrigue is easier to engage with, combat generally is something that doesn't come to you if you do not seek it out. So there's a lot of things that can go wrong in a PvP environment in intrigue as compared to combat.

The avoid intrigue playstyle I have is more a personal preference, I am somewhat weary of player vs player competitions, and generally any sort of opposed rolling where one character has 5D in social stuff. If I were to play this character AND expect to be rolling all the time, Theo would have persuasion and deception at 5, but that would take the game to places I don't want to go. Other PC's are free to dish out some awareness(empathy) if they feel like it. I don't have any issues with someone that think it's fine to break out the dices and see what happens, but I believe the option of not engaging should be there if the player doesn't want. The character not wanting to is another matter entirely.

by **Reader** Tue Nov 17, 2015 7:23 pm

I almost took Baelon down with a secondary NPC in an intrigue targeting his weakness. Would have won if I rolled 1 higher on initiative. I don't think he's unbalanced. Someone with eloquent would have a particularly good shot at things.

In other news, my flight to Shanghai was delayed and got in hilariously late, so play nice. :;
):

by **Yoren longshore** Tue Nov 17, 2015 7:29 pm

Airplanes and the entire aviation business is based around one thing: its a huge social experiment on how much discomfort and inconvenience you may cause people before they rather stay at home :;
):

by **Theomore Tullison** Tue Nov 17, 2015 7:59 pm

Reader wrote: play nice. :;
):

Because that works so well in the game of thrones.

by **Baelon Drakeson** Tue Nov 17, 2015 8:02 pm

Theomore Tullison wrote:
Reader wrote: play nice. :;
):

Because that works so well in the game of thrones.

We (players) don't play the game of thrones, we play at playing the game of thrones. Laughing

EDIT: spaelliong

by **Loreia** Tue Nov 17, 2015 11:53 pm

Reader wrote:I almost took Baelon down with a secondary NPC in an intrigue targeting his weakness. Would have won if I rolled 1 higher on initiative. I don't think he's unbalanced. Someone with eloquent would have a particularly good shot at things.

In other news, my flight to Shanghai was delayed and got in hilariously late, so play nice. :;
):

Everything's all good here, man. We're over it.

by **Baelon Drakeson** Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:50 pm

Pulling some game conversation stuff into this thread from the non-game thead:

Theomore Tullison wrote:I wonder if this particular chapter has too much house politics in it. Harder for characters to walk around being awesome when there are so many things we feel they must do.

I don't think it's that... I've been reading a bit about friendship, trust, and truth-telling recently (as background for covering these topics in class), and here's what I think is happening.
We are in a position where we want to perhaps even need to be working with others, but at the same time, there are a lot of IC suspicions about other characters. There are enemies in our midst, but we don't really know who they are. We (as characters) are having trouble trusting each other, and for good reason. However, this, I think, is causing conflict on the player level where we should all be cooperating - on the OOC level of creating a good story. There is a dichotomy formed, a split, causing internal tension. Add to this that because of the way that we project ourselves into our characters, I suspect there is a form of external/external source monitoring error - that is, misattribute character betrayals/lack of trust as player betrayals/lack of trust.

TL;
DR - it's not the politics, it's the ambiguity of not knowing who (IC) to trust, and the fact that that lack of knowledge extends to OOC because of hidden information aspect of the story.

Lady Corrine Marsten wrote:To be honest, I was happy until Minegate. Dealing with the fallout of that is what is sapping the fun for me, personally.

This. Very this. I felt pushed into a situation I did not want to be in, and now I feel like a target at a shooting gallery. It's very nearly the opposite of fun. I'm stubborn though, and I'm trying to turn it around. That it makes such a convenient political weapon in various hands and thus others don't want to let go of it doesn't help.

Yoren longshore wrote:I really enjoy the politics. <
snip>
I think that friction happens regardless and PCs should be able to pick sides, but it should not create OOC friction.
Role play should be challenging for Characters, I wouldn't enjoy having a week of simply drinking tea...

Also this. IC conflict is good. OOC conflict is not. When the two become one, a shitstorm is sure to follow - and it has.

Kevan Lyras wrote:
Maybe I should drop the house objectives? That might help. I was worried about people lacking direction. Maybe I can tweak things about, clear PvP prior with me etc?

No! Please don't do that. I enjoyed the house objectives. While the objectives for story 2 are very good and also fit the story and the set up, I specially liked the various "
smaller"
objectives we had in story 1. With these multiple smaller objectives, I felt everybody in a house had some open storyhooks to follow on that fit their character and playstyle and that would lead to some consequences for the house as a whole.
So if change is coming, I was hoping for more of these hooks

Also very this. I didn't have a whole lot of character motivations that directly involved other PCs, this gave us common goals - a critical feature to trust and friendship formation.

by **Nathaniel Mason** Wed Nov 18, 2015 4:45 pm

I have stayed out of the Mines situation. I was not directly involved, so my opinion is not relevant (do not mistake that to mean I don't have one). I have only commented on things that could affect the game as a whole (such as rules questions, etc.)

I would like to touch on a few things though, in a very generally way.

I can like someone and disagree with them. That's called friendship.

I can dislike someone and agree with them. That's called objectivity.

If I dislike someone and disagree with them, I am very conscious of what I am saying. That's called diplomacy.

Disagreement does not equal personal attack. I try to keep my opinion of a person and my opinion of their point of view separate. Yes, I know that is not as easy as it sounds. I also try not to be defensive when challenged. Yes, that is also not as easy as it sounds.

Tone matters. It is also very easy to misconstrue in things like forums where people quickly write things in the heat of the moment that comes off not as they might have intended, or much stronger than was intended.

Reread something at least twice before you post it. Is it what I want to say? Is it how I want to say it? Does it need to be said? I can count at least a dozen times I have written a page in response to something and simply hit the delete key after reading it a couple times.

Finally, I try to consider what the other person's reaction may be, be it IC, OOC, yeilds, intrigues, or any other kind of post. If I would be offended by it, I don't write it. If I would not agree to it, I don't ask it. While there are many winners and losers IC, there shouldn't be any OOC.

There are several things about the game I am not happy about, but when I put those things in perspective and consider other players, they diminish a great deal in importance.

by **Lady Corrine Marsten** Wed Nov 18, 2015 11:53 pm

Important message!

I would like for Corrine to call a meeting with representatives of sll investigator Houses in the mid morning of D4, to sort out some important business before the royal delegation shows up.

I'll be posting a thread for this, including the wording of a letter each House head will receive. If you can't spare the MM slot, please do try to get soneone from your House to attend. Smile

by **Nathaniel Mason** Wed Nov 18, 2015 11:58 pm

What slot is the actual meeting of the Houses? (where the speaches are taking place). I was under the impression that was happening before the royal arrival and would take more than one slot.

by **Lady Corrine Marsten** Thu Nov 19, 2015 12:00 am

I was not aware of any speeches-related meeting. :?

by **Reader** Thu Nov 19, 2015 12:05 am

Lady Corrine Marsten wrote:I was not aware of any speeches-related meeting. :?

On phone, but please see my recent request in the OOC forum. Nathaniel, for clarity, Corrine's request I separate to my post.

Sorry for no link, rushing to shower, check out then final meetings.

by **Nathaniel Mason** Thu Nov 19, 2015 12:11 am

Lady Corrine Marsten wrote:I was not aware of any speeches-related meeting. :?

How will this work?
- Essentially, you've got seven days to interview NPCs, investigate scenes and defeat "
broken men"
and enforce a peace. Many of these investigations will follow a similar event format to Story 1's official events, but with some differences (you'll still post roleplay, but results delivered via PM. You should reveal these results via roleplay, but are free to mislead/hint at partial truths etc. One investigation scene per PC per day. Generally, the investigations can be attempted on any day, but some may become harder/easier as time passes and others may interfere with evidence/kill/capture sources etc.
- At the halfway point (day 4) there's a scheduled debrief to update each other.
- On the eighth day, no further investigation takes place but the PC houses meet to deliver a peace treaty. Each item must be voted on by a majority of houses (abstention permitted). Disagreement to be solved by lance followed by personal combat (yielding is permitted and indeed encouraged &
honourable - the only blood feud here is between Blackwood and Bracken). This voting system is traditional, as is the dispute resolution. House Marsten leads the peacekeeping and can alter this traditional format unilaterally, but such behaviour would be unconventional and may have severe political ramifications.
- A reminder that Knowledge (streetwise) can be rolled once per day for general rumour investigation.

by **Reader** Thu Nov 19, 2015 12:13 am

Scheduled debrief is my official event (inc speeches).PC driven morning meeting warmly encouraged.

by Sponsored content