Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

(Game Thread) Ruceeglaelsktinag: A Study in Applied Christian Theology of War

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Benir replies to Umbris:
    "Ah, perhaps you would like to summarize your preferred version of The Tragedy of the Ladle Mistress? Or perhaps, through no fault of your own, you have never heard that story?

    Because I can assure you that Ruceeglaelsktinag is well aware of the moral and pragmatic benefits of wielding the carrot in the strong hand, and the stick in the weak hand."

    ((One version of the story he is referencing can be found HERE.))

    Comment


    • #17
      ((Oh, good grief... I REALLY hate not being to edit long-term... the above comment was directed to Rational Gaze's character, not Umbris. On that note, it is VERY helpful if one can work in the name of your character into each and every post one makes.))

      Comment


      • #18
        Umbris takes on a playful look of surprise,

        Why Benir, I don't think I could. I know the story but I prefer listening. Besides, my version of the tale would be far more complicated and thought provoking--not to say it isn't provocative enough on its own. -no, I'd much rather hear the thoughts of my fellow thinkers!

        Now, looking towards the other outspoken two charmingly...

        As the many characters of the story have their biases, so do the interpreters of the tale. I only wonder if anyone hear thinks that intimidating the very same you wish to help by means of torturing and killing their kinsmen might nullify the original act of kindness... Hunger is terrible but who can say they'd rather have a bowl of bland mush at the expense of losing their fellow man? And perhaps another consideration is was the help even requested in the first place...

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Rational Gaze View Post
          My character first replies to Benir (and, by extension, Razzik):
          "Fear not, Elf, for I am no stranger to sesquipedalian loquaciousness. I would question, however, the placating of barbarism via fear. For it seems that this method is a two-edged sword. On one hand, fear may prevent barbarians and the like from rabble-rousing, but, on the other hand, it may further cement their hatred of righteousness. For fear leads to anger, and anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering. The general way to avoid evil and barbarism is to make the path of good easier and more convenient, and the path of evil harder and more inconvenient to follow. The only debate, it seems, is in interpreting this general rule and putting it into practice. In my experience, trade and mutual exchange is the best way for two cultures to interact with each other peacefully, with violence being only an option in answer to aggression. This can be similarly applied on the personal level."
          Benir replies:
          "Ah, so you might agree that 'crime doesn't pay' is a useful guideline for setting sentences? If so, then let us take as example the issue of offering false surrender. It seems to me that the temptation there is to save the lives of one's-self, or even one's nearest comrades as well, via accessing a tactic that more lawful conduct would disallow. Would you then agree that it seems quite plausible that the punishment must be something more than a quick and simple death?

          The concept of 'vengeance' has been brought up, and while eliminating it entirely in the hearts of every individual involved in the enactment of Ruceeglaelsktinagian justice is a distant pipe-dream, our laws do not have it as an objective. Instead we have 'justice'. Our King follows the King of Kings, the Christ, who commands us to both love 'justice' and 'mercy' and eschew 'vengeance' as he reserves that last for his own to dispense. But what is 'justice' when the 'vengeance' has been stripped away? Surely it is slow and sure, rather than acting in rash haste, but beyond that, what goals are good to pursue when justice and mercy must each have there say? Thus the idea that the central good that justice accomplishes is deterrence. Which brings us back to the idea of balancing punishments to suit various crimes and criminals.

          But first I should take a side-trip and mention that the idea of 'protection' via means other than 'deterrence' might easily be mistaken for justice, but is actually not. To understand this, consider a nearly incorrigible individual who takes great joy in beating anyone he can to the point of permanent injury or death. If one flogs him and then releases him, this might accomplish 'deterrence', but only a little of 'protection', since, as I have stated, he is greatly incorrigible. But how-then if one should enact a great magic which would suspend him in a dream where he would have his every hearts desire, and should neither age, nor hunger, nor thirst. Surely this second fate would have no justice to it although great mercy, for surely such a thing would qualify as a reward to many. Yet it would accomplish protection for all his potential future victims, since he would be asleep until the spell was broken, if only by the ending of the world. In this sleep he would do no harm to any, save his own soul.

          And yes, it is true that rewarding good can and should work in concern with punishing evil, yet Good is a quiet thing, and thus I argue is best rewarded by spreading happiness and prosperity to all in accordance with their efforts at the common and everyday tasks. Naturally, there are also rewards for especial virtue, such as scholarships, bounties for apprehending evil-doers, public recognitions for charitable donations, and so on and so forth. And yet... what rewards would you have in mind that could help the situation between Ruceeglaelsktinag and the Vedag? Ruceeglaelsktinag has sought, does seek, and will continue to seek, trade and somewhat of cultural exchange, yet still warfare recurs. Surely a bounty for one who turns in his fellow countryman who would raise rebellion against our occupation would be a reward, although some might debate if it is a reward for Goodness. Yet such a reward goes in hand with punishment. In another regard, one might imagine showering cities that did not rebel with gold simply for that fact, but what is that but tribute in disguise, which only encourages demands for greater tribute, and laziness to improve ones own situation by ones own efforts, thus decreasing the total amount of labor performed, and thereby impoverishing the world as a whole as the effects of rust and moth eat away faster than is being built?"

          Originally posted by Rational Gaze View Post
          My character now replies to Umbris:
          "Thus, what would I see done to a murderer? Well, that depends very much on the circumstances. One who murders out of the evil of his own heart, and who enjoys and revels in it is clearly and unequivocally deserving of the most severe punishments known to man. Whereas someone who commits murder out of desperation, and/or who comes to recognise the immorality of their actions would warrant a lesser penalty."
          "Well, to slay such a one on a slab dedicated to the Warder Cuthbert and request endless torment for him or her might even be overdoing it... we try to reserve that level for those with an especially prolonged history of such action often compounded by false repentances made via strong deceptive magics. But yes, true repentance often does warrant a lesser sentence in our courts."
          Originally posted by Thomas Maltuin View Post
          Umbris takes on a playful look of surprise,

          Why Benir, I don't think I could. I know the story but I prefer listening. Besides, my version of the tale would be far more complicated and thought provoking--not to say it isn't provocative enough on its own. -no, I'd much rather hear the thoughts of my fellow thinkers!

          Now, looking towards the other outspoken two charmingly...

          As the many characters of the story have their biases, so do the interpreters of the tale. I only wonder if anyone hear thinks that intimidating the very same you wish to help by means of torturing and killing their kinsmen might nullify the original act of kindness... Hunger is terrible but who can say they'd rather have a bowl of bland mush at the expense of losing their fellow man? And perhaps another consideration is was the help even requested in the first place...
          Benir's brow knits in confusion towards the end.

          "I was trying to seek out what your impressions of Ruceeglaelsktinagian sophontarian* efforts were to better understand how to start. You must have a most peculiar impression to raise that last objection.

          As for your first point, I would say that any individual of a conquered people who did not, in fact, take heart for the sake of their own selfish interests would be showing no more than slightly above average intelligence. For were not the harsh punishments you describe done in aid of reducing the danger to those providing the food? Would that not reducing such dangers tend to increase the number and duration that volunteers remain?

          And yet... I can not truly blame anyone who would avoid such a place out of fear. Foolish it might be, but such folly is common to common persons. Careful explanations to the crowd in their own tongue or tongues can help, and there are mixed opinions as to if the punishments should be carried out in the center of the relief area, outside its perimeter, or at some site separate enough that the screaming is muted, yet within the same township. Personally I favor the midst of those being given aid, although damping out the sound by restricting the breath of the guilty, or even a spell can be of use. However, such a spell would be of greater power than one that would bend the accused to the will to cause them to see the interrogator as a well-liked friend. As such, it might be seen as less than merciful.

          I think that, in the usual version of the story, better signage to announce the procedures for unusual cases, so that the mother-goblin would know how she might procure food for her sick child would be desirable, although the issue of illiteracy unfortunately rears its head... and still more getting those being aided to read such things. Also, such listings of rules that are not entirely comfortable to the readers does tend to attract defacement of various sorts, and to punish those who perform such defacement has its own diminishing returns. In actuality, we DO use such signage, and DO tend to place it beside where a guard would usually stand, and DO make announcements when time is available to those with the ability to speak in a tongue that will be understood.

          One thing that most versions of the tale completely leave out is what actually happened to the goblin who the mother-goblin appealed to for translation and who refused her. With the very high emphasis in most Vedag cultures on self-rule, which in my opinion is to the point of excess, Ruceeglaelsktinag would not normally be involved in such matters except as specifically requested by the locals. Certainly if no prior understanding existed an inquiry might be made as to if the individual who refused to translate should be detained if it was convenient when seen, and then turned over to the locals for punishment, whether that be a beating or hanging by a mob, or a highly formal trial, or anything between the two.

          Of course, none of this even touches on the most critical generalization that almost all versions of the tale gloss over with no more than three stanzas, and those not repeated. This is the idea that the closest kin should be the ones delivering the punishment. To ask a wife to slow-kill her husband is a colossal burden, and not one to be inflicted without equally great need. In fact, Ruceeglaelsktinag does no such thing in the case of most conquered peoples. It is only when the bonds of family and a culture of vengeance-taking are paramount in a given people that such measures must be employed. In this way we encourage family members to look out for eachother by saying, at worst:

          'Drive these filthy Rucees out of our land, but do so within the rules they have set, else-wise if you are caught you will surely bring out entire clan down, for our bonds are strong, and none of us will raise their hand against another. I shall be watching you carefully, and if you betray our clan by considering to act outside those rules, I shall kill you in your sleep to protect our clan, and then commit ritual suicide for daring to strike you down.'

          Of course, it I have never heard a clear answer as to if this aspect turns out to be more or less applicable to the ideas that such procedures separate those willing to be progressive in their thinking from those who are not by winnowing them like chaff, or that death at the hands of family member is a distinctly greater deterrent for its terribleness to the transgressor themselves, regardless of any pity they might have for the one required to perform the execution.

          Even there there are ways of scaling things down. At the lowest level having the family privately loan a knife to the executioner, which is used to cut the rope holding the guillotine-blade suspended. After that is the public presentation of the knife to the executioner at the execution, then above that is cutting the rope themselves, then yet higher in severity are progressively smaller knives and thicker ropes, then still above that standing by with knife in hand during part or the whole of torture of the condemned, and so on and so forth on up to extended family each <redacted by GM in caution/deference to his poor best understanding of the desires expressed by Chaotic Void> while praying to all the deities for the damnation of the condemned with anti-falsehood magics in play and other torments being visited on the remaining portions of the body by a rotation of those whose turns it isn't currently. These remaining portions of the body are healed by the local clerics whenever unconsciousness or death loom to close, and also entrap the soul in a gemstone paid for by the family when the closest relative who has held the knife of withheld mercy to the condemned's throat through this whole procedure finally makes their cut to at the stomach for a slower death.

          I should emphasize that that last one is so rare for Ruceeglaelsktinagian justice that judges and lawyers specializing in the laws of such areas are required to prove their proficiency in knowledge of each and every such case before they can have any dealings as the leader of any of the three concerns. By which I mean the judge, prosecution, or defense. I only brought it up out of caution that if I did not then some of you might see me as white-washing the matter.

          I can provide further details on what various levels exist if any desire them, but I feel I've talked a while.

          Actually, that still leaves the last point you brought up. It usually only in the case of plagues in areas where our healers are not trusted that there is any possibility of Ruceeglaelsktinagian charity being forced on a person... unless one counts keeping the general peace to be an act of charity to those who would otherwise lose territorial squabbles between warbands and/or gangs? Naturally Ruceeglaelsktinag has encampments for their soldiers and such, so what of it if some additional locations are held where charity is offered to those who will take it? And if armed patrols for military and peace-keeping purposes are permitted then why should not doctors, non-combative clerics, engineers, and missionaries go about, either with or without escort, crying out their offers and messages? To claim that we do otherwise is not an unheard of accusation, but in the context of the Tragedy of the Ladle Mistress it would be an odd twist to the tale indeed, as it would rob away the nobility of the mother-goblin and the Ruceeglaelsktinagian charity effort as a whole. Furthermore it would do so in a way that would make the tale much the less interesting to the listener, or so it seems to me. I wonder at what sort of storyteller would choose such a twist. I suspect I may have misunderstood you, and you heard no such version however."

          *((IRL we would call this HUMANitarian.))

          Comment


          • #20
            After listening tothe exchange between Benir, Thanatos, and Umbris for a short while, I'll state," I agree that these laws are applicable in certain situations, but in the version of the tale I've heard, the young goblin should have at most had to cut the rope to the guillotine, and not be put to death due to the probable fact he was following his fathers orders and he likely knew no better than someone he looked to as a leader, his father, had told him. I'd also like to state that if these laws are used regularly they should be used with more discretion than I believe is shown in the tale, having just one cleric in charge doesn't seem plausible, especially if, after so many years one cleric becomes corrupted or weaker willed than they were because of the wear and tear of time and pressure that is on all of us." -Razzik

            Comment


            • #21
              Benir looks very slightly like he just ate something sour, given how the tiny purse to his lips and the slight roughening of his voice.

              "Well, the boy would have been an unlawful combatant, so by the letter of the international conventions the Guardian of the Code would have been well within his rights to condemn him to death on that basis alone. Of course we must never forget that there were devils, blue and green dragons, and other paragons of Lawful Evil at those conventions. So yes, his execution would have been much more quick than that, if it happened at all given the circumstances that most versions of the tale portray.

              However, what you may be omitting from your considerations are the allowances made for extracting actionable intelligence from known violators of The Codes. In such cases no second opinion is required if it is not conveniently available, several witnesses, and at least one a reliable witness can be entirely sufficient that the mere selection of witnesses would not require a routine board of inquiry under Ruceeglaelsktinagian law. Naturally the internal affairs decision might randomly select such a case for review, and any military magestrate in the Ruceeglaelsktinagian army could earmark the case for review by a judge properly trained and certified in the requisite areas of the laws of both nation and The Codes themselves. For the second type of witness any of the guards in the relief are would have qualified.

              In a pinch, with an interrogator of sufficient reputation, a single random local could have sufficed, although that gets into a big mess when it comes to verifying if such a witness is lying, although in that case an investigation would be required in every case under Ruceeglaelsktinagian law.

              I would like to make two major points. The first regarding what is an appropriate level of force in acquiring information in what may be a rapidly-developing tactical situation, and the second regarding the extents of what the goblin-boy would have been guilty of.

              As for the severity of the torments applied on the spot during the extraction of information, those are actually considered a completely separate issue under The Code, although they frequently come in as reasons why Ruceeglaelsktinagian authorities may allocate a lesser sentence. Basically, the reasoning is that as long as the torments are insufficient to extract all the information that there is good reason to suspect would lose its value in the time period before more gentle methods could reasonably be spared to the purpose, then those torments can not have been carried out for too long a period. There are also rules regarding limits on the appropriate starting levels and rates of escalation.

              In short, for example, if an individual should violate The Code, and it be even somewhat reasonable to suspect they may know something of great and immediate importance, and when asked 'Do you know anything of use?', they should keep silent, or seem to be lying when they say 'No, I know nothing of use related to the past, present, or future actions of those who may be in violation of The Code.'... and I should remind all gathered here that the interrogators we are considering here can be fooled into thinking the spoken truth is a lie only by the means with non-trivial magics, in which case I would suggest that the blame lies on the caster of said magics in almost every case.

              But back to my original point! If someone should know but little, but there is little surety it IS little based on what the interrogator knows, then whatever methods prove necessary to discovering that information can not be too much, as the fault lies with the one withholding the information. But if much torment is applied, and the tormented was guilty of but little, then no separate sentence is applied. This is similar to the principle operative in the situation of an accused in some small village accused of some complex crime such that the trial drags out while waiting for the arrival of a judge and lawyers versed in the particular area of the law might be sentenced to 'time served'. And, as in such cases, the state will often make restitution and redress. For instance, a farmer whose crops failed while he was in jail would be granted food at the public expense until the harvest after the next planting season. In the case of a violator of The Code in a very small way, with very small knowledge protected by great force of will to the violators own detriment, magics are usually used to repair the mind from the costs of the trauma, a public declaration of the smallness of the crimes is given, and, if the suffering was great, and the resources are available the memories of the torments may be wiped from the mind.

              My one of two central points is that, in the cases of violators of The Codes, whatever torment is necessary to extract information related to violators of The Codes that there is a reasonable possibility of being time-critical is generally the indicated level of torment. Naturally, since multiple attacks in quick succession or even simultaneously are a common strategy in most town-level areas of operation, a violator of The Codes caught in the act must usually be assumed to know something time-sensitive.

              My second point is that the goblin-boy might not have even been technically punished for his part in the initial attack despite being without uniform and aiding in an attack targeting a civilian. It is difficult to draw the necessary bases for legal discussion from a tale with scores of variations, but everything that occurred to the boy might have been a legally supportable demand for demonstration of allegiance to The Codes by assisting in the interrogation of his father at the first stage, and being used as a tool to obtain that cooperation at the second. A little thought will reveal that being tortured by a close family member is generally more horrific than being tortured by a known foe, although an interrogator might sometimes mis-judge whether that would raise such ire in the father that it would over-whelm the additional pressure on the mind. Having fallen short of his duty, even after being pardoned fo his two earlier crimes, the boy would then be sufficiently guilty that torturing him to more rapidly gain the father's cooperation would not be viewed as outside the limits of Ruceeglaelsktinag's balance between Justice, Mercy, and Expediency. In fact, in almost all cases, if the father had folded early on, he would have been executed swiftly by the hand of a Ruceeglaelsktinagian soldier, perhaps with the involvement of a loaned knife. Of course, the issue of motive for the boy's refusal would enter into the picture. If it were merely the horror of causing harm in general, it might even fall under the catagories that Ruceeglaelsktinag recognizes, though The Codes, which allow both Good and Evil, do not even define of 'conscientious objector'. Even if he should be motivated by love for his father, that might earn him only one to three public lashes of a the cat-o-nine-tails scaled to his frame from his mother at some later date, or even less than that. But if he should fail to acknowledge that his father's actions were wrong, or admit to some loyalty to his own species for the sake of loyalty to said species, then that would be accounted against him."

              At this point both 'Bloodsoaked' and 'Eugenicist' raise their hands. Benir turns to them both at once and says: "Let me guess, you would both weigh in on the validity of loyalty to own's own blood?"

              "@&$#| sure I do!" replies 'Bloodsoaked'.

              "Yes." says 'Eugenicist'.

              "A worthy issue, but I feel we should table it for the moment until we have explored other issues related to the dispensation of Justice and Mercy, and the role, if any, of Expediency when time is a pressing concern. We might split into two groups, with the larger group taking the larger room if one or both of you prefer?"

              "Nay, I'd rather be heard by a larger group later than a smaller one now." says 'Eugenicist'.

              "A victory over a great territory, and with opposition strong is more glorious than one over a smaller territory or with inexperienced opposition. I'll remain here a while, although my patience will not last forever, and I may settle for a smaller victory, and count all who will not hear my words at that time as fled cowards." says 'Bloodsoaked'.

              Comment


              • #22
                At this point, our somewhat underground pantherian, Umbris, is looking all the more serious, if not hurt slightly. The things going through his head are many and include memories of past pains as well as empathy for those discussed.

                Somewhere during this long address, Umbris begins to halfway wander in thought...



                I can still remember...the looks in all their eyes

                ...the hunter and the hunted, predator and his prey...

                fear

                hatred

                pain

                disgust

                I'm still afraid...

                No one has the right to-


                Bottom line, I disagree with the entire scenario.
                Umbris now looks hardened, yet still pained.
                I think the handling of events from any version of this story is corrupt. I don't care to elaborate on this at present, but I will say that the amount of suffering will always be excessive. But that's how it is while we lack peace. What I see in all this, is a people trying to prevent conflict by forcefully administering justice on such a high level that the the receiving party could develop more resentment than fear and respect. This last bit could potentially worsen matters and cause a revolt rather than prevent one. That aside, assuming the punishment is issued as a way of preventing later damage on a larger scale to either party, it could be viewed as making involuntary martyrs, a disgusting thought.

                If I were forced to watch enough of the things just described, I can't say that I wouldn't want to die myself, even if only a spectating friend or acquaintance. If we cause an entire people to hate us further and ensure an attack, or cause them to wish their own extinction, isn't it more merciful to extinguish them altogether. I don't suggest that, but it puts things in perspective.
                If mere death had been offered in the place of what we were dealt, then perhaps... no... *clears throat*

                I think there is need for reform, what kind, who am I to say. What is certain, is if the pain is to lessen, the root cause of said pain needs to be addressed and resolved. I prefer Diplomacy to brute force, but I'm no stranger to violence. I only wish to avoid it where possible. Having respect for the greater good, I will fight where necessary to secure futures brighter.

                Breathe...

                Umbris relaxes and tries to smile at Benir, I was not making objection, only raising questions. I fear, I've been to forward, I tend to get a bit excited in some conversations. I have strange affinities and one is to get inside the heads of people now and then. I believe some of your kind have a saying about the curiosity of the creatures whose semblance I bear.

                Comment


                • #23
                  "In order to give you a sensible answer, I think I must greatly clarify your meaning first.

                  You disagree with 'the entire scenario'? I suspect you don't mean that literally, since that would mean that you disagree with the offering of food to the hungry. Do you object to having a secure area for the giving of such food? The requirement that only under very special circumstances that any such food be removed from the serving area? The kneeling? The fact that the mother was not detained for trying to take food out of the area, and then interrogated without torment in her own tongue, which likely would have saved her baby's life?

                  Also you speak of 'Justice on such a high level' which somewhat suggests to me you are missing the major point of half the torments described. Would you care to revise your statement or do I need to clarify why I think that?

                  What do you mean by 'when we lack peace'? Do you simply refer to war itself?

                  And what do you see as being the 'root cause' that you speak of? Is there any you have in mind, or do you see that as being incredibly widely varied?"
                  Last edited by Draco Dei; 10-06-2015, 03:26 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I was speaking in generalities when I said I disagreed. I shall have to watch my tongue more closely. I'd like to say that I meant I disagreed with the part I paid the most attention to. Forgive me, but in this discussion there is one topic that grips my attention more than others and for a moment, that was all I heard. I do not disagree with all you have mentioned, but going into specifics is something I do cautiously. Some of my motives may seem complicated or may require more explanation than I feel safe to give. However, I hope that as we all learn to trust each other better, I might in good confidence share with you with great confidence.

                    When I spoke of justice, I meant to say "justice as the one exacts it would define it." Once again, being slightly ruffled from thinking too much on the matter as I see it in my mind, I meant justice being dispensed via such a "high level" of severity. If you wish to clarify, I will listen as always, but that does not ensure I will agree with your way of seeing it. I try to remove my own bias, but to be perfect at this would be to remove all signs of having a mind of my own.

                    On that note, I think that a mans mind should be his sanctuary and that, alongside his God-Given freewill, that no man, beast, or sentient-cloud should have the right or ability to touch it. Better to extinguish a life than manipulate it beyond recognition. Say you have a sculptor, you take his arms and say "at least he gets to live..." but what is life to him then. perhaps not all but some might cast their own head against the stone they carved from to end the miserable purgatory they have now been made to dwell in.

                    When I said, "that's how it is while we lack peace," yet again if refer to a broad concept, not a specific instance. "So long as there is conflict, there is suffering." It is ongoing, there may never be true peace so long as we are breathing on this plane. The idea, is to strive for it.

                    As far as a root cause is concerned,... I...


                    Umbris examines his left paw with an increasingly neutral expression.

                    I haven't the slightest idea. I only meant that if anything is causing this much pain, it needs to be eradicated. The root would be the deepest original factor. The indirect cause. Find it and...

                    Umbirs looks hard and directly into the eyes of benir.

                    Pull it up by the root.
                    Perhaps this will inevitably lead to causing more pain. Perhaps the greater good is already being served, I only wish there was another way. If bringing peace requires the torment and excessive pain of others, I will not interfere. however,


                    Umbris looks again at the palm of his paw as if searching it for an answer. The highly observant might notice a watery look in his eye.

                    I should hope to not to stand near enough to hear their screams.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Thanatos interjects:
                      "I assume, of course, that the war in the tale was started by the goblins? If so, then there is little I disagree with. The only tragedy, aside from the murder of the serving girl, is that the poor goblin woman's infant died due to a language barrier. Maybe the boy received too harsh a sentence, but, other than that, I agree: the penalty for unrepentant murder is death. The only issue that faces those who pursue justice is in determining what is and is not the case."
                      My Amazon Author page: https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B0719RS8BK

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I'll look at Benir and tell him,"I see what you mean, and of course I shoudn't have spoken so hastily, but I had forgotten as the one version is more known to me." and then, " I do believe the boy was guilty, and his execution of course was but a following of the law that the people in charge of that territory saw fit." -Razzik .
                        Last edited by ForrestGump; 10-11-2015, 09:11 PM. Reason: Because Reasons

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Thomas Maltuin View Post
                          I was speaking in generalities when I said I disagreed. I shall have to watch my tongue more closely. I'd like to say that I meant I disagreed with the part I paid the most attention to. Forgive me, but in this discussion there is one topic that grips my attention more than others and for a moment, that was all I heard. I do not disagree with all you have mentioned, but going into specifics is something I do cautiously. Some of my motives may seem complicated or may require more explanation than I feel safe to give. However, I hope that as we all learn to trust each other better, I might in good confidence share with you with great confidence.
                          "Ah, I see. Well, I can not begrudge you that, although it may ever so slightly reduce the progress we make today. Better a moderate amount of discussion than none at all."
                          Originally posted by Thomas Maltuin View Post
                          When I spoke of justice, I meant to say "justice as the one exacts it would define it." Once again, being slightly ruffled from thinking too much on the matter as I see it in my mind, I meant justice being dispensed via such a "high level" of severity. If you wish to clarify, I will listen as always, but that does not ensure I will agree with your way of seeing it. I try to remove my own bias, but to be perfect at this would be to remove all signs of having a mind of my own.
                          "Indeed it would for any mind save perhaps that of Boccob the Warder... but I doubt even him given his lack of agenda."
                          Originally posted by Thomas Maltuin View Post
                          On that note, I think that a mans mind should be his sanctuary and that, alongside his God-Given freewill, that no man, beast, or sentient-cloud should have the right or ability to touch it. Better to extinguish a life than manipulate it beyond recognition. Say you have a sculptor, you take his arms and say "at least he gets to live..." but what is life to him then. perhaps not all but some might cast their own head against the stone they carved from to end the miserable purgatory they have now been made to dwell in.
                          "So then would take that so far as to support the use of swords that can kill or wound to the exclusion of the spells of the enchanter and the necromancer who instills terror directly into the hearts of his foes, and which end a conflict without injury? What of the illusionist?

                          And what of the Mark of Justice which does not effect the mind to twist its purpose, but only lays a strong curse on the criminal if he should recur in his crime? Is that not a gentler fate than to hold a person in prison for many years until his spirit is broken in that way? Or do you claim that every prison should be sufficiently comfortable as to provide no deterrence, but only a safe separation of the possibly recurring criminal from his potential victims?

                          Understand, I'm not claiming you do any of these things, I'm merely saying that I have heard all of these and more spoken as heart-felt truth within chambers like this one, and I wish to be sure I am understanding you...

                          Similarly, it seems you may not draw any line between a sin committed in the heart, and a plan to enact a crime. The first is not something that Ruceeglaelsktinag makes its business, but the second can be when the harm being considered is great enough. At the VERY least, we might... well, we reserve the right to give warning to those who may turn out to only be considering harm, rather than having plans that are nearly certain to bloom into action if they are given opportunity. I believe the saying is... 'My knife to your throat, we are friends'?"

                          Here another interrupts (he called himself "Granite Foot" in the introductions) : "Excuse me, I think you have that wrong. In my every experience that saying refers to a phenomena that may be applied in some very uncommon cultures, where-by someone who is feared, but does not actually intend harm, yet has overwhelming strength may subdue the fearful without permanent harm, and then release them. It is a rare culture indeed where this will be seen as a demonstration of a lack of desire to cause harm, rather than a threat."

                          "Ah, yes. My mistake. What was I thinking?" replies Benir, "In any case, the idea that 'thought crimes' should not exist in laws, and the idea that say, the spell known as Zone of Truth, which merely prevents the speaking of lies, coupled with the legal principle that silence qualifies as an admission of guilt seem to be very separate ideas to me. And if the guilty must be forced to speak to protect the innocent, then it seems to me that the arts of the enchanter are a superior method to those of the torturer, just as gold is superior to copper... and alas that gold must be the rarer metal! ... although I've had a Gnomish banker tell me that is nonsense, although I do not quite remember his argument.

                          I would speak on the idea of directly altering the minds of criminals, but I feel I've already run long, and should give you some time to respond to my questions and ideas."
                          Originally posted by Thomas Maltuin View Post
                          When I said, "that's how it is while we lack peace," yet again if refer to a broad concept, not a specific instance. "So long as there is conflict, there is suffering." It is ongoing, there may never be true peace so long as we are breathing on this plane. The idea, is to strive for it.

                          As far as a root cause is concerned,... I...

                          Umbris examines his left paw with an increasingly neutral expression.

                          I haven't the slightest idea. I only meant that if anything is causing this much pain, it needs to be eradicated. The root would be the deepest original factor. The indirect cause. Find it and...

                          Umbirs looks hard and directly into the eyes of benir.

                          Pull it up by the root.
                          Perhaps this will inevitably lead to causing more pain. Perhaps the greater good is already being served, I only wish there was another way. If bringing peace requires the torment and excessive pain of others, I will not interfere. however,

                          Umbris looks again at the palm of his paw as if searching it for an answer. The highly observant might notice a watery look in his eye.

                          I should hope to not to stand near enough to hear their screams.
                          "Yes, well, I would encourage that in you. Those who can do, or even be very near to such things done by their allies on a regular basis without taking at least a little damage to the mind are somewhat rare. We do have to be selective, and rotate personnel out of positions likely to be proximate to such procedures, and as for the ones most directly involved... well, they simply must have the gift.

                          With greater distance comes the risk of greater coldness, and I consider it a wise saying that 'All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men stand by and do nothing'."

                          Here another (Elysium) chimes in with "And the reverse of course! I fully support the encouraging of the smoking hemp among those societies that would otherwise be prone to aggression!"

                          "Perhaps an... effective defense in the medium term, although I'd raise serious concerns about its kindness in the long term... which may get back to Umbris's point about affecting the mind directly, if that even was what he was trying to say?"
                          Originally posted by Rational Gaze View Post
                          Thanatos interjects:
                          "I assume, of course, that the war in the tale was started by the goblins? If so, then there is little I disagree with. The only tragedy, aside from the murder of the serving girl, is that the poor goblin woman's infant died due to a language barrier. Maybe the boy received too harsh a sentence, but, other than that, I agree: the penalty for unrepentant murder is death. The only issue that faces those who pursue justice is in determining what is and is not the case."
                          "Well, yes, that would seem to me to be the more accurate version of the tale, and is the more common to boot I do believe.
                          As for determining factual truths... yes, that is an important issue, but it is like saying 'a blacksmith should not burn himself upon glowing iron'... a vital concern, and very occasional accidents prove it a non-trivial task, but hardly the more difficult issue in actual practice over all. At least with our current policies."
                          Last edited by Draco Dei; 10-11-2015, 10:47 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Umbris becomes a bit flustered and worries that all chance of anonymity is swiftly being stripped away despite the many enchantments and preventative measures taken. He takes on a somewhat agitated tone though not aggressive, he has no intention of breaking the peace rule. However, he is trying to keep his calm. His emotions have been up and down and to his surprise, this entire conversation has been nowhere near his expectation as he's been caught off guard multiple times. He would need more practice. Unable to see all possible outcomes and fearing the worst, Umbris has become a bit unnerved and is therefore on edge.

                            If you really want to know how I feel, I'm afraid I've become frustrated. At the start of this convention, the option of silence was offered and now I wish I had not been so foolish as to neglect its value. I spoke of a man's mind being his sanctuary and this I believe. My means of finding out what a man thinks involve more creative technique than simple pain or the use of bluntly inflicted mental anguish--but please don't think to hard on this as it's hardly of importance. What I really want to say is that currently I feel like the very sanctuary I described is the object of your interest and that the room will not be satisfied until my every dark memory has been extracted. If anything can be said here by me, it would be that nearly nothing is black and white.To every argument, a counter. To every rule, a loophole. To every absolute, an exception--with exception to the rational of the divine, naturally I speak of our perspectives. When I said I wanted to keep my complicated reasoning to myself, I thought it would be obvious that explaining them would require not only an imposition to my privacy, but also a weak spot for solving my identity. I had also truly believed that there would be other ways to derive a solution than examining the origins of each individual's psyche. Perhaps I'm foolish for this, but it is what it is. I'm young yet, and although I've probably seen as much as the majority, I've much experience left to acquire.

                            Now if you so desire it, then to the pit with anonymity.


                            Umbris raises his shrouded paws the hood of his cloak slowly. He then pauses and looks at Benir waiting to see if he should continue or if it is demanded or desired that he should keep his face and hands covered. Umbris is now ready to answer some questions about why he is biased though he is still unlikely to reveal more than what is needed to properly justify his perspectives.
                            Last edited by Thomas Maltuin; 10-12-2015, 08:37 AM. Reason: forgot to include a detail or two.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              casting a negative light on these meetings.

                              "Nay! Stay your hand! That was not what I meant at all! I care nothing for the origins of your biases per se, and have no wish to discover your identity!

                              Your mind is indeed your own, the more-so in this place and time!

                              To put it more precisely I cared somewhat for the evidences that you based your reasoning on. Which often lies close to the origins of ones biases, but I sought to remain in the realm of logical thought, even as I stated at the outset. If revealing such evidences would endanger your anonymity then such evidences must remain beyond the reach of the group I think. An entirely necessary cost in my view.

                              My sincere apology for the misunderstanding." he finishes with soft voice and bowed eyes and head conveying his humility

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                ((The first line of my previous post in this thread is a typo I failed to notice in time to correct.))

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X