stages of rebellion

[Quickleaf]

The backdrop for our heroic-tier D&D campaign is the PCs gathering support/fomenting resistance against a scheming prince who would be king. I want to include several signposts along the way that their efforts are having an effect.

What kinds of stages of development apply to a rebellion?

In 4e-speak I'm thinking a skill challenge which lasts throughout the campaign using Stalker's Obsidian skill challenge rules. Every couple successes yields a tangible result, like inspiring a town to revolt against their lord or gaining blackmail information to leverage the prince with.

[Mesh Hong]

Thinking about it, a simple model for rebellion might have the following stages or chain:


General
1: Backdrop of injustice or detachment
2: Incident of realisation
3: Small conspiracy of like minds
4: Minor acts of opposition
5: Publicity or Propaganda
6: Recruitment of malcontents or radicals
7: Major act of opposition
8: Recruitment of the masses
9: Public protest
10: Major civic opposition – probably violent
11: Regime change, installation of new system or leader

Trying to apply it to your scenario

1: Backdrop of injustice or detachment
Their obviously has to be something not right with the Prince in the first place, he might have a reputation for being harsh, cruel, or decadent etc. This should probably be something distasteful to the common man but not completely unreasonable to the Princes piers or the society that he functions in.

2: Incident of realisation
This would be the moment when the rebellions founder finally could take no more. It would probably be something very personal to them that they could not overlook or ever forgive, and they believe it is wrong in every way. A classic example would be something like after months of overtaxing the persons village beyond their ability to pay the Prince himself orders the burning of the persons farmstead and the imprisonment, forced labour, or execution of the persons family as an example of what happens to trouble makers.

3: Small conspiracy of like minds
This stage would be the person seeking out others in his position, people sympathetic to his new cause, or radicals to aid him (maybe with their own agendas).

4: Minor acts of opposition
Once a small team is assembled they would look to start making trouble for the Prince. These first acts would probably be reasonably minor and be carried out in such a way as to make the Prince look foolish, weak or expose his faults or flaws.

5: Publicity or Propaganda
The next stage would be publicising the achievements of the previous acts of opposition in the hopes of fostering the sympathy and support of a greater population. Interestingly the Princes efforts (and failure) to capture or bring to justice the opposition group will also help to spread the word amongst the common man.

6: Recruitment of malcontents or radicals
With increased publicity and renown the opposition group would then be in a position to swell its ranks by recruiting from the greater population.

7: Major act of opposition
To really boost support and encourage more people to flock to their banner the opposition group would need to perform a major act of opposition in order to firmly establish themselves as a serious movement. This might be kidnapping the Princes right hand man, directly attacking the Princes residence and burning it down (poetic justice maybe), breaking into and releasing all prisoners from the Princes jail or labour camp, destroying one of the Princes businesses or revenue streams etc.

8: Recruitment of the masses
With a very public and major act of opposition under their belts (and no doubt the Princes extreme reaction) a major proportion of the population would be open for general recruitment and talk of downfall for the Prince would be on everyone’s lips. At this point revolution is almost inevitable and it would take severe and very decisive action from the Prince to turn the situation round.

9: Public protest
With the majority of the population on board the opposition movement would just have to get them out on the streets, probably marching on the Princes palace in one giant (and angry) mob. All along the route rabble rousers would be giving speeches working the crowd up and keeping them on mission.

10: Major civic opposition – probably violent
There is only one thing an angry mob is good for, and that’s rioting and swift justice. It would be likely that the mob would be able to cause mayhem in the streets (easily outnumbering any form of police or personal guard) and force their way into the Princes palace. The ring leaders would probably take this opportunity to storm the palace themselves for their final showdown with the Prince, either killing him themselves, capturing him and giving him to the mob or maybe even capturing him and forcing him to stand trial (though that is unlikely given mob attitudes, and any trial would be short with the obvious swift and bloody justice)

11: Regime change, installation of new system or leader
Once the old Prince has been dealt with the leaders would then have to control and calm the riotous mob and persuade them to return to their homes and become peaceful. They would then have to swiftly install a new leader or government or take control themselves. The weeks immediately following this change would be critical in cementing the change as the population is already primed for violent upheaval and any miss-step or perceived injustice might have them all out on the streets again with obvious consequences.

…then give it a few years and see if a similar thing happens again. History as they say often repeats itself, and once a precedent has been set many more malcontents might start thinking they could do much better.


The above of course doesn’t include for action from the Prince which would make the whole process much more dynamic and complicated.

As to making it all part of one giant skill challenge I’m not sure. It seems mainly like a lot of really interesting roleplaying situations, secret meeting in shady taverns, rousing speeches in village barns, night raids, evading the authorities as they search the streets. You might even get a bit of intrigue at the princes masked ball etc.

You could probably do some of it as skill challenges but I would say most of it would be skill checks as part of the roleplaying during certain events. To me there is a subtle difference, one is mapped out before hand, one is normal freeform roleplaying.

Anyway I hope these ramblings help in some small way.

[Quickleaf]

They do indeed, thanks Mesh Hong! That is an excellent breakdown.

I agree that a skill challenge isn't the way to go. Instead what I'm doing is coming up with a list of potential NPC supporters and minor quests which can aid their efforts.

The most structure I might apply is a list of "developments" which occur with certain triggers. For example, after stage #9 (public protest), a town (perhaps the birthplace of a rival royal leader) rises against its lord and asks for the PCs’ aid in ending the siege on the lord’s keep. The twist is the lord is a decent person and the town is led by a rabble rouser who wants something in the keep.

I'm also going to develop the Prince's response at each stage. For example, after stage #4 (minor acts of opposition), the Prince might fabricate trumped up charges against PCs in order to silence them and send thugs to rough up one of their supporters.

Thanks again for the framework, it helps me to get more organized about my campaign planning.

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Well, all the advice I recently heard on skill challenges is to avoid the "big ass high complexity" kind and rather split it up in multiple challenges. For a big plot like a rebellion, that's certainly advisable, especially since you can mix combats, quests and skill challenges as you see fit.

[Hand of Evil]

Something to add to Mesh Hong's list is a Catalyst should be 7.a - this is an event that sets the fire of rebellion burning, moving it from unrest to a true rebellion.

[Jack7]

I think everyone has given pretty good advice so far. MH did a very good job of basic situational analysis and likely steps of progression. They needn't necessarily proceed in that particular order though, that will be sitiautaionally determined by events on the ground.

Another thing you're gonna need is a really effective leadership organization if this is to be a true rebellion and not just a series of sporadic and geographically isolated temporary uprisings. Also, depending upon the geographic area involved (how spread out in actual terrain is the uprising to be, will it be localized to the capital or a major city where the prince is likely already in background operation seeking to gain influence and followers of his own, or will it be a national or kingdom wide operation) you will need a really effective and reliable means or set of means of communications. This is especially true in a non-magical, low magical, or primitive society or one in which much control over the means of communications and commerce/trade is exercised. What about espionage and spying? Does the prince have a good spy network (probably) and what about the opposition (the could possibly build up a good network over time). There is a lot of necessary and hidden support organization behind both a secret insurgency/coup/power grab, and an organized or developing rebellion.

Another thing you're gonna have to account for is push-back. How hostile or violent will the counter-insurgency, counter-rebellion become, and on who's side will the local and larger authorities decide, both in the early stages of the rebellion, and later on? And again how long will this go on? Will the authorities hope to ride it out or destroy the opposition through attrition, or will it be relatively quick from beginning to end, and how violent and brutal is the rebellion likely to become and how will they behave if they actually succeed? Will it bring about a possible entirely new form of government, like an American Republic, will it bring about a French Revolution Reign of Terror, will it simply exchange one tyrant for another, will it lead to society wide change, or just local exchange of princes?

All of these things, and things mentioned previously, might be signposts along your way.

Good luck QL. Sounds like an interesting scenario.

[Mesh Hong]

All very good points Jack7.

I think this is one of those classic examples of a great idea that is really hard, if not impossible to thoroughly plan for. So much depends on the actions of the PCs and their approach. A rebellion is such a dangerous undertaking that one mistake could either bring a catastrophic end to the rebellion or change it in a completely unexpected way.

I kept my list as simple as possible to represent a possible basic flow. In game it would be much more complicated and have several different layers (or social strata) all progressing at the same time.

As Jack7 states communication and espionage/counter espionage are major factors that will influence events, and their difficulties change over time. The bigger the rebellion becomes the easier communication should become but it will also become harder to spot infiltration by the authorities due to the increase in membership.

Information gathering by the rebellion should ideally come from at least one inside source, an informant or sympathiser close to the Prince (either a courtier or even servants who work in the Princes household). Members of other reputable organisations should also be exploited, e.g. members of the church who may have access to the Prince or his associates, local magistraits who can try to reduce convictions and pass on information that could be used to rescue captured allies etc.

I think this could be an incredably fun enviroment to play and DM in. But personally I would approach this with a general background, a bunch of generic stats (as you have already done - human minions thread) and a bit of serious thinking as to the morals and motivations of the main protaganists. Then just react in character during sessions, and plot and scheme between sessions But as to having the whole thing mapped out I think it would hurt the campaign freedom as well as your own sanity.

[green slime]

No one has yet mentioned the effect of outside agents. Other nations, even those far away will of course be paying very close attention, and probably trying to fund / persuade / coalign activities and factions to their own causes.

Add in important resources and the whole thing starts to get mired down

Look no further than the Democratic Repulic of Congo just to see how complicated things can get.

[Mesh Hong]

Originally Posted by green slime

No one has yet mentioned the effect of outside agents. Other nations, even those far away will of course be paying very close attention, and probably trying to fund / persuade / coalign activities and factions to their own causes.

Add in important resources and the whole thing starts to get mired down

Ah yes, now we're talking. There is nothing like secondary or tertiary factors to really complicate matters.

This is why I love DMing. You take a simple situation then start to extrapolate to the nth degree, and before you know it you have a beautifully complex and realistic situation that is so far away from any sort of control (or maybe even comprehension) that your players (let alone your PCs) have no idea what is going on, and important events start to happen off screen that your players have no chance of ever finding out about or predicting.

Personally, I am often guilty of this sort of behaviour .

Getting back to the point. Yes I think that some sort of natural resource and an external influence would be great things to weave into the situation.

The natural resource would of course be a great target for the rebellion to disrupt or close down, hampering the Prince or making him look weak. One possible side effect of this could actually be a loss of support if the rebellion actually starts to cost normal people their livelihoods.

An external influence might be a good additional short scenario. The Prince could be looking to external forces or specialists to eradicate his trouble makers but this would require some diplomacy. The rebellion would have to disrupt that diplomacy.

As to rival nations wanting to use the situation to their own advantage as a prelude to their own invasion, I think this might be a step too far. I think Quickleaf stated that this was the heroic tier of the campaign, maybe this could be saved as a possible scenario after the rebellion in the Paragon tier.

[Jack7]

No one has yet mentioned the effect of outside agents. Other nations, even those far away will of course be paying very close attention, and probably trying to fund / persuade / coalign activities and factions to their own causes.

This is a very good point. It will depend of course on how advanced the society itself is and how advanced the surrounding societies are. In more primitive conditions communications will be slow and other nations might not even learn of events in time to properly react. Nor may their own communications or military/espionage/trade capabilities be advanced or fast enough to gather and develop the appropriate counterforces before the satiation is already resolved or beyond their influence. If however the various societies are advanced enough and exchange is common enough then other influences might very well want a stake in the game, up to and including overtly or covertly funding or supporting either the rebellion itself, or the prince. I am reminded though, as a sort of warning about outside influences, of the many European aristocrats and autocrats who either encouraged or suppressed democratic movements in other nations, only to regret that they ever stirred up such trouble when the same movements began in their own nations. In other words if rebellions and large scale "change movements" gain success and influence of their own, 'ware the wheel pilots and captains, even if you think your waters calm. The storm is soon upon you after nightfall.

I think this is one of those classic examples of a great idea that is really hard, if not impossible to thoroughly plan for. So much depends on the actions of the PCs and their approach. A rebellion is such a dangerous undertaking that one mistake could either bring a catastrophic end to the rebellion or change it in a completely unexpected way.

I kept my list as simple as possible to represent a possible basic flow. In game it would be much more complicated and have several different layers (or social strata) all progressing at the same time.

I think MH makes a good point here too. You don't want to overcomplicate planning at the intention stages especially because it is very hard to know how the PCs and others may influence events as they develop. Or in other words as has been suggested I wouldn't try to plan out everything that happens in the rebellion but would rather plan for the possibilities and the possible factors involved, and then let the situation develop as organically as possible. Always be prepared, but it doesn't mean that everything will happen as you think.

[S'mon]

Mohammed & Mao both developed a 3-stage system for insurgency warfare, I suggest you google it. Basically it goes:

1. Defensive - create areas of support, avoid enemy attention.
2. Offensive - expansion, raiding, destabilise the enemy.
3. Military - the final conventional attack on the enemy.

It has worked well for Jihadis and Reds, it should work for you too.

[Noumenon]

Wow, what a great background for a campaign. Look at all the politics, and all the action, and the growing challenge, and the development afterward.

Will it bring about a possible entirely new form of government, like an American Republic, will it bring about a French Revolution Reign of Terror

I'm thinking dracocracy.

[haakon1]

Originally Posted by Hand of Evil

Something to add to Mesh Hong's list is a Catalyst should be 7.a - this is an event that sets the fire of rebellion burning, moving it from unrest to a true rebellion.

QFT.

The political science explanation of revolution:
1) The J curve. Expectations are going up, then they are dashed. Revolutions aren't caused by repression, they are caused by hope that things are getting better, and then it doesn't. Recent example: The Iranian election, where the "liberal" faction thought their man was going to win, only to have their hopes dashed.

2) The spark. There needs to be an igniting event. Storming the Bastille, Boston Tea Party, that sort of thing.


I've also noticed that a revolution is usually successful when the troops are ordered to shoot the protesters, but refuse . . . that's the critical moment: when they raise their guns, do they fire, or not?

[LostSoul]

I think a skill challenge might work out very well for this.

You'd only make checks after something took place, and only to determine those forces outside the direct influence of the PCs - basically, they work on the small scale; how are things proceeding on the larger scale?

It would allow you to determine NPC actions and behaviours based on die rolls. That may not be what you want, but it's one way to handle it.

I would do roleplay, all the small-scene stuff, and what happens there would do two things: determine the skill that's used for the roll, who makes it, if other characters can lend Aid (and how), and any other modifiers to the roll. Sometimes things might turn out to be an automatic success; other times, an automatic failure.

It'd be more of a campaign-scale pacing mechanism.

[Orius]

The more the big bad tightens his grip, the more villages slip through his fingers.

Unless of course he's got some all-powerful nigh-unstoppable applied phlebotinum on tap or something.

[Quickleaf]

Tons of great responses, and hopefully useful for other DMs besides myself.

LostSoul, I think you're right about it serving more as a campaign pacing mechanic, but I'm veering away from designing it as a skill challenge.

Originally Posted by Jack7

Another thing you're gonna need is a really effective leadership organization if this is to be a true rebellion and not just a series of sporadic and geographically isolated temporary uprisings. Also, depending upon the geographic area involved (how spread out in actual terrain is the uprising to be, will it be localized to the capital or a major city where the prince is likely already in background operation seeking to gain influence and followers of his own, or will it be a national or kingdom wide operation) you will need a really effective and reliable means or set of means of communications.

I'm breaking up the campaign into two "parts", levels 1-5 the PCs are more underdogs, helping individual villages, securing the aid of small tribes, guilds or minor nobility - they are working to bring the movement to the masses. Levels 6-10 the PCs either become leaders of the rebellion or help establish a leader, they get to dictate extent of rebellion, organize communication, and secure aid of major political nobility.

Another thing you're gonna have to account for is push-back. How hostile or violent will the counter-insurgency, counter-rebellion become, and on who's side will the local and larger authorities decide, both in the early stages of the rebellion, and later on?

Exactly. I'm trying to map the Prince's push-back to various PC actions. For example, if they recover the King's stolen will (which reveals the Prince got passed up as heir to the throne), the Prince might attempt to frame them for stealing it.

Will it bring about a possible entirely new form of government, like an American Republic, will it bring about a French Revolution Reign of Terror, will it simply exchange one tyrant for another, will it lead to society wide change, or just local exchange of princes?

I think that's more paragon-tier territory, at least for my purposes, though I would love to explore it. It's also something the players will want to consider, since they'll be protecting the Prince's illegitimate son at various points - the boy was raised by a kindly witch but his father wants to recover him and raise him as a prince, to mold him as the next tyrant and to bolster his claim to the throne (i.e. "look I have a son, so when I take this throne, if something goes wrong during the regime change and I fall in battle/get assassinated, then you've got my successor right here").

Good luck QL. Sounds like an interesting scenario.

Thanks! First adventure is tomorrow.

Originally Posted by Mesh Hong

As Jack7 states communication and espionage/counter espionage are major factors that will influence events, and their difficulties change over time. The bigger the rebellion becomes the easier communication should become but it will also become harder to spot infiltration by the authorities due to the increase in membership.

Thanks Mesh Hong, I'd completely neglected the possibility of moles among the rebels. That's something I'll have to work in.

Information gathering by the rebellion should ideally come from at least one inside source, an informant or sympathiser close to the Prince (either a courtier or even servants who work in the Princes household). Members of other reputable organisations should also be exploited, e.g. members of the church who may have access to the Prince or his associates, local magistraits who can try to reduce convictions and pass on information that could be used to rescue captured allies etc.

Absolutely. I've got a couple NPCs who will serve this capacity as "inside men/women". Cadeyrn is a dissatisfied redcoat captain who, as the campaign progresses, will be more and more swayable to the PC's side as the evils of the Prince become apparent. Another NPC is a herald who can help get the PCs into a tournament usually restricted to nobility.

I think this could be an incredably fun enviroment to play and DM in. But personally I would approach this with a general background, a bunch of generic stats (as you have already done - human minions thread) and a bit of serious thinking as to the morals and motivations of the main protaganists. Then just react in character during sessions, and plot and scheme between sessions But as to having the whole thing mapped out I think it would hurt the campaign freedom as well as your own sanity.

Haha Point well taken. It's always a fine line between improv and prep. I have several events I think would be fun, but haven't committed them to a structured sequence or map of any sort. For example, the PCs could be in a besieged city which just declared itself a freehold (once the Prince makes a bid for the throne), but trapped inside the walls with them is a ravaging werewolf...the PCs must find a way to sabotage the siege and find out who the werewolf is and stop them.

Originally Posted by green slime

No one has yet mentioned the effect of outside agents. Other nations, even those far away will of course be paying very close attention, and probably trying to fund / persuade / coalign activities and factions to their own causes.

Great point, green slime. While I might give hints of inter-kingdom collusion or treachery, I agree with Mesh Hong in saving that for paragon-tier (if the campaign continues that long). For example, I have a religious/economic conflict on the western border which features foreign crusading paladins... the conflict is fueled by the Prince's agents because the fighting helps to evoke an external threat. Actually that's #1 on Naomi Wolf's "10 steps to fascism" list , which has helped me organize my thoughts about the campaign.

Originally Posted by Mesh Hong

This is why I love DMing. You take a simple situation then start to extrapolate to the nth degree, and before you know it you have a beautifully complex and realistic situation that is so far away from any sort of control (or maybe even comprehension) that your players (let alone your PCs) have no idea what is going on, and important events start to happen off screen that your players have no chance of ever finding out about or predicting.

Personally, I am often guilty of this sort of behaviour .

I'd join that 12-step group. DMA. Dungeon Master's Anonymous.

The natural resource would of course be a great target for the rebellion to disrupt or close down, hampering the Prince or making him look weak. One possible side effect of this could actually be a loss of support if the rebellion actually starts to cost normal people their livelihoods.

Yeah, that would be a risky move. I mean, would the people blame the Prince or the rebels for their woes? Still, I love the idea. One possibility I'd considered which ties in well with the background for our eladrin swordmage is an enchantress whose rituals provide the Prince's troops some benefit...so it becomes a classic "stop the ritual" mission.

An external influence might be a good additional short scenario. The Prince could be looking to external forces or specialists to eradicate his trouble makers but this would require some diplomacy. The rebellion would have to disrupt that diplomacy.

For some reason my mind went immediately to the Mariachi movie, or the remake with Antonio Banderas where a team of assassins are brought in to take him out. Hmm. I agree it might make a fun side trek...the kingdom to the east is a magocracy run by tyrannical mages so I'm sure I could come up with some tenuous foreign allies for the Prince.

Originally Posted by Jack7

In other words if rebellions and large scale "change movements" gain success and influence of their own, 'ware the wheel pilots and captains, even if you think your waters calm. The storm is soon upon you after nightfall.

You've summed up how I imagine neighboring rulers would view the situation... like a cauldron ready to boil over.

Originally Posted by Orius

The more the big bad tightens his grip, the more villages slip through his fingers.

Nicely said. That's how I view the first couple levels. Before the PCs it was a chokehold, but the PCs create just enough breathing room for people to stop and question what's happening and take a stand.

[Noumenon]

Would it be a good idea to make a rebellion where the PCs might find themselves wanting to help either side? Or is that like trying to make a Star Wars movie without deciding whether Luke is going to join the Dark Side or not?

[green slime]

Originally Posted by Noumenon

Would it be a good idea to make a rebellion where the PCs might find themselves wanting to help either side? Or is that like trying to make a Star Wars movie without deciding whether Luke is going to join the Dark Side or not?

I like those kind of scenarios myself.

I prefer the set up where it isn't immediately obvious who is the "bad" team, or that both sides have pros and cons. I know some prefer to have their Morgoth or Sauron to rail against. I prefer a more less obvious, subdued threat (at least to start with). Preventing an evil may mean a temporary alliance with an abomination.

[ProfessorCirno]

Originally Posted by green slime

I like those kind of scenarios myself.

I prefer the set up where it isn't immediately obvious who is the "bad" team, or that both sides have pros and cons. I know some prefer to have their Morgoth or Sauron to rail against. I prefer a more less obvious, subdued threat (at least to start with). Preventing an evil may mean a temporary alliance with an abomination.

And on that note, rebellions are PERFECT for throwing in some good ol' moral greys! Not everyone joins a rebellion to be a passionate and righteous defender of the people. Some do it just to set buildings on fire. Others do it because the chaos means THEY can do some particularly nasty things themselves. The PCs find some very powerful allies doing some very horrible things. Do they weaken their own revolution though a culling? Or try to ignore it and tell themselves it's for the greater good? What about the allies that they choose from the start - smugglers and big head criminal masterminds can make for some potent allies in such a situation, but where do you stand with them once the revolution is over? Do you even let them join your rebellion in the first place, knowing how much they'd help - and how much they'd hurt?

I think it's just too easy to just turn it into REBELLION GOOD, EMPIRE EVIL. Most townsfolk probably want nothing to do with the rebellion until things get REALLY hectic - they just want to be safe in their homes. And once the rebellion actually is in full swing, your hardened revolutionaries can so easily turn into animalistic looters and pillagers - and the captain of the Prince's guard states that anyone, regardless of who they are, is deemed a criminal if they're out of their house and not in a guardsman uniform.

Situations like this, I believe, empower players far more then any number of GOOD VS EVIL conflicts, because in grey morality situations, they have to make a much more emotionally charged decision - and when that decision comes to fruition, they have that much more personal emotion put into it.

[haakon1]

Originally Posted by Quickleaf

Exactly. I'm trying to map the Prince's push-back to various PC actions.

You might want to get a third party to role play the Prince for you. In complex open-ended scenarios like this, I find that's interesting way to remain the "referee", without being tempted to have the enemy be either omniscent about the PC's plans, or giving them too much of the benefit of the doubt.

Of course, you could always just ask the community here: "What would evil prince do?"

Two other random revolutionary thoughts:
(1) People generally assume it's the poor who lead revolutions, because they are oppressed and can't take it anymore. That's completely wrong. It's the upper middle class or low end of the upper class who are revolutionaries.

Think of the American Revolution's Founding Fathers: scientist/polymath (Franklin), aristocrat/surveyor/military officer (Washington), Harvard graduate/lawyer (John Adams), aristocrat/polymath (Jefferson), lawyer (John Jay & James Madison), college student (Hamilton).

Some other revolutions:
-- English Civil War (first modern revolution): Oliver Cromwell is described by Wikipedia: The social status of Cromwell's family at his birth was relatively low within the gentry class.
-- French Revolution: Robespierre -- illegitimate son of a country gentry lawyer
-- Russian Revolution: Lenin -- son of a province's director of public schools
-- Vietnamese Revolution: Ho Chi Minh -- son of an imperial provincial magistrate for the French

No outsiders, no downtrodden poor . . . don't buy the "Les Miserables" version of who revolutionaries are. Think Aristocrats and Experts (in 3.x terms), not Commoners.

(2) There's a great Shakespeare quote about rebellions:
"Treason never prospers, and what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."