Calm before the storm on FEI

[Anaris]

That isn't what I'm arguing. I've said multiple times that I don't expect to not be banned, etc. Of course that will happen. All I am saying is that in a realm where the perception of "fair" in the justice system is thrown around, Sigrún has been anything but.

So...what, exactly, did you expect to happen?

Did you expect that we would have to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that Galen had acted with murderous intent?

Did you expect that all the BS about people getting different reports would be taken seriously by the court?

If so, then you've been watching too many of the wrong cop shows. Even in a modern US court, that crap wouldn't fly.

So you're telling me that the accuser in a trial acting as the arbiter of the trial is not corrupt?

That's your own stupid fault for attacking the Judge.

That a Judge insisting that she has the power to order a Duke's physical whereabouts around and them arresting them after a few hours is not corrupt?

If you stop thinking of him as "a Duke" and start thinking of him as "a confessed criminal who has already refused to appear before the court," you might see things a little differently.

That having your nepotistic cronies' in position to perform the arrest is not corrupt? 

That's not corruption, that's just good sense and good preparation.

And by the way, one of those "nepotistic cronies" is a Duchess who has been in the realm since long before Baranion and Sigrún, so I wonder how you think we suborned her?

[Perth]

So...what, exactly, did you expect to happen?

Did you expect that we would have to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that Galen had acted with murderous intent?

Did you expect that all the BS about people getting different reports would be taken seriously by the court?

If so, then you've been watching too many of the wrong cop shows. Even in a modern US court, that crap wouldn't fly.

What? It only doesn't fly if you are acting on your OOC knowledge that one is false and one is true. How would a character who wasn't there know the difference?

That's your own stupid fault for attacking the Judge.

Again, I never said it wasn't my fault. I said it wasn't justice.

If you stop thinking of him as "a Duke" and start thinking of him as "a confessed criminal who has already refused to appear before the court," you might see things a little differently.

1) I wasn't given enough time to even reach Zonasa.

2) He is a Duke, who as of right now has not been pronounced guilty of anything. Furthermore, when the hell did he confess to being a criminal?

3) You mean the same court that the REGENT already came and said nobody had to actually be there it could be done through letters? By this logic, every single Duke involved in the trial who isn't in Zonasa is in contempt of court.

That's not corruption, that's just good sense and good preparation.

And by the way, one of those "nepotistic cronies" is a Duchess who has been in the realm since long before Baranion and Sigrún, so I wonder how you think we suborned her?

Hm, oh I don't know, they're close friends whom one of the Judge's family members has a very long RP with spending tons of time with her upon her death bed? Or they share a religion?

Besides, she didn't arrest me. The Judge's brother did.

[Broose]

Why is this argument on the forums and not in the game? Isn't everything you're talking about IC anyways?

[Anaris]

What? It only doesn't fly if you are acting on your OOC knowledge that one is false and one is true. How would a character who wasn't there know the difference?

This is actually a philosophical argument within BattleMaster that I've seen crop up a number of times. Before I get deep into it, let me just say: No, we were not acting solely on our OOC knowledge. Our characters were acting on their IC knowledge that one is false and one is true. If a system that has run smoothly all your life, and all the lives of everyone you've ever know, and through all of recorded history, is suddenly being claimed by a small group of people to have failed in the way that is most convenient to them, and only in that way, the burden of proof is really on them to prove that the system failed, not on us to prove that it's still working the same way it always did.  Plus, you sent that, "Begone, heretic!" message, which kind of ruined even the tiny sliver of an IC chance you had to act innocent.

Now, on to the broader issue:

Personally, I've never really given much credence to the idea that our characters should disbelieve the reports that they get. One of the most important reasons for this is that if you start claiming that one message or report is unreliable, there's no logical reason that you should trust any message or report that you receive. And that way lies madness. If your characters cannot believe the things that they hear, you may as well stop playing the game, because that's all there is to the game.

Furthermore, like I said, these are systems that have worked consistently throughout recorded history. There are no known instances of unreliable information coming through them. Who in their right mind would believe that they suddenly failed, just when it would most benefit <insert aggrieved lying party here>?

This is the only reason I would really consider trying to put in place some kind of official explanation for these systems that could explain that they are, for all intents and purposes, infallible. Yeah, you'll argue it can cause internal conflict if there's plausible deniability. Well, there isn't. No one buys it. The only people who will ever go along with an idea like that are the ones who are already on your side. (And Loren. He's weird that way.)

[De-Legro]

So you're telling me that the accuser in a trial acting as the arbiter of the trial is not corrupt? That a Judge insisting that she has the power to order a Duke's physical whereabouts around and them arresting them after a few hours is not corrupt? That having your nepotistic cronies' in position to perform the arrest is not corrupt? 

What?

In modern society, maybe. In Medieval societies, not particularly. The concept of what consitutes corruption and Justice for that matter varies wildly with Culture and Age. For example you would be hard pressed to convince people in the modern western world that trial by combat represents justice.

Now, on to the broader issue:

Personally, I've never really given much credence to the idea that our characters should disbelieve the reports that they get. One of the most important reasons for this is that if you start claiming that one message or report is unreliable, there's no logical reason that you should trust any message or report that you receive. And that way lies madness. If your characters cannot believe the things that they hear, you may as well stop playing the game, because that's all there is to the game.

Furthermore, like I said, these are systems that have worked consistently throughout recorded history. There are no known instances of unreliable information coming through them. Who in their right mind would believe that they suddenly failed, just when it would most benefit <insert aggrieved lying party here>?

This is the only reason I would really consider trying to put in place some kind of official explanation for these systems that could explain that they are, for all intents and purposes, infallible. Yeah, you'll argue it can cause internal conflict if there's plausible deniability. Well, there isn't. No one buys it. The only people who will ever go along with an idea like that are the ones who are already on your side. (And Loren. He's weird that way.)

Completely agree. System message's don't have a big OOC tag on them. Until Tom declares otherwise I see no reason to assume they are OOC information. I accept completely that some players have made a decision to treat it as OOC information, but without it being a declared fact that is a personal decision in my opinion, not something to be forced upon everyone else.

And finally everyone needs to realise that it is rare that you will understand 100% why another character takes the actions they do. It is EASY to assume some sort of OOC motivation to explain almost anything, and stating so in the forums is just a invitation for a flame fest. If it continues I will need to consider locking this thread.

[Scarlett]

"Your own stupid fault?" Wow.

I don't have a horse in this race, but as I recall you used to spend at least a little bit of time on tact before you had that 'dev team' tag.

I'm amazed at the extent to which a player of your experience would actually come on these boards and have out in-game arguments like this. As it happens I agree with most of what you've said, but it really looks bad to have somebody in an official capacity talking smack.

Oh, wait, this is BM. I forgot.

[Lorgan]

"Your own stupid fault?" Wow.

I don't have a horse in this race, but as I recall you used to spend at least a little bit of time on tact before you had that 'dev team' tag.

I'm amazed at the extent to which a player of your experience would actually come on these boards and have out in-game arguments like this. As it happens I agree with most of what you've said, but it really looks bad to have somebody in an official capacity talking smack.

Oh, wait, this is BM. I forgot.

In all honesty, auto da fe-ing your judge is never really smart if you want to stay in the realm... Unless you've got a big rebellion planned or the judge is really unliked or your religion reigns supreme in your realm. Then you may try something and expect to get away with it. If you haven't (and he hadn't), well, then I think Anaris has used the right terms.

[Anaris]

"Your own stupid fault?" Wow.

I don't have a horse in this race, but as I recall you used to spend at least a little bit of time on tact before you had that 'dev team' tag.

No...no, I've talked like this pretty much the whole time.

And if you'll notice, Perth agreed with that particular part.

Anyone who assassinates or auto da fes their Judge and then expects to have an unbiased trial is not thinking clearly.

[De-Legro]

No...no, I've talked like this pretty much the whole time.

And if you'll notice, Perth agreed with that particular part.

Anyone who assassinates or auto da fes their Judge and then expects to have an unbiased trial is not thinking clearly.

I don't think I even remember a time before Tim was a dev.

[BardicNerd]

Also, in my own defense, until today I never even got to see the order to come to Zonasa. I replied to the Regent's polite request. When I next logged in I was arrested and so never saw all of the stuff with where Sigrún so politely corrected her Regent's request into an order. I honestly never had the chance to come in.

Though Morgan phrased it as a request, it was always meant as an order.

Morgan is rather upset about the speed with which you were arrested, though, and is debating what to do about it.

Sigrun is certainly vengeful, possibly power hungry, and probably oversteps her bounds, but I wouldn't call her corrupt.  Nor would I say that Morgan is afraid to stand up to her. . . .

[Perth]

Alright, alright.


Look, I'll stop arguing about it here.

At the end of day, yes, I recognize there was only a thin chance I would get away with what I did. As I said when I first did it, when I decided to do it I was extremely bored with Galen and considering deleting him. This whole incident has been a lot of fun actually and made me take some more interest in Galen.

I really enjoy Sigrún as character and I mean no offense to the player if I have insinuated that. I think he plays the character well.

I'll keep it in game from here.

[Weylyn]

Though Morgan phrased it as a request, it was always meant as an order.

Morgan is rather upset about the speed with which you were arrested, though, and is debating what to do about it.

Sigrun is certainly vengeful, possibly power hungry, and probably oversteps her bounds, but I wouldn't call her corrupt.  Nor would I say that Morgan is afraid to stand up to her. . . .

She did make it explicitly clear that she intended to arrest him if he refused to attend his trial.

What happened wasn't picking up a convicted criminal, it was arresting a suspect who refused to stand trial. It is quite standard in any country I know of to arrest the accused first, and then put them on trial.

[BardicNerd]

She did make it explicitly clear that she intended to arrest him if he refused to attend his trial.

What happened wasn't picking up a convicted criminal, it was arresting a suspect who refused to stand trial. It is quite standard in any country I know of to arrest the accused first, and then put them on trial.

Morgan is of the opinion that Dukes should have special privileges.


I honestly can't recall exactly what she said about her intentions, because I was half asleep when I read it.

[Longmane]

In modern society, maybe. In Medieval societies, not particularly. The concept of what consitutes corruption and Justice for that matter varies wildly with Culture and Age. For example you would be hard pressed to convince people in the modern western world that trial by combat represents justice.

"Medieval Law and the Foundations of the State" by Alan Harding is a brilliant read concerning this kind of stuff.

[Perth]

Damn.

Can you tell I've never had a character been arrested before?

I figured if I paid the fine I would at least have some grace time before I could be arrested again. What is the point of a ransom then?


Is Sigrún really going to execute him? And where did these treason charges come from all of sudden?