Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GreatWyrmGold]

Implications further down the line don't matter much when his men hack you to pieces.

This isn't a video game; the Count isn't bright, but he's smart enough to realize that killing a noble doing a perfectly legal action, especially when suspected of trying to kill said noble, is a fast track to demotion and death, if lucky.

The Count can't predict the fall-out from you having an "accident" in his city,

So? Don't stay in the city for long, keep soldiers with you.

Implications won't matter when you move overland, and they catch up to you.

Yes, they will, because they keep the men from being sent.

You've got the man who ends everything for the Count, his damned nephew-in-law, as you endlessly reminded me last time, who we shouldn't antagonize him by abducting. Now, one piece of paper without a single extra soldier to enforce it has seemingly been a game changer and makes you stride into his lands and be surrounded by his men and horses confidently.

Look.
The difference isn't the paper, it's the entire kingdom except the Count and Sir Stone.

Your argument this time is that our paper means something, that if the Count catches up to us, that paper means our life rather than we go missing without a trace. Be logical. It's far better to catch us and dispose of us than risk his nephew-in-law talking, whatever the fall-out of a upjumped peasant disappearing.

Look, the reason the paper matters is that we can actually persecute the merchant without breaking laws.
Why is this important?
Before, if the Count attacked us back, in the eyes of the law and the Crown he would have been right, so we would have been against everyone else.
Now, if he does so, he will be fighting the whole kingdom.
How the heck does the Count hide that Sir Stone and his men all mysteriously died right after he sent out his cavalry in their direction?

Can we just poison the bastard like we talked about when we first met him?!

No. That's kinda illegal, and would end VERY badly for us WHEN discovered.

Thankfully, we'll be taking him lawfully. How do police officers do it?

What the hell is a police officer? Are you even trying to pretend that this is the middle ages?

Oh, because nothing people do these days was done in those days?
Look, people keep prisoners from fleeing during transport and have ever since there's been a concept of "prisoner." We have a few dozen soldiers; he's a merchant. We can manage him.

[Gervassen]

Implications further down the line don't matter much when his men hack you to pieces.

This isn't a video game; the Count isn't bright, but he's smart enough to realize that killing a noble doing a perfectly legal action, especially when suspected of trying to kill said noble, is a fast track to demotion and death, if lucky.
e ever since there's been a concept of "prisoner." We have a few dozen soldiers; he's a merchant. We can manage him.

DEMOTION! LOL! POLICE OFFICER! LAW AND ORDER!

Some barons in England grabbed Piers Gaveston, the favorite courtier of King Edward II, and killed him. The old rumor was that they did it with a hot poker in the bum. The king couldn't do shit to them in retaliation. Later, one of them, Thomas of Lancaster, became an official with great power in the government. Finally, years later, after Thomas had made sufficient powerful enemies among the barons, specifically the Despenser family, he too got executed. No demotions! His holding went to his younger brother Henry.

Why don't you try pretending you're in a feudal society without police officers, demotions, or strong rule of law? It could be fun.

[GreatWyrmGold]

DEMOTION! LOL! POLICE OFFICER! LAW AND ORDER!

...

Some barons in England grabbed Piers Gaveston, the favorite courtier of King Edward II, and killed him. The old rumor was that they did it with a hot poker in the bum. The king couldn't do shit to them in retaliation. Later, one of them, Thomas of Lancaster, became an official with great power in the government. Finally, years later, after Thomas had made sufficient powerful enemies among the barons, specifically the Despenser family, he too got executed. No demotions! His holding went to his younger brother Henry.
Why don't you try pretending you're in a feudal society without police officers, demotions, or strong rule of law? It could be fun.

1. No Rule of Law, but the king won't like it if the Count goes off and kills one of his knights; if he doesn't do anything about this flagrant breech of law, he loses face. And the king has a bigger army than the Count.
2. Putting that aside, why don't you work your way back to the actual question for which I brought up police officers?

[Mlamlah]

The count isn't exactly popular, and he's going up against people with more authority and power than him. The duke has a number of other counts under him, and there is no guarantee that the count will even have all of his knights and troops under him if he decides to go against us. He has nothing to gain by resisting, and everything to lose. There is already a scandal brewing, he adds to it and he's fucked.

He's way more likely to hang the merchant out to dry than he is to defend him. "Blah blee bloo blee blah, this guy married my niece trying to muscle in on my name and orchestrated a plot to discredit me so he could take some influence in the power vacuum."

[Gervassen]

1. No Rule of Law, but the king won't like it if the Count goes off and kills one of his knights; if he doesn't do anything about this flagrant breech of law, he loses face. And the king has a bigger army than the Count.

Vaguely-remembered knights are a dime a dozen.

Flagrant breech? So the whole country watches the 11 o'clock news each night? The disappearance of a small-time knight gets passed by word-of-mouth, if it interests enough people in other regions. I was not aware that we had made a name for ourselves kingdom-wide. The question here is not royal. It does not cause the king to lose face, because no one cares about us outside of our immediate neighbor.

This is local, and it's about local power relationships and manpower... not laws. The Duke can't move just because a favorite of his niece went missing. Kings didn't do that for their own favorites being outright killed! You march on an established noble family for something weak as a recently elevated peasant disappearing, and every other established noble will become uneasy. Most of these noble families have had their lands for centuries and you need to get rid of this idea that the Count will be "demoted" by "rule of law" or something. It'll go to another family member if he's stripped of his title, since no other noble family wants the hereditary status-quo being disturbed. Unless the king is extremely strong-willed and personally enraged. The king probably isn't, and definitely won't be.

2. Putting that aside, why don't you work your way back to the actual question for which I brought up police officers?

You ask me, "how do police officers do it?" Okay. If they live where you probably do, they probably ring the doorbell, and get the reply "Hello, officer, is there something I can help you with?" Then they politely ask you to go in for questioning. You realize that fighting them yourself is impossible, and that your neighbors believe strongly in rule of law and won't help you.

Down in Oakland, CA, maybe the police don't go at all. Maybe they go and get nowhere with people that don't respect their authority. Maybe they get shot at by thugs that just don't like cops.

And that's in a country with otherwise strong notions of law, and police that haven't upset the local strongman. Now, since I've been so kind, in return answer me this: how do police do it in Somalia?

[Mlamlah]

Then we act quickly, no dillydallying, before our enemies have a chance to mobilize or react.

[Gervassen]

Then we act quickly, no dillydallying, before our enemies have a chance to mobilize or react.

I'll not disagree with that. Whatever is done must be swift.

[10ebbor10]

Yeah, just a note. If the count could afford to dissappear us before, he can afford to dissappear us and a piece of paper now.

[somebody]

Why don't we ask the duke to send a group with us to help ensure the arrest and retrieval goes smoothly?

[Mlamlah]

Why don't we ask the duke to send a group with us to help ensure the arrest and retrieval goes smoothly?

I'm not sure if this is on the table right now. Our liegelord's liegelord told us to do something. He might be trying to get us to prove ourself as well.

[kaian-a-coel]

Vaguely-remembered knights are a dime a dozen.

I'll point out that we are engaged to the Duke's niece, who is practically his daughter since she is an orphan (If I remember well). Our death will make quite the event, I can guarantee it.

So if the count does ANYTHING to stop us from getting the merchant, he is obstructing the law, and more directly the Duke's will. Simply refusing to hand off the merchant will cause him trouble, because the duke is suspecting him.
Harming us directly is a direct ticket for the ninth circle of hell.

[Gervassen]

The count's spymaster being brought in and talking will make quite more the event than even our dying. Our writ, that great bastion of the law though it may well be, also happens to show that we have enough dirt on the wool merchant to concern the Duke, which means there's every reason to suspect the dirt is enough to make him confess everything and sell out the Count in exchange for his life, which means the repercussions of our murder somewhere en route to the Duke are a much more distant worry than numerous dirty dealings coming to light that are far less ambiguous in ultimate consequences than a missing boy-toy of the Duke's niece.

Again, reference to Gaveston. Feudalism directly implies weak central authority. A fig for your "obstruction of law" and he wouldn't be the first lord to not give a damn about his superiors. I think you'd be moderately amused to read about the writs and summonses that the Percy family ignored in their feuds with the Nevilles.

[GreatWyrmGold]

1. No Rule of Law, but the king won't like it if the Count goes off and kills one of his knights; if he doesn't do anything about this flagrant breech of law, he loses face. And the king has a bigger army than the Count.

Vaguely-remembered knights are a dime a dozen.

Knights aren't soldiers, they're nobles who happen to be useful in war.
Killing a noble is a serious offense.

Flagrant breech? So the whole country watches the 11 o'clock news each night? The disappearance of a small-time knight gets passed by word-of-mouth, if it interests enough people in other regions. I was not aware that we had made a name for ourselves kingdom-wide. The question here is not royal. It does not cause the king to lose face, because no one cares about us outside of our immediate neighbor.

Except...you know...we're more well-known than a random knight, because of our unique history and unique governing strategies and new minerals. And, you know, our friends would make a stink, because they already suspect the Count of plotting to murder us.

This is local, and it's about local power relationships and manpower... not laws. The Duke can't move just because a favorite of his niece went missing. Kings didn't do that for their own favorites being outright killed! You march on an established noble family for something weak as a recently elevated peasant disappearing, and every other established noble will become uneasy. Most of these noble families have had their lands for centuries and you need to get rid of this idea that the Count will be "demoted" by "rule of law" or something. It'll go to another family member if he's stripped of his title, since no other noble family wants the hereditary status-quo being disturbed. Unless the king is extremely strong-willed and personally enraged. The king probably isn't, and definitely won't be.

Let me explain a few things...
1. Leaders who let people violate their laws without so much as taking action look weak.
2. Leaders who look weak tend to lose their ability to affect the world, not to mention their honor.
3. Kings don't like either of those, and therefore will probably act once the king is informed by, say, the uncle of our fiancee about our death and the various reasons to suspect the Count.
4. Killing a noble is a pretty serious offense. Killing us wouldn't be as bad as killing, say, the Duke or King, but it would be pretty bad, even without Marna.
5. Losing his power is something the Count doesn't want, and it's probably one of the lesser punishments that would be administered.
6. The Count doesn't have anything to gain by killing us so blatantly.

2. Putting that aside, why don't you work your way back to the actual question for which I brought up police officers?

You ask me, "how do police officers do it?" Okay. If they live where you probably do, they probably ring the doorbell, and get the reply "Hello, officer, is there something I can help you with?" Then they politely ask you to go in for questioning. You realize that fighting them yourself is impossible, and that your neighbors believe strongly in rule of law and won't help you.
Down in Oakland, CA, maybe the police don't go at all. Maybe they go and get nowhere with people that don't respect their authority. Maybe they get shot at by thugs that just don't like cops.
And that's in a country with otherwise strong notions of law, and police that haven't upset the local strongman. Now, since I've been so kind, in return answer me this: how do police do it in Somalia?

Okay, first off, you didn't answer the actual question. I asked how police officers transport criminals, not how they capture them.
Second off, the "nice" thing about the middle ages is that random people are much less likely to have lethal weapons.
Third off, we're not worried about random citizens attacking us; you're worried about the Count attacking us. Sure, his forces could probably overwhelm ours...but could they defeat the entire rest of the kingdom? No. So if it comes down to the people who support us (who now have the law on our side) against those who support the Count (just his closest friends and such), the odds are very much in our favor.

Yeah, just a note. If the count could afford to dissappear us before, he can afford to dissappear us and a piece of paper now.

If the count could afford to disappear us and a piece of paper, not to mention the men we're bringing with us to help restrain the prisoner and whatnot, why wouldn't he have disappeared us before?

The count's spymaster being brought in and talking will make quite more the event than even our dying.

Perhaps, but the spy talking and revealing everything (including his dealings with the Count) are lower than the chance of the king reacting to the death of a noble.

Our writ, that great bastion of the law though it may well be, also happens to show that we have enough dirt on the wool merchant to concern the Duke, which means there's every reason to suspect the dirt is enough to make him confess everything and sell out the Count in exchange for his life, which means the repercussions of our murder somewhere en route to the Duke are a much more distant worry than numerous dirty dealings coming to light that are far less ambiguous in ultimate consequences than a missing boy-toy of the Duke's niece.

Actually, it just means the merchant broke a law. For all that anyone not fairly familiar with the case knows, it could just be that the merchant forgot to pay taxes.

Again, reference to Gaveston. Feudalism directly implies weak central authority. A fig for your "obstruction of law" and he wouldn't be the first lord to not give a damn about his superiors. I think you'd be moderately amused to read about the writs and summonses that the Percy family ignored in their feuds with the Nevilles.

That "weak central authority" has access to a much larger army than the Count...

[Gervassen]

Knights aren't soldiers, they're nobles who happen to be useful in war.
Killing a noble is a serious offense.

Feuds happened. Probably why "feudal" and "fief" are cognates of a modern word for petty infighting, actually.

Except...you know...we're more well-known than a random knight, because of our unique history and unique governing strategies and new minerals. And, you know, our friends would make a stink, because they already suspect the Count of plotting to murder us

Our unique commoner history really resonates with established noble families. They love it when upjumped fieldhands access their exclusive world. These people would lay down their lives for us, because they are entranced at the good example that we set for other peasants, namely, that ruling a land is not a blood-right and can be done ably by a baseborn.

I mean, our listed friends consist of two neighbor knights, but just think of all that tacit support that naturally accumulates  around peasants that get uppity.

6. The Count doesn't have anything to gain by killing us so blatantly.

Except keeping his dirt secret. Dirt that can really undo him, no doubt in his mind. That guy probably has more secrets that just ours.

Okay, first off, you didn't answer the actual question. I asked how police officers transport criminals, not how they capture them.

In cars. Guess we need to double down on research and tech advancement. The point with my criticizing overland travel is you've got a squirming captive doubling up on someone's horse. And fast cavalry on your heels.

Second off, the "nice" thing about the middle ages is that random people are much less likely to have lethal weapons.

Plenty. Robin Hood is just the most obvious. No one can pinpoint who he is, because there's such a wealth of outlaws and robbers in medieval English history to potentially be the inspiration. When you travel, especially through the lands of your enemies who are scared, bandits can pop up out of nowhere and leave no trace.

If the count could afford to disappear us and a piece of paper, not to mention the men we're bringing with us to help restrain the prisoner and whatnot, why wouldn't he have disappeared us before?

He did. He failed. We were on our own lands and not his, so surviving was much easier.

Perhaps, but the spy talking and revealing everything (including his dealings with the Count) are lower than the chance of the king reacting to the death of a noble.

Wouldn't even notice. You saved his life and it earned you "vaguely remembered" whereas it would earn you "blood brothers" from most other men.

Actually, it just means the merchant broke a law. For all that anyone not fairly familiar with the case knows, it could just be that the merchant forgot to pay taxes.

Taxes... and we're just the person to execute that writ. Not to mention the merchant should only be taxed by his own lord, which is the Count, who gives a percentage to his lord, the duke. And this is a nutshell is what I'm trying to drive home. All laws are a smattering of local customs at this point in time, and the Duke does not have jurisdiction in the Count's land if the count has a quo warranto writ to hold a court. That was changing, but not quickly.

That "weak central authority" has access to a much larger army than the Count...

Does it? Count Theobald of Troyes gave the King of France a good run for his money. Kept his lands after the war, too. Must not have killed any recently-elevated peasant knights in the various battles and sieges, I suppose. That would have gone too far.

The King's forces are a small familia regis and... troops from other noble families. They won't be dragged from their homes to attack a noble who may possibly have killed a commonborn, rather than a band of bandits in the countryside.

[Gervassen]

I'm just arguing for amusement, by now. Maldevious, feel free to run whatever scenario you like. The results will interesting regardless.