Byerly Vlad Rutyer (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
bouchonne) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
faderiftooc2020-10-17 05:24 pm
bouchonne) wrote in faderiftooc2020-10-17 05:24 pm
Entry tags:
WAR TABLE MISSION: DIPLOMACY
DIPLOMACY MISSION: MASTER DEBATERS
WHAT: Tantervale is one of the most influential cities in the Free Marches - and one that's not very fond of Riftwatch, given that Riftwatch's friendliness towards radicalism and apostasy clashes with Tantervale's pious culture.
Riftwatch is sending a select group of representatives to charm the Lady Chancellor Davina Crouch. Specifically, they are to charm her by sending representatives to a summit on religious law to be held in Tantervale.
HOW: The summit is a place where religious scholars come together with city leaders to discuss questions of Andrastian law. Most places would skip this this year given everything that's going on, but, you know, Tantervale. Riftwatch has been politely invited to attend to discuss a topic of their choice.
Riftwatch diplomats will present their stances on a variety of legal/religious questions. The main RP mechanism will be debating where they stand on this list of questions. Their official assignment is to win over the Chancellor, which will likely require moderate-to-conservative responses to these questions, but they might also be tempted to present their true (likely more liberal) views.
There will be an RNG mechanism that will determine the success/failure of their arguments, with more radical arguments requiring a higher roll.
tl;dr: This mission will involve you deciding where your character stands on thorny ethical issues and figuring out how willing they are to compromise on them.
WHO: 3-5 Riftwatch agents, with preference given to members of Diplomacy. Members of Diplomacy and Research will be particularly useful in this plot.
WHEN: Get your sign-ups in by end of day EST, Sunday, October 25th. The log will be posted on Wednesday, October 27th.
SIGN-UPS
no subject
Character: Sister Sara Sawbones (side character)
Division: Research
Very particular set of skills acquired over a very long career: Trained as a Chantry Cleric, familiar with both Chantry law and inner politics. Intimately familiar with how to debate divisive topics in front of higher ups without getting excommunicated.
On a scale of 1-10 how radical are their religious/legal opinions:
6-8 depending on the topic, downplays it to a 5 when discussing potentially heretical topics in front of Chantry hierarchy.
no subject
1. Is it acceptable to go to war to spread Andrastian teachings?
2. Should elves and dwarves have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
3. Should men have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
4. Should a Divine have the right to remove an unjust ruler?
5. Should the Chantry tolerate the Imperial Chantry?
no subject
No, it's a needless waste of the lives of the Chantry faithful.
[redacted: pointed question about going to war with Orzammar and the risk that would bring of not only losing the Chantry's access to lyrium, but also sparking another Blight if/when Orzammar falls.]
2. Should elves and dwarves have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
Yes, any who feel called to serve should be able to to their full ability.
[redacted: Some strong language about the erasure of Shartan to gain support for a corrupt March and also inter Chantry nepotism.]
3. Should men have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
Yes, though obviously they wouldn't be eligible for running to become the Divine.
4. Should a Divine have the right to remove an unjust ruler?
Not without full documentation of unjustness and a Chantry committee that includes members of the local Chantry in question.
[redacted: they should be able to remove an unjust Divine as well.]
5. Should the Chantry tolerate the Imperial Chantry?
Refer to 1, with an added note that the Chantry doesn't tolerate the Imperial Chantry now.
no subject
Note that this mission was a strong success, with the group passing rolls spectacularly for convincing people of their moderate positions on questions 1&2. They were also moderately successful in their responses to questions 3&4. Question 5, however, was a spectacular failure; this was not enough to dampen their success.
no subject
And I have two who might work! Jehan's a side character so required to have last priority for sign-ups, but if a religious traditionalist would help balance the team etc. he's all yours.
Character: Bastien
Division: Diplomacy
Very particular set of skills acquired over a very long career: Mustache. Reasonably charming and good at telling people what they want to hear.
On a scale of 1-10 how radical are their religious/legal opinions: 3-5 range depending on the question.
Character: Jehan
Division: Research
Very particular set of skills acquired over a very long career: Chantry Brother & theological historian & Orlesian noble who knows how to behave himself.
On a scale of 1-10 how radical are their religious/legal opinions: He's a Thedas 2 but a Riftwatch 1.
no subject
1. Is it acceptable to go to war to spread Andrastian teachings?
2. Should elves and dwarves have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
3. Should men have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
4. Should a Divine have the right to remove an unjust ruler?
5. Should the Chantry tolerate the Imperial Chantry?
no subject
1. Is it acceptable to go to war to spread Andrastian teachings?
It’s not immoral, but whether it’s a good idea depends—liberating the Qunari people from their very obvious oppression (don’t @ him) an constant aggression tactics would be one thing, rolling over the Avvar when they just want to live in their mountains and eat their bark or whatever would be another.
2. Should elves and dwarves have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
Nope, they can hang out with the men.
3. Should men have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
Nope!
4. Should a Divine have the right to remove an unjust ruler?
Yes.
5. Should the Chantry tolerate the Imperial Chantry?
Nope.
BASTIEN
1. Is it acceptable to go to war to spread Andrastian teachings?
No. Stop killin’ people.
2. Should elves and dwarves have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
Sure. Obviously in practice no one would be choosing an elven Divine for a few hundred years, but barring the possibility outright is rude.
3. Should men have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
The robes are clearly unisex.
4. Should a Divine have the right to remove an unjust ruler?
No. Unless someone is also removing unjust Divines.
5. Should the Chantry tolerate the Imperial Chantry?
Assuming the Imperial Chantry isn’t actively involved in burning Orlais, yes.
no subject
Note that this mission was a strong success, with the group passing rolls spectacularly for convincing people of their moderate positions on questions 1&2. They were also moderately successful in their responses to questions 3&4. Question 5, however, was a spectacular failure; this was not enough to dampen their success.
no subject
Character: Fitcher
Division: Scouting
Very particular set of skills acquired over a very long career: The definition of charm and wit. Can play up the older conservative Antivan angle. Has a good head for policy and eyeing contradictions. Secret Info: Familiar with the sketchier side of Chantry politics.
On a scale of 1-10 how radical are their religious/legal opinions: Thedas 2, Riftwatch 1
Fitcher's a) a side characters so give her lower priority when it comes to selection, and b) is a filthy spy and would probably be using this as an opportunity to check in with her bosses.
no subject
1. Is it acceptable to go to war to spread Andrastian teachings?
2. Should elves and dwarves have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
3. Should men have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
4. Should a Divine have the right to remove an unjust ruler?
5. Should the Chantry tolerate the Imperial Chantry?
no subject
2. Yes, they should be eligible for elevated service in the Chantry. However, they shouldn't qualify as candidates or successors to the position of Divine.
3. No.
4. Yes, contingent on support from those under the ruler in question's authority, and that the replacement not be a prominent member of the Chantry itself.
5. No.
no subject
Note that this mission was a strong success, with the group passing rolls spectacularly for convincing people of their moderate positions on questions 1&2. They were also moderately successful in their responses to questions 3&4. Question 5, however, was a spectacular failure; this was not enough to dampen their success.
no subject
Character: john silver
Division: diplomacy
Very particular set of skills acquired over a very long career: Extreme charisma, reframing radical ideas to sound less threatening, good at schmoozing
On a scale of 1-10 how radical are their religious/legal opinions: solid 8-9 but fully capable of downplaying to a 2-3 in polite company.
no subject
1. Is it acceptable to go to war to spread Andrastian teachings?
2. Should elves and dwarves have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
3. Should men have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
4. Should a Divine have the right to remove an unjust ruler?
5. Should the Chantry tolerate the Imperial Chantry?
no subject
1. Is it acceptable to go to war to spread Andrastian teachings?
No.
2. Should elves and dwarves have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
If they are so called, yes.
3. Should men have the right to serve in the higher echelons of the Chantry?
4. Should a Divine have the right to remove an unjust ruler?
Yes, with the caveat that the same treatment be applicable to an unjust Divine, and if the people are influential in selecting a new ruler in the aftermath rather than the Divine selecting one for them.
5. Should the Chantry tolerate the Imperial Chantry?
Yes.
no subject
Note that this mission was a strong success, with the group passing rolls spectacularly for convincing people of their moderate positions on questions 1&2. They were also moderately successful in their responses to questions 3&4. Question 5, however, was a spectacular failure; this was not enough to dampen their success.
QUESTIONS