Bay 12 Games Forum

Sounds right. I think Marna can do that. While not exactly warriors themselves, a woman could supervise her husband's armies in his absence. We'll tell her to mobilise everyone, the full levy, guard the town walls, and send a letter to her uncle via the Carshire road asking for intervention.

Let's tell our men that the Marshal has come to see a demonstration of our readiness and that we expect on-going drills in the next week. Let Uriel go through these motions and see a few demonstrations of our dragoons. Could be interesting, anyway.

We ought to take our new siege engineers along, as well, along with some local carpenters to assist fabrication per their specifications, but these are called up just before we leave.

Send a message to the Rat, "The game is afoot."

Rangers lead the way. Send them out ahead. Let's not forget scouts, when we do move.

---

Let's hide in the open, btw. We give Uriel a feast in our hall, make sure he's well-rested and entertained, and continue dropping comments around others how you're anxious that Feroshire pass his military review.

If rumour gets back to Curbiston, then Owen thinks that Uriel is following his orders by spying on us in an official capacity. Also, a well-rested Marshal has other advantages.

Let's not impute that the Lord Marshal can ever be a lone mad man. That's gauche. It's a high office.

Stick "Yes, milord! Oh... Shall I contact some..." out in front and don't impute that he's a madman at the end, and its good.

Not to say he votes B... but it's not clear that he votes A, either.

My personal view is that, during an RP like this, we should take what we all can agree on, rather than possibly alienating some by taking things that we can't all agree on. I hope that we can agree that mentioning our bravery in shared battles is good, mentioning duty is good, mentioning the murder rumours we've already started is good, calling him to take the lead is good. I don't think we can all agree on exposing our deeper motives unless directly challenged, so for now we can move past that and return to that if necessary.

I have to admit, though, I was wrong to suggest lying about the Count planning to legitimise this bastard.

Let's recap our response so far.

Bearing in mind that we want to be completely honest about the way that duty and loyalty mean a lot to us, while omitting irrevelant details like shadowy alliances with a criminal underlord in Curbiston called The Rat, a campaign of whispers that is full of slanders and calumnies against our presumptive lord, and our petty rivalry with Sir Owen... let's try to scrape something together than fuses these principles of openness, honesty, and streamlined truthfulness into a single coherent response.

How's this:

"I am a knight, my lord Marshal. Risking my life is merely duty for me. The blood that we spilled on the field of Torchester together ought to convince you that I am found in the front rank when the cause is just and the battle hot."

"I'm not going to hold the late Count's mistakes against his offspring. Arthur deserves a chance to prove himself. However, though I did make amends with the count some time before his death, you're correct in that loyalty to his son isn't my only motivation. To put it bluntly, Owen may well have been responsible for the murder of the last Count, and a man like that is a danger to all his vassals. How can I feel safe when such rumours are afloat of my liege? He who would murder a Count, scorns to do right by his own vassals. Surely, none of us can rest easily if that is true. That is why I must protect Arthur, who has no fault on his soul but being fathered by a Foles in the rightful lands of the Foles."

"Yet I am but a knight, my lord Marshal, not an experienced leader of men. I do not have the means to press his claim myself, and I can give him precious little protection in the long run, without someone greater to take up his claim. If you have come with this intention, I offer up my lands, my men, and yes, my life to your disposal."
 

I also vote for honesty, but we omit Owen's rivalry. We're honest without filling in that detail. Give me that, guys. You can tell later if necessary.

As for this character and his motivations, well, he's pulled off some real whoppers, and he's in the middle of forging a claim... He values honesty so highly that he uses it sparingly and with great economy.

you're correct in that loyalty to his son isn't my only motivation.

How can he be correct, when he hasn't even made that assertion yet? Where did he say we had other motivations? He merely seeks reassurance rather than outright challenging us.

He doesn't even want the real truth. He wants his reasons bolstered by our reasons. People here are giving up our real position for a song. There's no reason to do this, unless we think we're losing him with other angles. The truth is always the last option, of course, but let's keep it back there in the queue where it belongs, not out in front on our sleeves like we're a wide-eyed rube and a gull.

If we ever make it to the King's Court, I give us ten seconds before the lying piranhas there have cleaned our bones.

I disagree. Honesty is a pretty good policy.

Nothing in my life has ever upheld that old saying. Whoever told it first was the best liar of all.

Honesty is an admission of weakness. We don't need anyone to know our weaknesses. Now, the exact extent to which I lied, that can be changed. We can simply take out the second and third paragraphs, which are kinda gratuitous lies but rather fun.

However, we don't need to admit that we need Owen gone for our own reasons unless Uriel says, "Horseshit" to us. He wants to know that we're committed to this fully, not our life story. The extent to which he needs the truth is very minimal. He just needs something plausible, and we're apparently good at seeming upright and dutiful. And that's a useful trait to have, if you don't let it go to waste by being upright and dutiful.

The thought pinging about my skull right now is that he's just here to feel us out for Owen, in which case, if he leaves here without signing messages calling the county to arms with his name, he dies.

Doubtful. Bombing Russia, perhaps nationalism. How could a Chechen nationalist statement be made by bombing the Great Satan?