Ask the narrators

Me and Dunstan, we both posted it in the Inn thread, but not sure whether this is in line with Reader's expectations...?

So could I provide an assist to ser Walton in the calling event as well as do an investigation?

Fatigue says that you can spend it any time during a combat, even when it is not your action.

So can I spend a Fatigue for a lesser action, in the middle of performing a greater action.

For example, could I perform a Charge (greater action) and spend a Fatigue for a Knockdown (lesser).

Essentially, charging at my target, knocking him down, and then stabbing him.

The spending at any time applies to negating so I'm afraid actions still have to follow their normal sequence.

"
At any time during a combat, even when it’s not your action, you can accept a point of fatigue to negate specific effects until the start of your next turn."


However, the below works.

Lesser: Move
Lesser: knockdown (with +2 move bonus)
Spend fatigue for action
Lesser: attack

or

Greater: Spring
Fatigue for action
Lesser: knockdown

So with the events and battles and such, does it work like each character deciding which timeslot to dedicate and no need to coordinate which one all parties involved in a battle need use?

I didn't know quite where to put this question so I guess I'll post it here have you ever thought about starting a patreon account? I'm sure there is some type of overhead for hosting this site and I be willing to help and donate at least some money every month to help support the costs in the overhead of running this fantastic game that you run.

Theomore Tullison wrote:So with the events and battles and such, does it work like each character deciding which timeslot to dedicate and no need to coordinate which one all parties involved in a battle need use?

No need to coordinate, just timeslot of way. It represent a coordinated effort, even if it will lead to some timeslot weirdness, handwave away!

Patreon - a very kind thought, but payments create expectations I'm not comfortable with! Plus my day job is more than enough to keep my in comfort. This remains a labour of love. The only support necessary is considerate, engaged players.
Maybe a small consideration one day if hosting services became expensive, but current board is free!

Re: (D3 - LM) Search for Iron

Postby Septon Arlyn » Sun Nov 15, 2015 11:44 am
[You can operate persuade me that that you as a character are not so bad (charm) as in. "
Baelon is a true knight "
but you can't tell me that (convince) your actions were, as you say "
acted righteously for the good of all, and will share that opinion freely (now and in the future)"
]

I accept the charm defeat

I am in agreement with Septon Arlyn, so I would like an official ruling on this.

To me the Defeat events are very specific.

Objective: I am a great guy and you should agree with me.

Charm Defeat: Yep.. your a great guy, but I still don't agree with you.

Convince Defeat: Okay, I agree with you, but my opinion of you has not changed.

Defeat in a Charm gives +1 Disposition and +1D to the next Intrigue. Period. It does not motivate, or promote action in any way.

My interpretation is that Charm uses appeals to emotion. Consider uses logic and rationality.
The former is powerful so long as nothing challenges it - just watch any political debate and you will see it being used left, right, and center.
Logic and rationality, however, tend to hold up under scrutiny far better.

Cersei is a charmer - yet she gets people to do all sorts of things.
Some people thing that is best represented by Charm hammer tactics.
If that's what it takes, then I will do that (I would note that the intrigue is not actually over yet, there is still room for various things to happen - like changing objectives and non-influence actions.)

viewtopic.php?f=75&
t=2007&
p=55909#p55909

Answer to this by RAW here, no confusion I believe.

Cersei may be a charmer person but her actions (and their consequences) suggest that she is more keen on using both Intimidate and Seduce more frequently.

Many people can have conflicting interpretations of the rules.

Luckily we have a narrator who is the final arbiter of the game rules.

Which is why I posted this here.

Nathaniel Mason wrote:

Re: (D3 - LM) Search for Iron

Postby Septon Arlyn » Sun Nov 15, 2015 11:44 am
[You can operate persuade me that that you as a character are not so bad (charm) as in. "
Baelon is a true knight "
but you can't tell me that (convince) your actions were, as you say "
acted righteously for the good of all, and will share that opinion freely (now and in the future)"
]

I accept the charm defeat

I am in agreement with Septon Arlyn, so I would like an official ruling on this.

To me the Defeat events are very specific.

Objective: I am a great guy and you should agree with me.

Charm Defeat: Yep.. your a great guy, but I still don't agree with you.

Convince Defeat: Okay, I agree with you, but my opinion of you has not changed.

Defeat in a Charm gives +1 Disposition and +1D to the next Intrigue. Period. It does not motivate, or promote action in any way.

On phone so not very eloquent...

I lean towards Nathaniel's interpretation, with some key caveats:

- loser of intrigue would then doubt their position: "
I thought he did it, but now I've discussed it with him..."
You're more likely to do the things noted in step 3 for your friends). In this case, the Septon moves from a biased point of view (judgment coloured by his Dislike) to judging the evidence impartially (now Indifferent).
- p150 got edition under "
defeat"
- "
victor achieves the stated goal"

- otherwise seduce just makes people want to fuck you. :;
): surely it's more: stated goal (information) ->
seduce ->
consequences of defeat ("
usually... Some carnal act of passion"
) during which the target gives up the information/palace key/agrees to kill your foe (because you've improved their disposition by lots of steps - this is what makes it stronger than charm but riskier. Read the last section of the disposition to see what people will do after being made affectionate or even just friendly!) Although I suppose you could argue the same could be achieved over multiple intrigues, that seems weird to me, and perversely the higher disposition could help some builds then win the actual "
convince"
intrigue if these are to be mandatory - I think that puts us in an livery weird place.

Happy to discuss further so end up with something fair. What do you think of the above?

Half past midnight here, so reply likely to be delayed. Sorry!

The issue is that he is achieving victory through charm not convince, so you shouldnt be able to force the Septon to be convinced just more impartial by moving to indifferent. So yes he achieves victory of Charm technique. Not convince +Charm and whatever else he wants to add.

Edit, this will make players to just bump charm as a it does all other techniques if I win anyway, why bother with other specialties, or avoid intrigue with charmhammer players entirely.

Athelstan wrote:The issue is that he is achieving victory through charm not convince, so you shouldnt be able to force the Septon to be convinced just more impartial by moving to indifferent. So yes he achieves victory of Charm technique. Not convince +Charm and whatever else he wants to add.

Theomore's post in the iron mines together with the Nathaniel post it quotes gets me close to the answer, unless either involved player has an issue (which is totally fine!).

Reader wrote:

Theomore Tullison wrote:I'll just quote Nathan:

Objective: I am a great guy and you should agree with me.

Charm Defeat: Yep.. your a great guy, but I still don't agree with you.

Convince Defeat: Okay, I agree with you, but my opinion of you has not changed.

Defeat in a Charm gives +1 Disposition and +1D to the next Intrigue. Period. It does not motivate, or promote action in any way.

However, disposition matters. Affectionate people are willing to risk their lives to protect you, Malicious people are willing to risk their lives to hurt you. Septon Arlyn that dislikes you is likely to speak of you in negative terms, he is not likely to actively spread that opinion, that's crossing into hostile territory. Indifferent septon Arlyn will not speak of you in any particularly positive or negative terms.

Expanded example of how it could be interpreted:

Dislike Arlyn: Baelon overstepped his authority because he is arrogant and unwilling to accept that others should have been included.
Indifferent Arlyn: Baelon overstepped his authority, but he probably did not have any ill intentions, perhaps he needs some further tutoring on account of his youth?
Amiable Arlyn: Baelon overstepped his authority, but his heart is in the right place, but he is young and will learn in time.

Arlyn at dislike, but convinced: Baelon acts can be justified by the circumstances, but he is arrogant and unapologetic about the consequences, unwilling to accept that he could have handled it better.

The advantages of a keyboard! Cheers Theomore, this plus Nathaniel gets me where I want to be.

This is very close to my interpretation and those disposition stances are reasonable (but the septon should not feel bound by them).

If either player is unhappy we can go back to a negotiated yield.

Sorry for the quote tunnel, on phone. The above is close to my answer, with the caveat that if disposition is high enough you may do what the other asks (so seduce works, and people believe charming people). Nathaniel has to some extent answered his own question, with a bit of help from Theomore.

One question on charm defeat, nothing to do with what has been established, anf I might have missed this.

Does the +1D last only for the current story or its until used at any point (next story/off season)

Athelstan wrote:One question on charm defeat, nothing to do with what has been established, anf I might have missed this.

Does the +1D last only for the current story or its until used at any point (next story/off season)

If your next Intrigue with that person is five years from now, you get it.

What n-unit said. Now i sleep...

Reader wrote:

Reader wrote:

Theomore Tullison wrote:

However, disposition matters. Affectionate people are willing to risk their lives to protect you, Malicious people are willing to risk their lives to hurt you. Septon Arlyn that dislikes you is likely to speak of you in negative terms, he is not likely to actively spread that opinion, that's crossing into hostile territory. Indifferent septon Arlyn will not speak of you in any particularly positive or negative terms.

Expanded example of how it could be interpreted:

Dislike Arlyn: Baelon overstepped his authority because he is arrogant and unwilling to accept that others should have been included.
Indifferent Arlyn: Baelon overstepped his authority, but he probably did not have any ill intentions, perhaps he needs some further tutoring on account of his youth?
Amiable Arlyn: Baelon overstepped his authority, but his heart is in the right place, but he is young and will learn in time.

Arlyn at dislike, but convinced: Baelon acts can be justified by the circumstances, but he is arrogant and unapologetic about the consequences, unwilling to accept that he could have handled it better.

The advantages of a keyboard! Cheers Theomore, this plus Nathaniel gets me where I want to be.

This is very close to my interpretation and those disposition stances are reasonable (but the septon should not feel bound by them).

If either player is unhappy we can go back to a negotiated yield.

Sorry for the quote tunnel, on phone. The above is close to my answer, with the caveat that if disposition is high enough you may do what the other asks (so seduce works, and people believe charming people). Nathaniel has to some extent answered his own question, with a bit of help from Theomore.

Nathaniel Mason wrote:While neither Charm nor Seduce promote an action mechanically, I think it's fair that Charm would soften the Septon's outlook on the one hand... or gain information for the seducer that the target does not consider sensitive on the other.

Both techniques only change the person's attitude, not their opinions or beliefs.

All this seems very reasonable to me. Sorry to keep you up. Sleep well.

I accept this, though it guts my character severely in ways I would have addressed earlier had I known (e.g. explored working towards Magnetic or made more of an effort to seek out and charm characters dispositions up before I had so much on the line).

Further, in this particular case I think it disingenuous to wait until losing to argue against an openly stated objective.
If I had known my objective was a non-starter, I would not have even engaged in the intrigue and I certainly would not have spent 2 glory and a DP on it.

Can we have all these decisions and clarifications copied into the rules thread? Just in case we ever have to revisit during story 4 when this thread has a couple hundred pages and nobody finds it anymore

Baelon wrote:I accept this, though it guts my character severely in ways I would have addressed earlier had I known (e.g. explored working towards Magnetic or made more of an effort to seek out and charm characters dispositions up before I had so much on the line).

Further, in this particular case I think it disingenuous to wait until losing to argue against an openly stated objective.
If I had known my objective was a non-starter, I would not have even engaged in the intrigue and I certainly would not have spent 2 glory and a DP on it.

I sincerely thought about intervening to question this but as Im new to the forum, dont know much about the system and the houserules and Im not active part of the intrigue I also thought that my questioning could do more damage than help, so for that im sorry

Well I think that a good rule of thumb should be that you should look at the techniques when writing up objectives. The more you try to accomplish with a single technique the more likely you might want to split it into multiple intrigues.

Ser Raynald Dulver wrote:I sincerely thought about intervening to question this but as Im new to the forum, dont know much about the system and the houserules and Im not active part of the intrigue I also thought that my questioning could do more damage than help, so for that im sorry

No need to apologize, and please have no hesitation to ask questions, even about things you are not involved in. It doesn't stop most of us (and, I think, makes the game better overall - it's good when we are on the same page before we get into a tense IC situation, so better to ask than not.

Septon Arlyn wrote:Well I think that a good rule of thumb should be that you should look at the techniques when writing up objectives. The more you try to accomplish with a single technique the more likely you might want to split it into multiple intrigues.

Well sure - and I did so. I just had differing interpretation of what the rulebook meant. If you look at my actual objective (not the yield text you pasted above) I was only asking for one thing - a positive interpretation of Baelon's actions.

The issue I am having is that you could have challenged the objective right at the beginning, but you did not - that to me seems like an implicit acceptance. If the objective was objectionable, why not bring it up immediately so that no one is operating under false information?