Council of the Clans voting on... what?

[Furious J]

There's a lot of debate about how a vote might or might not go on the discussion thread for 1155. In looking at the different arguments about what would be a "reasonable" or "believable" vote, I came up with an interesting question. (or, well, a question that I find interesting, anyway.)

I think it's more or less a given that the elders were/are going to be presented with the same basic choice that the gods have: end the world, or don't end the world. However, how much context will the elders be given for that decision? It has been mentioned a few times (275, 1137) that the gods won't (can't?) tell their followers about the Snarl unless they are already aware of it somehow.

Are we going to have a bunch of dwarven bigwigs aware of the soul-consuming threat that is imprisoned inside their world after this vote? Or is it going to be something more along these lines?

King Dvalin: A grave choice lies before us. Shall we beseech the gods to end the world, consigning the souls of our entire race to Hel?
Council Elder: O First King, that the gods are considering this is a terrible thing. What reason could there be for such a choice?
King D: Er, technically, I can't tell you that.
C. Elder: ...
King D: Trust me, though, it's a super serious reason. A terrible situation, just the worst.

[Mad Humanist]

Well if Dvalinn does not give them any context, then he is well positioned to phrase the question pointing in a direction of his choice.

[hroþila]

A lot depends on what exactly Dvalin tells them: even if he can't talk about the Snarl specifically, he could still be very convincing, in theory. Regardless, I could see some comedy coming out of this, yeah, so I wouldn't be surprised if that's what we see in the comic.

[Fyraltari]

He could go
"There is a high risk that the soul of every mortal will be destroyed in the next few days. While there is a chance this does not come to pass the gods are considering destroying the world and sending all of you to your respective afterlives where your souls would be safe. In the case of your kinsmen however that means Hel. Should I vote to destroy the world or not?"

[Mad Humanist]

He could go
"There is a high risk that the soul of every mortal will be destroyed in the next few days. While there is a chance this does not come to pass the gods are considering destroying the world and sending all of you to your respective afterlives where your souls would be safe. In the case of your kinsmen however that means Hel. Should I vote to destroy the world or not?"

Do you write referendum questions for a living? This question takes me back to 2016. Such a long time ago now.

[Fyraltari]

Do you write referendum questions for a living? This question takes me back to 2016. Such a long time ago now.

No, I do not. I am unsure what you are implying too.

[Furious J]

He could go
"There is a high risk that the soul of every mortal will be destroyed in the next few days. While there is a chance this does not come to pass the gods are considering destroying the world and sending all of you to your respective afterlives where your souls would be safe. In the case of your kinsmen however that means Hel. Should I vote to destroy the world or not?"

I had thought that it would be unconvincing to talk about a "soul-destroying threat" in vague terms, but those terms are actually pretty reasonable. So much for my interesting question. :smallamused:

[Grey_Wolf_c]

No, I do not. I am unsure what you are implying too.

Brexit would be my guess, given his location.

And that's all I will say, because politics.

Grey Wolf

[Fyraltari]

Brexit would be my guess, given his location.

And that's all I will say, because politics.

Grey Wolf

Yes I gathered as much, but I went and looked for how that referendum was phrased and it was nothing like the sentence I wrote so I don't see how that correlates. However if the explanation is political in nature, it'd be best not to give it, indeed.

[D.One]

There's a lot of debate about how a vote might or might not go on the discussion thread for 1155. In looking at the different arguments about what would be a "reasonable" or "believable" vote, I came up with an interesting question. (or, well, a question that I find interesting, anyway.)

I think it's more or less a given that the elders were/are going to be presented with the same basic choice that the gods have: end the world, or don't end the world. However, how much context will the elders be given for that decision? It has been mentioned a few times (275, 1137) that the gods won't (can't?) tell their followers about the Snarl unless they are already aware of it somehow.

Are we going to have a bunch of dwarven bigwigs aware of the soul-consuming threat that is imprisoned inside their world after this vote? Or is it going to be something more along these lines?

King Dvalin: A grave choice lies before us. Shall we beseech the gods to end the world, consigning the souls of our entire race to Hel?
Council Elder: O First King, that the gods are considering this is a terrible thing. What reason could there be for such a choice?
King D: Er, technically, I can't tell you that.
C. Elder: ...
King D: Trust me, though, it's a super serious reason. A terrible situation, just the worst.

That brings me back to the question: how mortals ever come to know about the Snarl?

[NerdyKris]

By falling victim to it. Once they see it reach out and kill someone, their patron god can tell them.

The Dark One wasn't party to that pact, so he was free to tell his High Priest about it.

Soon saw his wife killed, and was likely told by the twelve gods when he communed with them about it. Or he found out all on his lonesome by looking for similar reports with the other members of the Order of the Scribble.

The Order was told by Shojo who was told by his father who was told by Soon.

[woweedd]

That brings me back to the question: how mortals ever come to know about the Snarl?
The fact that people occasionally get murdered by it when those rifts in reality show up. See: what happend to Soon's wife, or when Laurain tried to claim Girad's Rift. And, as Thor's shown, while the Gods can't tell you of the Snarl's existence, they can elaborate if you already know of its exitsence, even if its existence is all you know, hence how Soon learned the backstory.

[D.One]

I've just now thought about a silly situation. Imagine a trickster god submitting his decision to a council of mortals:

King Dvalin's Crazy Sibling: A grave choice lies before us. What do you say? Yes or No?
Council Elder: O First King's Brother, what is thy question? For what shall we say yes or no?
King Dvalin's Crazy Sibling: It doesn't matter. Answer, yes or no.
Council Elder: ...
Complaining Council Elder Lady: Oh, to Hel with this. I vote Yes. Can I depart now?

[Furious J]

I've just now thought about a silly situation. Imagine a trickster god submitting his decision to a council of mortals:

King Dvalin's Crazy Sibling: A grave choice lies before us. What do you say? Yes or No?
Council Elder: O First King's Brother, what is thy question? For what shall we say yes or no?
King Dvalin's Crazy Sibling: It doesn't matter. Answer, yes or no.
Council Elder: ...
Complaining Council Elder Lady: Oh, to Hel with this. I vote Yes. Can I depart now?

Heh, I wonder if the Council of Elders have the option to abstain from votes? Purely hypothetical.

Also, D. One: I snorted at "to Hel with this". Nicely punned. :smallbiggrin:

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Heh, I wonder if the Council of Elders have the option to abstain from votes? Purely hypothetical.

If we assume the rules are vaguely analogous as to the ones in the moot, then probably yes, because otherwise, when exactly would Dvalin have stalled a previous vote for two days, when the number of gods that usually attend is odd? Only if one (or more) of the gods abstained. So Abstention is a possibility (either by design or by - as Hel - not being able to attend).

Grey Wolf

[Emanick]

If we assume the rules are vaguely analogous as to the ones in the moot, then probably yes, because otherwise, when exactly would Dvalin have stalled a previous vote for two days, when the number of gods that usually attend is odd? Only if one (or more) of the gods abstained. So Abstention is a possibility (either by design or by - as Hel - not being able to attend).

Grey Wolf

I expect you're right, but it's also possible that, even setting Hel aside, not every deity always has a cleric of sufficiently high level to cast Summon Proxy. We know that Hel has had clerics before, but that they keep dying before they become sufficiently powerful to attend a Godsmoot, so the spell might not be trivial to cast - my headcanon is that it's 5th level, but it could be even higher. If Njord or some other random god/goddess doesn't have a terribly large base of worshippers, it might be the case that occasionally, they simply don't get to send delegates to a Godsmoot because of a lack of powerful followers.

In fact, it's even possible that there are major gods who exist but currently lack powerful enough followers to send to the Moot - maybe their main temple just got wiped out by a fire giant raid, for instance. That's pretty unlikely, though, and I'd bet against it.


Yes I gethered as much but I went and looked for how that referendum was phrased and it was nothing like the sentence I wrote so I don't see how that correlates. However if the expalantion is political in anture it'd be best not to give it, indeed.

I'm not Mad Humanist, but I'd guess that he asked you that because you did a great job of writing something that sounded like an even-handed, very official referendum question.

[Mad Humanist]

I'm not Mad Humanist, but I'd guess that he asked you that because you did a great job of writing something that sounded like an even-handed, very official referendum question.

Yup that's about it.


Yes I gathered as much, but I went and looked for how that referendum was phrased and it was nothing like the sentence I wrote so I don't see how that correlates. However if the explanation is political in nature, it'd be best not to give it, indeed.

You laid out the risks and benefits, rather than completely misdirecting.

Of course I am not going to confirm what I am talking about in case that would be political.

[Fyraltari]

Well, thank you, then.

[thereaper]

I keep having this hilarious idea of the vampires (somehow) successfully dominating the elders (or more hilariously, for them to vote yes on their own), only for Dvalin to ignore them.

"Hey, I said I would consult them. I didn't say I would do what they said!"

[Ruck]

I keep having this hilarious idea of the vampires (somehow) successfully dominating the elders (or more hilariously, for them to vote yes on their own), only for Dvalin to ignore them.

"Hey, I said I would consult them. I didn't say I would do what they said!"

Hah, yeah, there are a lot of funny anticlimactic ways this could happen, but in 1016 he explicitly says "I swore an oath to obey the will of the Council on issues affecting all the clans."

[factotum]

Well if Dvalinn does not give them any context, then he is well positioned to phrase the question pointing in a direction of his choice.

Which seems to me would make the whole thing rather redundant. If Dvalin wants to vote a particular way he was perfectly at liberty to do so at the Godsmoot without having to get a vote from the clans.

[Ruck]

Which seems to me would make the whole thing rather redundant. If Dvalin wants to vote a particular way he was perfectly at liberty to do so at the Godsmoot without having to get a vote from the clans.

That wouldn't be very Lawful of him to violate his oath.

[factotum]

That wouldn't be very Lawful of him to violate his oath.

It would be plain sophistry for him to try and work round it by influencing the council to vote the way he wanted, though.

[woweedd]

That wouldn't be very Lawful of him to violate his oath.
I mean, phrasing his question about the situation deliberately in such a way as to get the result he wants, then working off of that, would be Lawful, but it'd also be Evil, and he seems Lawful Neutral at worst, so...

[RatElemental]

I mean, phrasing his question about the situation deliberately in such a way as to get the result he wants, then working off of that, would be Lawful, but it'd also be Evil, and he seems Lawful Neutral at worst, so...

"Okay, so this tax levy is up for a vote. The funds would go towards building this orphanage and paying for food. You can either vote for the levy, or you can kill some innocent orphans."

I can't see this as being Lawful Evil because he would be phrasing the decision in terms that are overwhelmingly biased, in this case not even mentioning how much the levy is or who it will affect or how it will be carried out or even if it will fund things besides the orphanage too, and instead focusing entirely on the orphans. It's probably more along the lines of Neutral/Chaotic Good.

Similarly, I can't see it being Lawful Evil to phrase the question of whether to destroy the world or not in a way biased towards preventing its destruction. Hell, even biased towards destroying it probably isn't Lawful Evil, and you can make a case for it not being evil due to what's at stake in the event of an uncontrolled demolition.

[woweedd]

"Okay, so this tax levy is up for a vote. The funds would go towards building this orphanage and paying for food. You can either vote for the levy, or you can kill some innocent orphans."

I can't see this as being Lawful Evil because he would be phrasing the decision in terms that are overwhelmingly biased, in this case not even mentioning how much the levy is or who it will affect or how it will be carried out or even if it will fund things besides the orphanage too, and instead focusing entirely on the orphans. It's probably more along the lines of Neutral/Chaotic Good.

Similarly, I can't see it being Lawful Evil to phrase the question of whether to destroy the world or not in a way biased towards preventing its destruction. Hell, even biased towards destroying it probably isn't Lawful Evil, and you can make a case for it not being evil due to what's at stake in the event of an uncontrolled demolition.
While you are correct that deciet is not actually inherently Evil, and I admit to jumping the gun a little, deciet can be Lawful, quite easily, as Lawful characters will often willfully deceive. Out-and-out lying is Chaotic, but, as Tarquin can tell you, deciet isn’t, and there are many ways to deceive without technically lying. See: Tarquin’s famous “I said i’d be sending solodiers, I never said what side they’d be on.” Or, Hell*, Devils deceive about as easily as breathing, and they’re technically embodiments of Law, as well as Evil.

*Literally.

[Dion]

Maybe Dvalin wants the world to end. Maybe he’s sick of being the demigod of dwarves, and wants to be demigod of sentient toasters, or house elves, or whatever is in store for him for the next world.

“In this world, I’m the first king of the sentient kitchen appliances, and I vow to always consult the clan of ancient microwaves, egg beaters, and soap dispensers before making any decision that affects them all!”

[Furious J]

Hm, now we're on to alignment, eh?

I agree that King Dvalin could word the question in a biased fashion to swing the vote. However, based on what we've seen of him so far (which is admittedly very little to go on), I don't think that he would, or that he will. He (as channeled via his proxy) didn't seem particularly alarmed at the Godsmoot, and I think that's because with or without Hel's machinations, this is not a trivial decision. One choice is very bad for the dwarves, but the other carries the risk of oblivion for everyone. It's fitting, if painful, that the dwarf elders themselves have to make this call, and I don't think there is an unambiguously correct (or good or evil) choice.

I'm actually a little curious about how the consultation process would work, mechanically, given the fact that King Dvalin can't specifically mention the Snarl. If the demigod were to phrase the choice in roughly the same way that Fyraltari did, the members of the council might very well have questions. Do they have an opportunity to ask King Dvalin for more information? Or do they just have to speculate and debate amongst themselves based on the originally-worded choice put before them?

(Assuming that the OotS do put a stop to the Vampire Vote-Riggers, it's actually quite lucky that they will end up being on hand for the deliberations. If the elders do have questions, Roy et al. just so happen to be able to talk about the Snarl and to outline more of the details about this nebulous "high risk" that all souls are under.)


Maybe Dvalin wants the world to end. Maybe he’s sick of being the demigod of dwarves, and wants to be demigod of sentient toasters, or house elves, or whatever is in store for him for the next world.

“In this world, I’m the first king of the sentient kitchen appliances, and I vow to always consult the clan of ancient microwaves, egg beaters, and soap dispensers before making any decision that affects them all!”

Oh, sure, dwarves are often characterized as cantankerous or "gruff". But I can only imagine being the demi-god king of sentient kitchen appliances. Hell, the ancient microwaves' solution to any problem would be to nuke it!

[martianmister]

Fyraltari basically end the thread.

[Furious J]

Fyraltari basically end the thread.

He sure did! It was a good answer to my question. While I still think it'll be interesting to see how much information about the Snarl the clan elders will have after the vote is resolved, there's not much more to say on it.

[Fyraltari]

Fyraltari basically end the thread.
I might sig that, if you allow me.

They sure did!
He*. You can see my gender under my avatar.

It was a good answer to my question. While I still think it'll be interesting to see how much information about the Snarl the clan elders will have after the vote is resolved, there's not much more to say on it.
I completely left out the whole business about the previous worlds and the possibilty of the Dark One not being able to end the cycle if the current world blows up. On one hand that doesn't really concerns the Dwarves but on the other hand, they are still about to take a decision on behalf of a lot of non-dwarven people anyway.

Then again, I'm not 100% sure Dvalin himself knows about that.

[martianmister]

If you really want my name on your signature, sure do it.

[Furious J]

They sure did!

He*. You can see my gender under my avatar.

Apologies; fixed.



I completely left out the whole business about the previous worlds and the possibilty of the Dark One not being able to end the cycle if the current world blows up. On one hand that doesn't really concerns the Dwarves but they are still about to take a decision on behalf of a lot of non-dwarven people anyway.

Then again, I'm not 100% sure Dvalin himself knows about that.

I'd be surprised if Dvalin was even able to discuss the cycle-ending potential in this world with the elders, though upon reflection I can't point to a concrete reason why not.

Re: your point about taking a decision on behalf of a lot of non-dwarven people: yeah, it's a heavy choice. I've been leery about jumping in on the actual strip thread, but I'm a little surprised that there is such a strong sentiment there that Dvalin should have reason to suspect voting shenanigans if the vampire plan worked and the council voted for the destruction of the world by the gods. That's a whole world full of people that the elders will be deciding on behalf of, so a "yes" vote from the dwarves for the sake of everybody else doesn't strike me as all that far-fetched of a possibility.

[D.One]

Re: your point about taking a decision on behalf of a lot of non-dwarven people: yeah, it's a heavy choice. I've been leery about jumping in on the actual strip thread, but I'm a little surprised that there is such a strong sentiment there that Dvalin should have reason to suspect voting shenanigans if the vampire plan worked and the council voted for the destruction of the world by the gods. That's a whole world full of people that the elders will be deciding on behalf of, so a "yes" vote from the dwarves for the sake of everybody else doesn't strike me as all that far-fetched of a possibility.

In fact, one could argue that the decision to sacrifice themselves to Hel in order to save all the other souls from oblivion could be considered a honorable death, and thus the dwarves (or at least the elders doing the decision) could evade Hel this way.

[Furious J]

In fact, one could argue that the decision to sacrifice themselves to Hel in order to save all the other souls from oblivion could be considered a honorable death, and thus the dwarves (or at least the elders doing the decision) could evade Hel this way.

If one argued that, one would make an interesting case. :smallsmile:

Can you imagine? If, in the purely hypothetical situation where the OotS defeat the vampires but the clan elders vote to end the world anyway, all those dwarf souls end up evading Hel? Granted, the gods would be on to a new world, and she wouldn't be bound by the bet any more, but she would probably be so angry!

[Fyraltari]

If one argued that, one would make an interesting case. :smallsmile:

Can you imagine? If, in the purely hypothetical situation where the OotS defeat the vampires but the clan elders vote to end the world anyway, all those dwarf souls end up evading Hel? Granted, the gods would be on to a new world, and she wouldn't be bound by the bet any more, but she would probably be so angry!

While the elder’s death would be honorable I fail to see how being sacrificed by a bunch of elders is more honorable than being sacrificed by a bunch of gods.

[Rrmcklin]

While the elder’s death would be honorable I fail to see how being sacrificed by a bunch of elders is more honorable than being sacrificed by a bunch of gods.

Same. When someone else suggested that in another thread the best reasoning seemed to be something like "the clan elders represent dwarves as a whole" only we know that not to be the case; the Council of Clans isn't their current governing body.

[Snails]

If one argued that, one would make an interesting case. :smallsmile:

Can you imagine? If, in the purely hypothetical situation where the OotS defeat the vampires but the clan elders vote to end the world anyway, all those dwarf souls end up evading Hel? Granted, the gods would be on to a new world, and she wouldn't be bound by the bet any more, but she would probably be so angry!

It is an interesting idea, but I think Hel has a good argument that such may apply to the elders who made such a hard choice, but the sacrificial sheep do not get the loophole unless they overtly made the decision to die, too.

[Mad Humanist]

It is an interesting idea, but I think Hel has a good argument that such may apply to the elders who made such a hard choice, but the sacrificial sheep do not get the loophole unless they overtly made the decision to die, too.

They could involve the population by escalating the decision to the National Parliament, who could order all Dwarves to do the honourable thing. That would amusingly delay the final decision.

Of course I don't think that will happen because the emphasis is actually going to be about stopping Gontor and the Elders will likely be dominated.

[Emanick]

They could involve the population by escalating the decision to the National Parliament, who could order all Dwarves to do the honourable thing. That would amusingly delay the final decision.

Of course I don't think that will happen because the emphasis is actually going to be about stopping Gontor and the Elders will likely be dominated.

Yes, and then the Parliament could hold a filibuster indefinitely, basically tying up all the world’s High Priests for as long as they like! Excellent idea. :smallbiggrin:

[D.One]

Yes, and then the Parliament could hold a filibuster indefinitely, basically tying up all the world’s High Priests for as long as they like! Excellent idea. :smallbiggrin:

Tiebreaker Extravaganza! :smallbiggrin:

The greater gods come to a tie, and need a tiebreaker, so they call the demigods.

The last demigod to vote, the one who could break the tie, consults the Dwarven Council of Elders.

The Council of Elders come to a tie, and by their rules (which I'm making up based on this suggestion), the tiebreaker is made through a consultation to the Dwarven Parliament.

The Dwarven Representatives, informed of the seriousness of the situation, decide that they can't take this decision all by themselves and call upon a General Referendum to consult all the dwarven population.

[Elanasaurus]

Tiebreaker Extravaganza! :smallbiggrin:

The greater gods come to a tie, and need a tiebreaker, so they call the demigods.

The last demigod to vote, the one who could break the tie, consults the Dwarven Council of Elders.

The Council of Elders come to a tie, and by their rules (which I'm making up based on this suggestion), the tiebreaker is made through a consultation to the Dwarven Parliament.

The Dwarven Representatives, informed of the seriousness of the situation, decide that they can't take this decision all by themselves and call upon a General Referendum to consult all the dwarven population. Don't forget that the reason the Northern Pantheon's vote matters in the first place is because the other pantheons are tied. :biggrin:

[ijuinkun]

Based on what has been revealed in #1156, the Exexarch's plan may involve lying by omission and misinforming the Clan Heads that rather than "all Dwarves will go to Hel", the new arrangement would be like that of other races ("You go to the plane of your alignment or directly to your patron god"). That is to say, the Clan Heads would be convinced that they were voting in favor of escaping Hel rather than being condemned to Hel.

[woweedd]

Based on what has been revealed in #1156, the Exexarch's plan may involve lying by omission and misinforming the Clan Heads that rather than "all Dwarves will go to Hel", the new arrangement would be like that of other races ("You go to the plane of your alignment or directly to your patron god"). That is to say, the Clan Heads would be convinced that they were voting in favor of escaping Hel rather than being condemned to Hel.
...No,they're just straight-up mind controlling them.

[factotum]

...No,they're just straight-up mind controlling them.

Yeah, I'm unclear why anyone would think otherwise, what with the swirly eyes everywhere...

[drazen]

Don't forget that the reason the Northern Pantheon's vote matters in the first place is because the other pantheons are tied. :biggrin:

In the first world, there were FOUR pantheons.

If each pantheon got a single vote, what happened back then when the pantheons split 2-2?

[woweedd]

In the first world, there were FOUR pantheons.

If each pantheon got a single vote, what happened back then when the pantheons split 2-2?
A. The Godsmoot system postdates The Greeks, and, in fact, was specifically instituted to avoid another Snarl and B. Why are you assuming all votes are between two and only two options?

[D.One]

In the first world, there were FOUR pantheons.

If each pantheon got a single vote, what happened back then when the pantheons split 2-2?

By that time, as the existence of the Snarl demonstrates, they were less about voting and more about each one pulling the strings stronger in their direction.


A. The Godsmoot system postdates The Greeks, and, in fact, was specifically instituted to avoid another Snarl and B. Why are you assuming all votes are between two and only two options?

For the sake of avoiding three-part draws (North chooses A, South chooses B and West chooses C), any multiple answer question can be broken into Yes/No questions:

"Are we going to do A?"

Yes/No

"Are we going to do B?"

Yes/No

And so on...

If A, B, C,... are mutually exclusive, it can be done like:

"Are we going to do A?"

Yes/No

"If No, are we going to do B?"

Yes/No

And so on...

[Mad Humanist]

How do they manage the design process in between worlds? I suppose there is no or little voting as they are taking it in turns. But presumably their choices still have to be broadcast to the other gods. Do all the High Priests get teleported to somewhere in the outer planes and they have to act as telephone wires for every design decision?

[Fyraltari]

How do they manage the design process in between worlds? I suppose there is no or little voting as they are taking it in turns. But presumably their choices still have to be broadcast to the other gods. Do all the High Priests get teleported to somewhere in the outer planes and they have to act as telephone wires for every design decision?

They have messengers. Takes forever but gets the job done.

[The_Weirdo]

Hah, yeah, there are a lot of funny anticlimactic ways this could happen, but in 1016 he explicitly says "I swore an oath to obey the will of the Council on issues affecting all the clans."

There's a very specific way for him to disregard the vote while keeping to the oath. And it's all centered on the word will. Not the word vote. Dominated beings have no will, and he swore to obey the will, not the vote.

[Cazero]

There's a very specific way for him to disregard the vote while keeping to the oath. And it's all centered on the word will. Not the word vote. Dominated beings have no will, and he swore to obey the will, not the vote.And guess how the council express it's will to Dvalin.
With a vote.
Subverting the vote is tricking Dvalin into thinking the will is something else.

[Dion]

There's a very specific way for him to disregard the vote while keeping to the oath. And it's all centered on the word will. Not the word vote. Dominated beings have no will, and he swore to obey the will, not the vote.

Unfortunately, in really old very formal organizations with six inch thick rulebooks stretching back a thousand years or more, there are doubtlessly a dozen or more conflicting rules on how that will is expressed.

I’m sure that there are rules like “it is the council’s will that all votes with a quora express our will” and “it is the council’s will that all votes don’t count the if donuts aren’t provided”, etc.

And, if it’s the councils willl that the rules will be followed...

[Fyraltari]

Tiebreaker Extravaganza! :smallbiggrin:

The greater gods come to a tie, and need a tiebreaker, so they call the demigods.

The last demigod to vote, the one who could break the tie, consults the Dwarven Council of Elders.

The Council of Elders come to a tie, and by their rules (which I'm making up based on this suggestion), the tiebreaker is made through a consultation to the Dwarven Parliament.

The Dwarven Representatives, informed of the seriousness of the situation, decide that they can't take this decision all by themselves and call upon a General Referendum to consult all the dwarven population.
And then Vafthrudnir finds out that, yes, gods can have heart attacks.

[zimmerwald1915]

They have messengers. Takes forever but gets the job done.
An outsider's first memory is ferrying world-design proposals between gods?

[Yirggzmb]

An outsider's first memory is ferrying world-design proposals between gods?

I personally have been picturing, instead of just a wipe, the gods wipe the outsiders' memories AND supply some plausible fake memories.

Presumably, when the gods create new worlds, the humanoids they put on the planet don't all start as infants, so however they solve that problem theoretically could also work for the outsiders.

[Fyraltari]

An outsider's first memory is ferrying world-design proposals between gods?

Sure, why not?

[Mad Humanist]

Yes, and then the Parliament could hold a filibuster indefinitely, basically tying up all the world’s High Priests for as long as they like! Excellent idea. :smallbiggrin:


Tiebreaker Extravaganza! :smallbiggrin:

The greater gods come to a tie, and need a tiebreaker, so they call the demigods.

The last demigod to vote, the one who could break the tie, consults the Dwarven Council of Elders.

The Council of Elders come to a tie, and by their rules (which I'm making up based on this suggestion), the tiebreaker is made through a consultation to the Dwarven Parliament.

The Dwarven Representatives, informed of the seriousness of the situation, decide that they can't take this decision all by themselves and call upon a General Referendum to consult all the dwarven population.

Yes I see no need for a filibuster. The Council of the Clans escalates it to the National Parliament. The National Parliament does take a vote on it. Unfortunately the vote is exactly tied and so by the Dwarven Constitution a referendum is called automatically.

Unfortunately the Referendum is also tied and so by a surprisingly obscure and arcane Dwarven a civil war is initiated. The two opposing sides fight to the death ensuring honourable deaths for all.

[zimmerwald1915]

Yes I see no need for a filibuster. The Council of the Clans escalates it to the National Parliament. The National Parliament does take a vote on it. Unfortunately the vote is exactly tied and so by the Dwarven Constitution a referendum is called automatically.

Unfortunately the Referendum is also tied and so by a surprisingly obscure and arcane Dwarven a civil war is initiated. The two opposing sides fight to the death ensuring honourable deaths for all.
Eugene, is that you?

[NoHaxJustPi]

If one argued that, one would make an interesting case. :smallsmile:

Can you imagine? If, in the purely hypothetical situation where the OotS defeat the vampires but the clan elders vote to end the world anyway, all those dwarf souls end up evading Hel? Granted, the gods would be on to a new world, and she wouldn't be bound by the bet any more, but she would probably be so angry!
They doom themselves to Hel of their own decision, making it an honorable death, meaning they’re sent to the afterlife they deserve, meaning it’s a dishonorable death, meaning they’re doomed to Hel, meaning it’s an honorable death...

[Emanick]

They doom themselves to Hel of their own decision, making it an honorable death, meaning they’re sent to the afterlife they deserve, meaning it’s a dishonorable death, meaning they’re doomed to Hel, meaning it’s an honorable death...

So you’re saying that destroying the world would create a paradox, therefore making the world explode?

[NoHaxJustPi]

No, but an incredibly long argument between Hel and Thor would ensue over what happened to the dwarven souls.

[Rrmcklin]

They doom themselves to Hel of their own decision, making it an honorable death, meaning they’re sent to the afterlife they deserve, meaning it’s a dishonorable death, meaning they’re doomed to Hel, meaning it’s an honorable death...

This might easily be a joke, but in case it's not, that train of thought breaks down pretty quickly.

[Riftwolf]

Back to OP: I'm guessing it's not a simple yes/no question. Durkons already said the Councils formed of three rings; if these are hierarchical, it could be the Elder we've seen being dominated is a lower tier that doesn't have the same defences as the higher tiers. Dvalin may pose his question only to the highest tier, who then make their cases for support to the lower tiers. Let's say the higher tier is 7 individuals, and the vote between them is 5:2 in favour of saving the world. If the vampires subvert the *middle* tier, then the support of the lowest could be swayed in favour of destruction, without that tier even knowing Hel is involved.

[zimmerwald1915]

Back to OP: I'm guessing it's not a simple yes/no question. Durkons already said the Councils formed of three rings;
Where'd he say that?

[Fyraltari]

Where'd he say that?

Third panel. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1152.html)

[Ildirin]

It sounds to me like a description of the physical characteristrics of the council building, not the councils political structure.

[martianmister]

Priests, warriors and commons?

[zimmerwald1915]

Priests, warriors and commons?
I doubt it. Unless there's a very strict caste system in place, each clan would contain members of each estate, thus would be divided up by estate, thus would not be susceptible to representation by a single elder per clan.

At the same time, I don't think the division into rings is purely architectural. These divisions tend to mean things and to reinforce their meanings: [insert inappropriate real-world example here]. Durkon mentions that each ring has "its own set o'" something, probably procedures.

[Peelee]

These divisions tend to mean things and to reinforce their meanings: [insert inappropriate real-world example here].

I don't think my real-world example of building a pedestal on the roof of my house to put my bed on so that I can sleep towering over the rest of the city, is necessarily inappropriate. Imean, for the forum, at least.

[Emanick]

I don't think my real-world example of building a pedestal on the roof of my house to put my bed on so that I can sleep towering over the rest of the city, is necessarily inappropriate. Imean, for the forum, at least.

Is that a common practice in Alabama?

[Peelee]

Is that a common practice in Alabama?

Why do you think we built Vulcan (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8f929hZ-t6E/maxresdefault.jpg) like we did?

[Ruck]

Third panel. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1152.html)


It sounds to me like a description of the physical characteristrics of the council building, not the councils political structure.

Yes, he says the council chamber is made up of three rings.

[Fyraltari]

Yes, he says the council chamber is made up of three rings.

Five golds say that reflects something in the Council's voting process (three different subcategories of voters, some sort of three-part ceremonial, etc) and is not a completely arbitrary architectural choice.

[Aveline]

Yes, he says the council chamber is made up of three rings.

"Chamber" is often used to describe some governing bodies, i.e. that would meet in a chamber. For example, the Chamber of Commerce.

[Emanick]

Why do you think we built Vulcan (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8f929hZ-t6E/maxresdefault.jpg) like we did?

Good point.

[Mad Humanist]

Eugene, is that you?

Is Eugene British?

[NoHaxJustPi]

What is this “Britain” you speak of?

[Riftwolf]

Yes, he says the council chamber is made up of three rings.

You're right; I misremembered. Still I think there'd be some hierarchy to the council.

[Ruck]

"Chamber" is often used to describe some governing bodies, i.e. that would meet in a chamber. For example, the Chamber of Commerce.

I don't think "council chamber," not capitalized, is a usage in that sense. It's reasonable enough to think, but if I had to choose right now whether it was, I'd say "no."


Five golds say that reflects something in the Council's voting process (three different subcategories of voters, some sort of three-part ceremonial, etc) and is not a completely arbitrary architectural choice.

Yeah, that's plausible, but it could certainly also be relevant to whatever counterattack strategy Durkon has in mind.

[hroþila]

I assumed Durkon was going to say "each wit its own set o' defenses" or something along those lines (so like three barriers like the one we saw at the entrance), so that's what I imagined the rings to be: lines of defense, like in a fortress of sorts.

[Fyraltari]

Yeah, that's plausible, but it could certainly also be relevant to whatever counterattack strategy Durkon has in mind.

He wouldn't bring it up if it wasn't. As a rule of thumb, heroes leave the discussions on the aesthetical merits of the architecture of ancient buildings for after the battle with the evil world-destroying monsters.

[Ruck]

He wouldn't bring it up if it wasn't. As a rule of thumb, heroes leave the discussions on the aesthetical merits of the architecture of ancient buildings for after the battle with the evil world-destroying monsters.

Right... I don't see what point you are making vis-a-vis whether the term "chamber" refers to the area where the council is meeting or the voting body itself.

[Fyraltari]

Right... I don't see what point you are making vis-a-vis whether the term "chamber" refers to the area where the council is meeting or the voting body itself.

The chamber is where the council meets. If the chamber is divided into three rings, it is most likely because that is relevant to the voting process in some way. What way we cannot know yet so I am not interested in trying to guess it.

EDIT: Also you said that "it could also be relevant to whatever counterattack Durkon was planning". It has to be relevant, else Durkon wouldn't mention it, that's my point. But that's not contradictory with it being a divison of the voting body.

[Ruck]

The chamber is where the council meets. If the chamber is divided into three rings, it is most likely because that is relevant to the voting process in some way. What way we cannot know yet so I am not interested in trying to guess it.

EDIT: Also you said that "it could also be relevant to whatever counterattack Durkon was planning". It has to be relevant, else Durkon wouldn't mention it, that's my point. But that's not contradictory with it being a divison of the voting body.

I'm saying that it being the structure of the building is reason enough to bring it up since that would be relevant to his counterattack plans.

[Fyraltari]

I'm saying that it being the structure of the building is reason enough to bring it up since that would be relevant to his counterattack plans.
And do you think that structure has nothing to do with the voting process?

[Peelee]

The chamber is where the council meets. If the chamber is divided into three rings, it is most likely because that is relevant to the voting process in some way. What way we cannot know yet so I am not interested in trying to guess it.

EDIT: Also you said that "it could also be relevant to whatever counterattack Durkon was planning". It has to be relevant, else Durkon wouldn't mention it, that's my point. But that's not contradictory with it being a divison of the voting body.

Hasn't the Giant said conservation of detail is overrated?

[Fyraltari]

Hasn't the Giant said conservation of detail is overrated?
Sure. Because details have other uses (in the example given, establishing that the lizardfolk brothers have an employer helps establish that in this universe lizardfolk are civilised) I fail to see however what use a detail that comes up when the charcaters discuss a plan beyond "plays a pat in that plan either as an asset or as an obstacle that must be overcome somehow".

[Ruck]

And do you think that structure has nothing to do with the voting process?

I don't know; I think when Durkon says "the council chamber's made up of three rings," he's referring to the structure.

[Fyraltari]

I don't know; I think when Durkon says "the council chamber's made up of three rings," he's referring to the structure.

Well yeah but it would be weird to have the chamber set up in this way for no reasons related to the chamber's purpose.

[Aveline]

Well yeah but it would be weird to have the chamber set up in this way for no reasons related to the chamber's purpose.

Tiered security system involving three concentric rings?

[Emanick]

Tiered security system involving three concentric rings?

Yeah, this is what I interpreted it as. There’s no reason why this interpretation has to be correct, but the fact that a security system is three-tiered would certainly be relevant enough to mention.

[Fyraltari]

Tiered security system involving three concentric rings?

Okay, that's one good reason.

[Furious J]

Tiered security system involving three concentric rings?

This was my initial reading as well.