Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Iron_Chef" data-source="post: 1200496" data-attributes="member: 4530">From his point of view, once he made the agreement to let the woman go and not mention her actions (he had no idea what she'd done at that point), he had no choice but to live up to his end of the bargain... plus, if he did break his oath, not only would he be an oathbreaker, but he'd have a powerful crime family seeking revenge on him and his family! He never expected her to be an assassin. Getting rid of the tax collector's body was merely disposing of some inconvenient trash (life is cheap there and the man was no friend). He didn't kill anybody, he couldn't do anything to change the fact that the man was dead, but he could prevent a scandal from damaging his father and the inn. Family and personal honor are most important to his culture, so it seemed the only logical choice to him. He never suspected that it would lead to all the trouble he's currently embroiled in, but he doubts he would do it any differently if he could go back and do it again.I'm not sure there is an &quot;accomplice after the fact&quot; in the country's laws. Did medieval countries or Rome have laws like this? Seems pretty modern to me.&nbsp; He has kept every agreement he ever made (except the one to his father to stay out of the arena), regardless of the consequences. That's pretty lawful. Plus he's trying to work within the law as much as possible (it just hasn't been very possible lately). Keep in mind that it is a decadent republic where bribes are common and justice... or revenge... can be commonly bought, and most in positions of power regularly abuse their office for personal gain, so there is really little that is black and white except for the appearance family and personal honor.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Iron_Chef, post: 1200496, member: 4530"] From his point of view, once he made the agreement to let the woman go and not mention her actions (he had no idea what she'd done at that point), he had no choice but to live up to his end of the bargain... plus, if he did break his oath, not only would he be an oathbreaker, but he'd have a powerful crime family seeking revenge on him and his family! He never expected her to be an assassin. Getting rid of the tax collector's body was merely disposing of some inconvenient trash (life is cheap there and the man was no friend). He didn't kill anybody, he couldn't do anything to change the fact that the man was dead, but he could prevent a scandal from damaging his father and the inn. Family and personal honor are most important to his culture, so it seemed the only logical choice to him. He never suspected that it would lead to all the trouble he's currently embroiled in, but he doubts he would do it any differently if he could go back and do it again. I'm not sure there is an "accomplice after the fact" in the country's laws. Did medieval countries or Rome have laws like this? Seems pretty modern to me. He has kept every agreement he ever made (except the one to his father to stay out of the arena), regardless of the consequences. That's pretty lawful. Plus he's trying to work within the law as much as possible (it just hasn't been very possible lately). Keep in mind that it is a decadent republic where bribes are common and justice... or revenge... can be commonly bought, and most in positions of power regularly abuse their office for personal gain, so there is really little that is black and white except for the appearance family and personal honor. [/QUOTE]

Verification