Inactive [LP CYOA] Overlord

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

Again, not being a Theseus. Not even acting like one. Our behavior doesn't fit the pattern. Maybe if we met Kyle and killed him on the off chance he'd steal Mieren's body, we'd be acting like a Theseus, but we wouldn't actually be one.

Again, it's not a judgment on what they are doing but a classification of what type of NPC they are. We are not an NPC, ergo we are not a Theseus.

The 'Dex as a whole seems to handle people like Bai Juitian a lot better than you.

I handle these characters fine. I just see them as a threat because I recognize the patterns in the writing. The 'Dex is too busy popping moles to notice or care - right up until the point when our character dies because of it. Again. And again.

 

[Absinthe]

I don't like 1B because we don't want the kids to have any notion of rightful ownership. It's the kind of thing that can bite us in the ass, especially once we start dealing with undead or resurrection. It's much better to start them off on the path of "we don't fucking care, collect loot, and it's yours now." Less hassle down the line.

 

[Baltika9]

Absinthe makes a good point. Since the first choice is all about how we raise the kids, turning them into douchebags like Erdrick would be better than the alternative. Flopping to 1A.

 

[Nevill]

I have completely no idea what the point is, other than "let's be assholes". I mean, what exactly the necromancy would affect? I'd think that, first, if the kids are accepting of that, looting corpses would be a complete non-issue, and second, why would we loot someone that we want to resurrect (which I assume would be an ally of some sort)?

If we can own their lives with necromancy, owing their property is really not the problem.

I handle these characters fine. I just see them as a threat because I recognize the patterns in the writing. The 'Dex is too busy popping moles to notice or care - right up until the point when our character dies because of it. Again. And again.

Which leads to you being too busy shouting 'Theseus!!' and trying to kill off useful people - like Uehara or Bai Juitian - to pay attention to real threats, like 'Seiji' (that one is completely on you) and zhang manxing.

 

[Baltika9]

I have completely no idea what the point is, other than "let's be assholes"

That's exactly the point.

 

[Nevill]

That's exactly the point.

That's a waste of a B-rank charisma. If we are an asshole, we don't necessarily have to show it for everyone to see.

Weren't you the one pushing for a Gayngel cult?

And for the record, I am not suggesting that we should pretend to be a saint, either, since I am not a fan of binary thinking.

 

[treave]

For everything done there is an investment, whether it is time or money or something else, and they should rightfully profit from that investment where possible.

Everything has its uses, and if they can put formerly useless things to better use, there is no need to waste them out of sentimentality.

Using something in a way that goes against the wishes of those related to the object is acceptable, particularly if they have been troublesome.

 

[Nevill]

Using something in a way that goes against the wishes of those related to the object is acceptable, particularly if they have been troublesome.

Dammit, if put that way, C was awesome. How did we talk ourselves out of that under the pretence of it being a 'do-goody'?

 

[Baltika9]

That's a waste of a B-rank charisma. If we are an asshole, we don't necessarily have to show it for everyone to see.

Depends on how you look at it. From where I'm standing, I think we can use our charisma to cover for being an asshole. And that's the direction I want our character to go into, a mostly selfish, amoral prick who really isn't all that nice of a guy.
He got dragged out of bed by his family (who were going through the 'aww, our little boy will be a hero!' phase) to go on some dumb quest that he wanted nothing to do with in the first place; wasted a ton of effort to clean up someone else's mess and was being set up for a betrayal in the end anyway. Good thing we did it first.
At least he met Mieren, but then the whole decapitation thing happened.
After all of that, I want Erdrick to live for himself. If anyone has a problem with that, Gigadyne.

 

[Nevill]

He got dragged out of bed by his family

Huh? I don't think his family had a say in the matter. Wasn't he drafted from the Academy?

In any case, the choices have nothing to do with idealism versus cynicism, as we initially thought. Just different motivations: mercantilism, pragmatism, and I am not sure how to best describe C with a single word.

I'll switch to 1C>B.

 

[treave]

Dammit, if put that way, C was awesome. How did we talk ourselves out of that under the pretence of it being a 'do-goody'?

Erdrick was being sarcastic. But it is entirely possible that the kids will miss the sarcasm and think of it as being do-goody, so that's also an acceptable argument re: idealism vs cynicism.

 

[Baltika9]

In any case, the choices have nothing to do with idealism versus cynicism, as we initially thought.

They're about influencing the kids and I want to mold them into selfish little pricks, like us.

The words are the excuse you are giving them. For you, looting dead mobs is just something you do as a Hero, so you haven't given a lot of thought as to why you personally do it and can't be bothered to, so all three options can actually be simplified to "Because I want to" and "Because they gave me a lot of trouble" for you.

But they might take it differently.

and I am not sure how to best describe C with a single word.

Huh? I don't think his family had a say in the matter. Wasn't he drafted from the Academy?

You, on the other hand, would die here. Your name would be reviled as that of a traitor. Your family would pay the price for your betrayal. Perhaps your father would be put to death. Perhaps your sister would be tortured before meeting her end. At best, they would be ostracized, exiled from their homes. You are under no illusions that the people would not seek some form of retribution against the one who betrayed their hopes.

Yet they were the ones who dragged you from your comfortable bed, the ones who saw through your feigned madness, the ones who elected you Hero against your wishes.

 

[Nevill]

They're about influencing the kids and I want to mold them into selfish little pricks, like us.

The mercantilism does not sit well with me. What if they take it to heart and then see turning us in as profitable down the road?

What's a good motivation for us is not necessarily the best one for our henchmen. We want to be the one lazing around, we don't want them to copy us in all aspects or nothing will get done.

Yet they were the ones who dragged you from your comfortable bed, the ones who saw through your feigned madness, the ones who elected you Hero against your wishes.

I am pretty sure this quote refers to 'people' in the previous sentence.

 

[treave]

You are under no illusions that the people would not seek some form of retribution against the one who betrayed their hopes.

Yet they were the ones who dragged you from your comfortable bed, the ones who saw through your feigned madness, the ones who elected you Hero against your wishes.

This part refers to the people of your world in general, not the family.

The mercantilism does not sit well with me. What if they take it to heart and then see turning us in as profitable down the road?

That is good motivation to ensure that you are always profitable, then.

 

[lightbane]

I think I'll redo my first vote to A>B>C. Making the children believe in the afterlife and such will give us some trouble once/if we get our hands on resurrection/negcromancy magic. Doubly so once they learn about the ice-tomb. Lastly, we can correct any mental issues that may arise through the application of brainwashing/psychological teraphy our Empire will certainly have. Besides, that way the tie is broken.

 

[Baltika9]

How would 'people' drag us out of bed and see through our madness. It's our parents who did that.

The mercantilism does not sit well with me. What if they take it to heart and then see turning us in as profitable down the road?

Can't turn a profit if you catch a bad case of the Gigadyne.
As for turning on us, the can do that whether they're realists or idealists, it all depends on how we influence them. But then, we shouldn't get too attached in the first place, shit happens, maybe Aria will meet a handsome prince of her own and spill our secrets in bed.

 

[Nevill]

Can't turn a profit if you catch a bad case of the Gigadyne.

Can't catch a Gygadine if you are in an anti-magic field. :Theseus:

But then, we shouldn't get too attached in the first place, shit happens, maybe Aria will meet a handsome prince of her own and spill our secrets in bed.

Which won't happen if we... nevermind.

 

[Baltika9]

Can't catch a Gygadine if you are in an anti-magic field. :Theseus:

Gee, that's a nice anti-magic field. Shame if someone were to come up with a counter to it.

 

[treave]

How would 'people' drag us out of bed and see through our madness. It's our parents who did that.

I dunno, you can ask this guy Palamedes how he did it even though he wasn't Odysseus's dad:

When Helen was abducted, Menelaus called upon the other suitors to honour their oaths and help him to retrieve her, an attempt that would lead to the Trojan War. Odysseus tried to avoid it by feigning lunacy, as an oracle had prophesied a long-delayed return home for him if he went. He hooked a donkey and an ox to his plough (as they have different stride lengths, hindering the efficiency of the plough) and (some modern sources add) started sowing his fields with salt. Palamedes, at the behest of Menelaus's brother Agamemnon, sought to disprove Odysseus's madness, and placed Telemachus, Odysseus's infant son, in front of the plough. Erdrick Odysseus veered the plough away from his collection of bathing waifu pictures son, thus exposing his stratagem.

 

[Baltika9]

How'd we get baited? Hot, naked babe in the middle of a field?

 

[treave]

They threatened your Bathhouse Collection series.

 

[Nevill]

Shame if someone were to come up with a counter to it.

We already have a counter for it, but then she got tailhurt over TRU LUV and ran off to find another one of her Yaoi books!

Please come back.

 

[Baltika9]

They threatened your Bathhouse Collection series.

They're going down.

 

[Absinthe]

I have completely no idea what the point is, other than "let's be assholes".

The point is exactly that. Raise them to be assholes like Erdrick who will get along well with Erdrick.

I mean, what exactly the necromancy would affect?

1B says it's okay to take it because the rightful owner can no longer have them. If the rightful owner comes back (and for all we know the human nations do have special mages/etc who can perform resurrection), these kids would feel obliged to return their shit to them under 1B. They might even worry about the act of looting on a more philosophical level if they know the dead can come back to reclaim them, etc. So eventually we're probably going to have to unlearn them this bullshit and that's going to be harder after they've taken it to heart.

You already made it clear that with 1B you don't want them to become assholes. Do you really not foresee the conflict of interest with our character if you do that?

That's a waste of a B-rank charisma. If we are an asshole, we don't necessarily have to show it for everyone to see.

Dude, the first rule of having minions is that you don't deceive them for the fuck of it if you can just get them to genuinely support you instead. It's a perfectly good use of our charisma to convince them that looting is a natural right of battle.

 

[Nevill]

You already made it clear that with 1B you don't want them to become assholes. Do you really not foresee the conflict of interest down the line if you do that?

No.

And there is also no mention of the 'rightful ownership' anywhere. Just 'we need it more than they do'.

The only reason why they don't want to take possessions of the dead is sentimental - they do not want to 'dececrate corpses' by going through their pockets. If the people in question aren't dead, there is no sanctity of death to speak of, and the reasoning no longer applies.

That is if we gloss over the fact that the example is highly hypothetical in the first place.