Why ISN'T it a shell game?

[BloodSquirrel]

Sure, that's what she said at first, to make everyone stop fighting and agree to set up gate defenses where they wished. Doesn't meant she intended to make that reality forever. It's not like she kept that part of the deal anyway, she remained in contact with Girard at least long enough to make a bet on how long it would take for Soon to break his oath. Seems likely that she intended to get in contact with the other Scribblers over time as well.

It was a bit of a naive expectation on her part. Soon wasn't about to break his oath, and Girard wasn't about to just cool off. Making a plan to get together again in a year to formally exchange notes or at least have their proxies meet if they couldn't stand to do it in person would have been wiser.

[brian 333]

It was a bit of a naive expectation on her part. Soon wasn't about to break his oath, and Girard wasn't about to just cool off. Making a plan to get together again in a year to formally exchange notes or at least have their proxies meet if they couldn't stand to do it in person would have been wiser.

Would they have agreed to that? Serini may not have had the best solution at the moment, but separating friends who are about to get into a fight with the intent to make them hug and forgive each other later is a much better solution than letting them duel and possibly kill each other.

[BloodSquirrel]

Would they have agreed to that? Serini may not have had the best solution at the moment, but separating friends who are about to get into a fight with the intent to make them hug and forgive each other later is a much better solution than letting them duel and possibly kill each other.

Yes, because "Kill each other right now" and "never talk to each other again" are the only two possibilities, with no middle ground possible, such as the one I outlined previously.

[BRC]

IMO, Sereni's Solution isn't terrible, if we assume that the gate HAD to be something accessible.

Which, there are many reasons why the Scribbles might want to be able to access their gates instead of just burying them in a big hole. The wards might require maintenance for example.

If she set up the whole thing as a shell game with a secret, extra door elsewhere, then that's a vulnerability for somebody to find, and she's trying to future-proof this setup into perpetuity as much as possible.

If she tied the "Final Dungeon" rune to herself specifically, then the gate can only be accessed so long as she's alive.

If she ties it to some key she can pass on, then that's a vulnerability somebody can steal.

if any of the doors were decoys, then that's just one less door a lucky villain would have to handle.

The biggest vulnerability right now is if somebody grabs her and compels her to take them through, and that's kind of unavoidable.

I can see two layers of security that seem like they would be pretty trivial (although, that's making up how the magic works)

1) Make the runes dependent on having earlier runes, so you need to do the dungeons in a specific order.
Or
2) give Sereni herself the ability to turn off the "Give somebody a butt-rune" trap for one dungeon, thus locking them out of the final dungeon and restarting the clock as they now need to find out how to bypass the whole setup.

[Resileaf]

It was a bit of a naive expectation on her part. Soon wasn't about to break his oath, and Girard wasn't about to just cool off. Making a plan to get together again in a year to formally exchange notes or at least have their proxies meet if they couldn't stand to do it in person would have been wiser.

That's the usual thing with chaotic people. They don't tend to quite understand what a paladin is about. Serini thinks "Oh, I'll just get everyone to agree not to disturb each other and then in a couple of years I'll see if I can make them hug it out" and then gets surprised that the paladin takes that oath so seriously that he refuses to reconsider.

Meanwhile Girard is still certain that Soon is about to come try to take his gate any day now that he stubbornly refuses to go see the paladin as well.

[BloodSquirrel]

IMO, Sereni's Solution isn't terrible, if we assume that the gate HAD to be something accessible.

Which, there are many reasons why the Scribbles might want to be able to access their gates instead of just burying them in a big hole. The wards might require maintenance for example.

If she set up the whole thing as a shell game with a secret, extra door elsewhere, then that's a vulnerability for somebody to find, and she's trying to future-proof this setup into perpetuity as much as possible.

If she tied the "Final Dungeon" rune to herself specifically, then the gate can only be accessed so long as she's alive.

If she ties it to some key she can pass on, then that's a vulnerability somebody can steal.

if any of the doors were decoys, then that's just one less door a lucky villain would have to handle.

The problem here is that, if the gates require access and maintenance, and they will need to continue to do so after Serini dies, then the gauntlet will do as much to prevent the good guys from accessing it as the bad guys.

This isn't without a real-world parallel: people are always the biggest weakness in any security setup. You can make your password database unhackable, but you can't stop one of your employees from re-using the same password for their personal email account or writing it down and sticking it on their monitor. You can put a badge reader in place, but you can't stop someone from tailgating someone who has a badge.

[Ionathus]

It was a bit of a naive expectation on her part. Soon wasn't about to break his oath, and Girard wasn't about to just cool off. Making a plan to get together again in a year to formally exchange notes or at least have their proxies meet if they couldn't stand to do it in person would have been wiser.

I find it hard to swallow that "propose a breakup then secretly plan to make amends later" is somehow obviously more naive than "propose a breakup with a 1-year checkin."

For one thing, the Scribblers were ready to kill each other. Proposing a complete no-contact, "go our separate ways" would've been a lot easier for them to swallow in the moment.

For another thing, the Scribblers could easily cancel the 1-year checkin if they're still seething, and then they're no better off than before. I really don't see a meaningful benefit, and it has a greater risk of being rejected in that moment when blades are drawn.

And I really don't understand where you're getting the idea that Epic-level heroes who have agreed to cut off contact would be literally incapable of re-establishing that contact, if both parties were willing.

I know nitpicking is this forum's thing, but constructing flimsy reasons to criticize Serini's conflict resolution kind of misses the point that Serini's conflict resolution probably kept everybody in that room alive.

[BloodSquirrel]

I find it hard to swallow that "propose a breakup then secretly plan to make amends later" is somehow obviously more naive than "propose a breakup with a 1-year checkin."

For one thing, the Scribblers were ready to kill each other. Proposing a complete no-contact, "go our separate ways" would've been a lot easier for them to swallow in the moment.

For another thing, the Scribblers could easily cancel the 1-year checkin if they're still seething, and then they're no better off than before. I really don't see a meaningful benefit, and it has a greater risk of being rejected in that moment when blades are drawn.

And I really don't understand where you're getting the idea that Epic-level heroes who have agreed to cut off contact would be literally incapable of re-establishing that contact, if both parties were willing.

I know nitpicking is this forum's thing, but constructing flimsy reasons to criticize Serini's conflict resolution kind of misses the point that Serini's conflict resolution probably kept everybody in that room alive.

We saw how Serini's plan worked out. We're down to one gate and a world teetering on the edge of destruction. But, as usual, that is ignored in favor of poorly-supported counter-factuals and hypotheticals where even just proposing that they take a less absolute step must have resulted in everyone dying in the room because... uh... well... because it's just an assumption you have to make or else the argument completely falls apart.

Find it as hard to swallow as you like- but by more meaningful metrics, the case against Serini is pretty damning.

[JNAProductions]

We saw how Serini's plan worked out. We're down to one gate and a world teetering on the edge of destruction. But, as usual, that is ignored in favor of poorly-supported counter-factuals and hypotheticals where even just proposing that they take a less absolute step must have resulted in everyone dying in the room because... uh... well... because it's just an assumption you have to make or else the argument completely falls apart.

Find it as hard to swallow as you like- but by more meaningful metrics, the case against Serini is pretty damning.

What's the case?

Could Serini have potentially done something more effective to safeguard the world? Probably.
Did Serini have the knowledge that we do, up to and including things that happened after she did her bit? Not at all.

People aren't perfect.

[georgie_leech]

We saw how Serini's plan worked out. We're down to one gate and a world teetering on the edge of destruction. But, as usual, that is ignored in favor of poorly-supported counter-factuals and hypotheticals where even just proposing that they take a less absolute step must have resulted in everyone dying in the room because... uh... well... because it's just an assumption you have to make or else the argument completely falls apart.

Find it as hard to swallow as you like- but by more meaningful metrics, the case against Serini is pretty damning.

Gotta say, "an Epic Sorcerer Lich and Goblin Cleric systematically conquer and destroy the Gates one by one" being a more blamable/foreseeable outcome than "three people with weapons drawn/spells mid-cast all furious with each other will fight unless something intervenes" is an... interesting take.

[Kish]

I find it hard to swallow that "propose a breakup then secretly plan to make amends later" is somehow obviously more naive than "propose a breakup with a 1-year checkin."

Indeed, the "1-year check-in" approach would have suggested that Serini had critically misread the room and thought Girard was going to be back to considering Soon his best friend as soon as he calmed down a bit, not setting a bomb to kill him.

[Snails]

In the spur of the moment, Serini thought the best way to halt an argument that was seriously damaging friendships was to propose an immediate break and a nominally permanent separation...and then she could repair the damage and re-stitch the friendships later on.

That does not look like a stupid plan, even if the second half was largely a failure.

And not arranging check-ins is neither right nor wrong. Either Serini did not think of the idea or she thought it would be counter-productive. She had to make the call based on what she knew, and that call may have turned out to be sub-optimal but it does not seem foolish to me. Her eye was presumably on getting situation better, not worrying how this might help achieve the worst of all situations.

[BloodSquirrel]

In the spur of the moment, Serini thought the best way to halt an argument that was seriously damaging friendships was to propose an immediate break and a nominally permanent separation...and then she could repair the damage and re-stitch the friendships later on.

Indeed, the "1-year check-in" approach would have suggested that Serini had critically misread the room and thought Girard was going to be back to considering Soon his best friend as soon as he calmed down a bit, not setting a bomb to kill him.

What's the case?

Could Serini have potentially done something more effective to safeguard the world? Probably.
Did Serini have the knowledge that we do, up to and including things that happened after she did her bit? Not at all.

People aren't perfect.

I'd just like to note how, again, all of these attempted defenses rely on extreme binaries to sound even remotely plausible. If Girard wasn't going to be Soon's best friend they can't even have a formal protocol to talk business with each other. If Serini wasn't going to propose permanent separation, she couldn't propose and immediate break. If Serini didn't have perfect knowledge of the future, she couldn't have foreseen any problems at all with her plan.

Well, sorry, but I'm not buying into that premise.

[brian 333]

Yes, because "Kill each other right now" and "never talk to each other again" are the only two possibilities, with no middle ground possible, such as the one I outlined previously.

That was a non-starter while they were mad. They needed a cool-down period before they would rationally think that through. The idea you call a middle ground was apparently Serini's intent anyway.

I'd just like to note how, again, all of these attempted defenses rely on extreme binaries to sound even remotely plausible. If Girard wasn't going to be Soon's best friend they can't even have a formal protocol to talk business with each other. If Serini wasn't going to propose permanent separation, she couldn't propose and immediate break. If Serini didn't have perfect knowledge of the future, she couldn't have foreseen any problems at all with her plan.

Well, sorry, but I'm not buying into that premise.

You are the one forcing binary options here. You reject any possible 'other' argument as one way or the other, and ignore the entire spectrum between them.

What about your middle ground? It is equally arbitrary. A year from then, the two who were about to do unforgivable things may have been, (and apparently were,) still mad at each other. Would not the fight have resumed at that moment?

The only time The Scrabble appeared able to cooperate was when the world was in danger, and by that time the reasons for the agreement were both dead, and the other two were in contact.

So, there was a middle ground. Serini took it. Too bad the end of the world happened 50 years too late to get the band back together.

[georgie_leech]

I'd just like to note how, again, all of these attempted defenses rely on extreme binaries to sound even remotely plausible. If Girard wasn't going to be Soon's best friend they can't even have a formal protocol to talk business with each other. If Serini wasn't going to propose permanent separation, she couldn't propose and immediate break. If Serini didn't have perfect knowledge of the future, she couldn't have foreseen any problems at all with her plan.

Well, sorry, but I'm not buying into that premise.

Whereas some us find "while three people are actively threatening violence with each other is a good time to suggest keeping in touch" a non-starter of a premise.

[JT]

I'd just like to note how, again, all of these attempted defenses rely on extreme binaries to sound even remotely plausible. If Girard wasn't going to be Soon's best friend they can't even have a formal protocol to talk business with each other. If Serini wasn't going to propose permanent separation, she couldn't propose and immediate break. If Serini didn't have perfect knowledge of the future, she couldn't have foreseen any problems at all with her plan.

Well, sorry, but I'm not buying into that premise.

Remember that -- before they nearly came to blows -- Girard was actively concealing the location of (at least) one rift from (at least) Soon from the beginning. If we're to believe the tale as related by Shojo, the Scribblers agreed with Serini's plan to never contact each other. There would be no reason for Soon to ask for the location of what would become Girard's Gate after they agreed to separate; the logical assumption is that Soon asked for the locations from the guy who took 2 levels of ranger before that fight and separation agreement.

[Aedilred]

What we have regarding the agreement is Shojo's brief summary of Serini's proposal and "they swore an oath to that effect".

Serini's proposal was no interference in the other gates: no spying, no "checking in visits", nothing. I'm not sure this expressly rules out voluntary contact with each other or visiting if there's an invitation. And even if it did, this would only really bind Soon. From what we see of the Scribblers' dynamic, the central conflict was Soon vs. [Girard ft. Dorukan and Serini] with Lirian not apparently taking sides but presumably with Dorukan if push came to shove. So Serini's intention is really to defuse that by getting Soon and his awkward scruples out of the way in a manner that he will accept and which provides some sort of assurance for the others that he won't come poking his nose in their business on the basis that he knows best.

Soon is also the most likely of the group to interpret the oath rigidly and assume that this means "no contact", and probably the least likely to let friendship interfere with this interpretation, whereas Serini and Girard will take the view that it's more important to honour the spirit of it than the letter - and we know that Dorukan and Lirian remained in contact anyway. Indeed the oath to enforce the terms of Serini's proposal may even have been Soon's idea, with the other four already thinking of ways to get around it.

In this context, the idea that Serini could rebuild some bridges and reassemble the team, or at least the team minus Soon, to defend her gate if necessary, seems entirely reasonable.

[gbaji]

This is more or less what I was talking about- it's plausible, but it's very noticeably post-hoc, and doesn't stand up to determined scrutiny. For example: divide the canyon in half. Ask whether the place to dig is in one half. If the answer is 'no', ask for the other half. If it's 'yes', divide that half into half, and repeat the process until you've narrowed it down to a 10' square.

And if the answer to every location is "yes"? Technically, if you are digging, you can dig in any direction, for any distance, so every single location on the worlds surface would get a "yes" answer ("sure. start digging. you'll eventually find it..."). Not terribly useful.

The dungeon doors specifically lead into dungeons, with tunnels, and rooms. That's the purpose of the doors. So a "yes" answer to "can I find the gate by exploring through these doors" hugely reduces the amount of "space" the question narrows things down to. "Can I get to the gate by digging in this spot on the surface of the world", does not confine that "space" at all (again, the entire space under the surface is technically accessible via digging from every spot on the surface).

And yes. We could assume that divinations could give directional answers (ie: "If I start at this point and dig in <specific direction> will my tunnel encounter the gate") and triangulate the gate's actual position with a not too terrible number of divinations (not a "few", but probably reasonable if you're already "close" already). I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that divinations don't work that way in Rich's world, because surely someone like Redcloak would have tried that first thing. Or the gates simply can't be divined using methods like this. Or something else.

At the end of the day, a team consisting of an epic sorcerer and a very high level cleric, with pretty vast amounts of spellcasting between the two of them, upon encountering the hallow with its huge number of doors, decided that trying the doors until they found one that lead them to the gate was the right approach. We can certainly speculate about all the things they could have done differently (without actually knowing what they tried first), but this is what they did do. They clearly do believe that this is the best/correct way to find the gate. And they are correct. Serini did build the hallow such that doing this will eventually get you to the gate. We can assume she was an idiot who missed some obvious alternative to that method, or we can maybe assume that she had good reasons for doing it, but we just don't know exactly what those reasons are.

I'm going to lean in that second direction here.

[Aquillion]

Rich has been very vague about how divination magic works in his world (and rightly so, since that way only leads to madness and enternal internet dissection - hopefully of the divinations!). But it's entirely possible that due to the gates and rifts themselves, you may not be able to ask direct questions like "where is the gate?" or "what's the fastest way to the gate". But perhaps more specific (20 questions) style questions like "Are these dungeon doors the way to the gate?" may work.

I think we can safely assume that OOTS divinations are at least not more powerful than D&D divinations (after all, the whole reason they'd work differently in OOTS is because D&D divinations have the potential to derail plots.)

And D&D divinations are way, way more limited than people are suggesting here.

Augury is just "would this action bring good or bad results"; Divination, the closest thing to a spell that directly answers questions, gives you a single cryptic rhyme. Crucially for both, you can't ask multiple questions about the same topic - this specifically makes brute-forcing a problem with multiple questions impossible.

The yes-no question spell is Commune, which only gives you information based on your deity's knowledge and is therefore entirely useless here (The Dark One doesn't know where the Gate is.)

There's also Vision, but that will definitely fail because the Gate is unquestionably of "legendary importance" and the spell doesn't work at all on things like that.

[Kish]

Divination "can provide you with a useful piece of advice in reply to a question concerning a specific goal, event, or activity that is to occur within one week. The advice can be as simple as a short phrase, or it might take the form of a cryptic rhyme or omen."

So it's not going to be useless and it doesn't have to be either cryptic or rhyming. For that matter, augury would be plenty to make the difference here:

Will exploring these doors one by one have good or bad results?

If it's the way Serini described, this gets the result "good" and Redcloak does it. If it's any of the ways people have come up with that this could actually be only a diversion and not a gauntlet because Kraagor's TombSerini's Monster Hollow is about being a stereotypical rogue, it gets the result "bad" and Redcloak looks for another course of action.

[Throknor]

At the end of the day, a team consisting of an epic sorcerer and a very high level cleric, with pretty vast amounts of spellcasting between the two of them, upon encountering the hallow with its huge number of doors, decided that trying the doors until they found one that lead them to the gate was the right approach. We can certainly speculate about all the things they could have done differently (without actually knowing what they tried first), but this is what they did do.

They also had her diary which has proven mostly accurate so far as to locations. She may even have put some notes to the effect of "built a bunch of dungeons to hide how to get to the gate". She obviously didn't note the whole method to access the gate but given that even Soon knew about her plan to use dungeons with monsters it's reasonable to think that she included that much in her own diary. After all, they knew Girard had a pyramid but aren't shown learning that from O-Chul in his 'series of illusions' speech.

As far as divination goes it's already been lampshaded.

[brian 333]

See how useful The Oracle's information has been?

Except for some from specific NPCs, I've never found divination spells to be all that useful in game. Either we asked the wrong questions or we misinterpreted the answer, or the answer was cryptic to the point of uselessness. Devinition works fine for small stuff, but for plot-relevant things it is less effective.

I get the feeling that those who think scrying and divining are the solution never actually played the game. No DM I know, including myself, would reward repeated attempts to divine a way past the dungeon to get to the treasure. The first answer is the only one that would contain useful information.

Example: use the divide and subdivide method. Draw a line down the canyon and ask, Is the entrance on the right side or the left side, (or differentiate any way you like.) The answer is yes, because the entrance can be on either side. Now divide whichever side and ask again. You have excluded half the doors, so presumably those will not be searched. Now no matter how you subdivide, the answer is no.

Oops.

So, you ask an oracle, "Which door leads to the gate?"

Answer: "The last one you enter."

Okaaay.

So, I challenge anyone to name the spell or magic item used, and I will answer. Let's see how effective divination really is.

[Precure]

As far as divination goes it's already been lampshaded.

Yeah, now I remember. Didn't gods blocked any information regarding the gates? Divination is practically useless in this case.

[gbaji]

My rule of thumb when players use divinations in my games is to provide them with sufficient information to head them in the correct direction of the quest if they need that additional nudging, but that's about it. In my writeups on divinations I'm actually quite specific that divinations will not always distinguish between "difficult/dangerous versus easy/safe" when asking questions like "which way should we go to get to X". Basically, if the players are trying to use divination to bypass any significant obstacles, they're going to fail. Now, if they are using them to learn some additional information which may make them more successful (ie: "should we go to town X and talk to NPC Y before heading to the bbeg?") it's a diferent story. Of course, in most cases, I'm laying out stuff like this specifically for the players to have access to things that will enable them to complete the quest, so skipping stuff along the way is often a pretty likely way to just straight up fail anyway.

And honestlly? Usually divinations are tied to some deity anyway. So the answers are often a lot less about absolute truth as what their deity actually wants them to do. So again, it's usually something I can use to basically tell the PC: "your god commands you to go to X and do Y". It's a tool I can use as the GM to provide the players with information they may need ("Your god tells you that to complete your quest you will need a fruit from the tree of <whatever> located in the land of <wherever>"). Saves me time having to put this stuff in clues they will need to find at some point. But yeah, never to bypass the quest itself. That's just not fun...

[Lumix19]

Yeah, now I remember. Didn't gods blocked any information regarding the gates? Divination is practically useless in this case.

Potentially. The gods have an agreement not to share information about the Gates with mortals, including (I believe) their locations.

But the Dark One isn't party to that agreement. I believe his difficulty is that the other gods have occluded his ability to see where the Gate is. So perhaps with his deific scrying he's able to see quite a bit, including some information that he can pass one to Redcloak through divination, but he's just not able to share what the gods don't want him to see (i.e., the exact location of the Gate). He could still learn a lot from spying on Serini though.

So he might be able to provide vague clues like, "Yes, you are in the right area", or "Yes, you must go through the dungeons to find the Gate", depending on what his deific scrying has shown him. But Redcloak probably can't just cast commune and have the Dark One tell him exactly where it is like Hel did with her High Priest and the Godsmoot.

[Kamunami]

While not quite the same, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if we got a repeat of Girard's final gambit, where what LOOKS like a dead end is actually the last barrier to the Gate. That is to say, a fake shell game.

[RedSand]

A shell game would be a rogue's way of building a dungeon. You are making the assumption that the order did, which is that Serini would build this according to her own instincts as a rogue. But you fail to realize the Order has only just realized themselves: Serini really, really hates herself.

She clearly blames herself for the party's dissolution, sees her inability to keep them together after Kraagor's death as a deep and personal failure. His death might even be partially her fault. Because she hates herself, she doesn't trust what would be the most natural approach to her, which is why she went with what Kraagor, her dead friend who she literally put on a pedestal, would want instead. This mistrust in her instincts make her unique, though; every other gate failed due to the prideful, limited approach they took to guarding the gate. If she gets over these feelings and starts acting like a rogue in addition to her barbaric approach to dungeon design she might just manage to save the world.

[Ionathus]

I don't know if this has come up, but I just want to note for the Divination discourse that Serini outright mentions at least part of this consideration in the last panel of 1278 - she acknowledges that her dungeon was built, at least in part, to account for divination magic (and specifically designed to make an ass joke, which is fantastic )

Maybe 3.5 is different (not that Rich cares too much about the rules these days), but divination in 5e isn't restricted to deities. The Dark One isn't the only power out there that a potential invader could turn to: some of the other gods might both have that information and be willing to flout (or sneakily circumvent) the rules on The Great Gates Information Blackout, plus external powers like the Modrons or even arcane magic sources could use divination as well. A person designing this gauntlet would have to account for all of those as well.

A shell game would be a rogue's way of building a dungeon. You are making the assumption that the order did, which is that Serini would build this according to her own instincts as a rogue. But you fail to realize the Order has only just realized themselves: Serini really, really hates herself.

She clearly blames herself for the party's dissolution, sees her inability to keep them together after Kraagor's death as a deep and personal failure. His death might even be partially her fault. Because she hates herself, she doesn't trust what would be the most natural approach to her, which is why she went with what Kraagor, her dead friend who she literally put on a pedestal, would want instead. This mistrust in her instincts make her unique, though; every other gate failed due to the prideful, limited approach they took to guarding the gate. If she gets over these feelings and starts acting like a rogue in addition to her barbaric approach to dungeon design she might just manage to save the world.

Interesting theory. I'm not sure if Serini truly hates herself or if she's just lost hope or confidence in her own abilities, though. It would mean roughly the same for this choice of hers - she can feasibly say she's building it in Kraagor's honor, but hedging with these traps does kind of make it seem like she lacks the courage of her convictions.

[Snails]

I'd just like to note how, again, all of these attempted defenses rely on extreme binaries to sound even remotely plausible. If Girard wasn't going to be Soon's best friend they can't even have a formal protocol to talk business with each other. If Serini wasn't going to propose permanent separation, she couldn't propose and immediate break. If Serini didn't have perfect knowledge of the future, she couldn't have foreseen any problems at all with her plan.

Well, sorry, but I'm not buying into that premise.

Nope. You are simply failing to understand Serini's perspective, so you are getting distracted by irrelevancies.

If Serini is confident that time is on her side and she will surely be able to adequately stitch things back together with sufficient effort then the details of the immediate deal does not look so important...to her mind.

"Hey, I got this. I just need to separate these three as quickly as possible, they will cool down, and with enough social elbow grease it will get fixed. For the moment, I will keep talking and adding promises until they agree. Everything will get fixed to make real sense on down the road."

So, you think that the deal Serini blurted out was unnecessary legalistic and heavy-handed and suboptimal in other various ways? Yes, Serini would surely agree with you. But in the moment, I doubt she would think about any of these things carefully. And it is just not within most people's capacity to think all that carefully on their feet. That is a highly realistic kind of error.

In the moment, Serini did not see how promises and legalisms would be used as excuses and get in her way of fixing things later. Her kind of mind does not see these things as important. Surely Girard would come around to her perspective, right? Surely Soon, as a stick in the mud as he could be, would see that working together was better once the other three were with her?

[Rynjin]

In other words, Serini is extremely arrogant and doesn't nearly have the level of competence necessary to justify it.