Babies and Wet-Nurses: A Conversation

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

But to be labled traitor because of that? Jaine obviously places the lives of her children as terribly important. The fact that Archon would do the same shouldn't make him a traitor.

Jaine is also living with the knowledge that she will die during childbirth - and *her* child, *her* life is central to the rebellion. So far as the world is concerned, Archonus' daughter has nothing to do with the throne.

Archonus' situation so far as children goes, changed drastically when he choose leave Jaine...

 

[The_Universe]

But to be labled traitor because of that? Jaine obviously places the lives of her children as terribly important. The fact that Archon would do the same shouldn't make him a traitor.

He's not a traitor to Jaine. He's (potentially) a traitor to you.

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

So - as of right now - can we feel that Archonus has broken the oath?

Once someone breaks it - can it be "re-sworn"? If not, how to you redeem yourself? Will a Cleric's Redemption spell do it?

 

[The_Universe]

So - as of right now - can we feel that Archonus has broken the oath?

Once someone breaks it - can it be "re-sworn"? If not, how to you redeem yourself? Will a Cleric's Redemption spell do it?

I'm not sure - I don't want to drop the hammer until I am sure that the hammer should be dropped. As Archon has often in the past had trouble expressing himself, I want to clarify what he and Mik are thinking. If the child is unconditionally placed before the circle (and there's no connection in his mind between the purpose of the circle, and the life of the child) it's definitely broken. Even if some of those things turn out to be true, it may be broken.

But I'm not 100% sure, yet. So, as soon as I know, I will "retroactively" inform you of what you were or are feeling.

Reswearing a broken oath would probably require Atonement (a geas or quest) and then a formal re-swearing of the oath. The question remains if the Circle, having been so callously cast aside, would wish him to re-swear it at all.

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

I'm not sure - I don't want to drop the hammer until I am sure that the hammer should be dropped. As Archon has often in the past had trouble expressing himself, I want to clarify what he and Mik are thinking. If the child is unconditionally placed before the circle (and there's no connection in his mind between the purpose of the circle, and the life of the child) it's definitely broken. Even if some of those things turn out to be true, it may be broken.

But I'm not 100% sure, yet. So, as soon as I know, I will "retroactively" inform you of what you were or are feeling.

Reswearing a broken oath would probably require Atonement (a geas or quest) and then a formal re-swearing of the oath. The question remains if the Circle, having been so callously cast aside, would wish him to re-swear it at all.

That's what I meant - Atonement.

 

[Laurel]

Xath's face pales and turns to face the circle, her face entreating. "He can't...he doesn't mean it that way..." Her face becomes stern and serious, a rare expression on her face. "You all know that I have and that I would again give my life for the cause and the circle." Just as quickly, anguish replaces her stern expression. "I'll...go talk to him." With that she turns and runs after Archonus.

L'Aurel does not turn, instead looking at those still around the table, "Would you give your lives for Jaine? Would you give your lives for her public heir?....I would....We are fighting to place the correct and true blood on the throne, and to stop Tain and Mordred. There are only three who can claim a higher position to the throne then Tain, and one of those is the life that has been placed in Archonus' and thus our hands directly. That child my not be the most important aspect of this war, but it is a vital part. Archonus, I think, believes this as well, and is trying to protect her in the only way he can. They only way he sees as right as a fighter, as a father, and as a sworn protector of this cause. We have many times underestimated the enemy in what they know and what game they are playing. I would hestitate to turn a child of my own over to anyone else' care or protection, but I think I would because the child would have no other value except as my child. Archonus' child is more then simply a future Marquess. There are many other fighters, but there are only three in her blood line with the same claim." ((Not sure if Marquess is the proper title or spelling?))

OOC- so far Kareth, Archonus, and L'Aurel (Xath hasn't stated it this convo so far as I know)have all stated they would give thier life for the child- so in that we have all broken the oath.
the question still seems to be how much the child will be with us- all the time, none of the time, only for resting periods when not on missions, at all times but active missions, etc.
I guess as i was trying to point out in the above it depends on why he places the child above us- is it as a father or as a member of the cause or both. If it simply as a father then yes he has broken the oath, if it as either of the other two options then no he has not.... but this is just me

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

I don't think it's a matter of whether or not we would give our lives for the child - we've already said that does not break the Oath.

The problem rises when the child becomes a higher priority than the war - than the original reason we swore the Oath... and, I do not believe the child to be an significant addition to the Oath at this point because we need to win the war BEFORE the life of that child could have the possibility of even becoming important.

Can't put the cart before the horse... we need to win the war before the life of the child becomes so linked to the cause that she reaches the same priority as the Cause.

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

Also - Jaine's public heir is much different than Archonus' child who will be presented as NOT an heir to the throne to the rest of the world.

 

[Xath]

Xath has stated IC that she would give her life for the child, and if it (somehow) came down to a choice between the two of them, she'd rather save the life of the child.

Archon's daughter will be the insurance on the throne, and she is also part of the future which we all fight for. If we do not fight for the future, what do we fight for?

 

[The_Universe]

I don't think it's a matter of whether or not we would give our lives for the child - we've already said that does not break the Oath.

The problem rises when the child becomes a higher priority than the war - than the original reason we swore the Oath... and, I do not believe the child to be an significant addition to the Oath at this point because we need to win the war BEFORE the life of that child could have the possibility of even becoming important.

Can't put the cart before the horse... we need to win the war before the life of the child becomes so linked to the cause that she reaches the same priority as the Cause.

This is my interpretation, as well.

The kid is important, but the war is more. She's not going to be worth a hill of beans if Tain wins.