On 11/9/2019 at 5:50 PM, shineyorkboy said:

you imply that if it weren't for this supernatural force Tsuko and her generals wouldn't have behaved badly

I can see why you would come to that conclusion from my posts so I will clarify. If you think about it, there is no valid “greater good” justification for Tsuko’s crime. She is motivated by personal loss, the hateful desire for vengeance, and lust for glory. These are totally understandable and normal motivations in Rokugan but in the normal course of things honorable and noble characters restrain themselves. They overcome arrogance and grief and myopic rage. But in 1123, characters we know are capable of nobility and restraint, yes even Matsu Tsuko, seem to be losing a grip on their self control and sense of right and wrong. I think there is a supernatural darkness at work in this fantasy setting that is full of spirits and magic and it is affecting characters who are predisposed, for various reasons, to selfish and self-centered impulses. But this darkness did not force Tsuko and the faithless Lion generals to commit this crime. It was still of their own free will that they chose this dishonorable course of action and so they are morally culpable for it.

In Toturi’s latest appearance, the whole story is about him being tempted to act hastily in rage out of a egocentric sense of shame. But he does not give in to it.

2 hours ago, Manchu said:

If you think about it, there is no valid “greater good” justification for Tsuko’s crime. She is motivated by personal loss, the hateful desire for vengeance, and lust for glory.

That's highly debatable. It could be argued that had Toturi acted decisively earlier in the conflict the Lion could have achieved their territorial ambitions and been in a secure enough position that the Imperial bureaucracy couldn't justify handing Toshi Ranbo over to the Scorpions. It's hard not to see how, from Tsuko's point of view, Toturi continuing to be Lion Champion could be a threat to the well being of the Clan.

2 hours ago, Manchu said:

These are totally understandable and normal motivations in Rokugan but in the normal course of things honorable and noble characters restrain themselves. They overcome arrogance and grief and myopic rage.

Not really. I mean a core mechanic of the RPG revolves around characters giving into their passions. Granted most people aren't in a position to start a war when that happens.

2 hours ago, Manchu said:

But in 1123, characters we know are capable of nobility and restraint, yes even Matsu Tsuko, seem to be losing a grip on their self control and sense of right and wrong.

I kind of have to tilt my head at the idea that we've seen most of these characters enough or in enough situations to make a judgement call as to when they start acting out of character. Moreover I can't help but feel you're expecting an unreasonably perfect adherence to the tenets of bushido.

2 hours ago, Manchu said:

I think there is a supernatural darkness at work in this fantasy setting that is full of spirits and magic and it is affecting characters who are predisposed, for various reasons, to selfish and self-centered impulses. But this darkness did not force Tsuko and the faithless Lion generals to commit this crime. It was still of their own free will that they chose this dishonorable course of action and so they are morally culpable for it.

I think you're trying to have your cake and eat it too. Either this darkness is affecting their behavior so subtly that it might as well not be there (and thus, what evidence would we even have for it) or it's having enough of an affect that they're no more responsible for their action than any other victim of brainwashing.

3 hours ago, Manchu said:

In Toturi’s latest appearance, the whole story is about him being tempted to act hastily in rage out of a egocentric sense of shame. But he does not give in to it.

I'm not sure if you mean him wanting to commit seppuku or wanting to march into court and demand answers. Regardless, I'm not sure why you're bringing up Toturi in this context since his not acting hastily would seem to be evidence against the existence of some sort of corrupting darkness. Unless you're suggesting that the fact that he considered being hasty at all is evidence that some foreign influence planted that idea in his mind.

1 hour ago, shineyorkboy said:

That's highly debatable.

Not even remotely. Lion is in the enviable position of having created its own problems. Under Arasou’s leadership, Lion aggressively bullied both Crane and Unicorn. These conflicts are not about anything but a clan with a big army wanting to use it. Tsuko isn’t in any sense “saving” the Clan. To the contrary, she simply stole power because she wants to fight an unnecessary war.

1 hour ago, shineyorkboy said:

Not really.

Right back atcha. Restraint is obviously a key ethical practice in a society where nearly everyone of import walks around with three foot long razor blades. Ever noticed how important good manners are? (I mean, Crab mon aside.) Samurai who can’t control their base impulses are just bandits.

1 hour ago, shineyorkboy said:

I kind of have to tilt my head at the idea that we've seen most of these characters enough or in enough situations to make a judgement call as to when they start acting out of character. Moreover I can't help but feel you're expecting an unreasonably perfect adherence to the tenets of bushido.

Tilt all you want, we have an entire story about Tsuko resisting her impulse to kill Kuwanan. We know she is capable of better judgment than betraying her Clan Champion. Also, NOT betraying your Clan Champion is hardly an impossible expectation of perfect adherence to bushido. Tsuko and the traitors who followed her have breached a fundamental social norm here.

1 hour ago, shineyorkboy said:

Either this darkness is affecting their behavior so subtly that it might as well not be there (and thus, what evidence would we even have for it) or it's having enough of an affect that they're no more responsible for their action than any other victim of brainwashing.

That’s just a false dichotomy. Between the extreme poles of being non-existent and being so overwhelming as to totally eliminate free will one can imagine a wide range of possibilities.

1 hour ago, shineyorkboy said:

Regardless, I'm not sure why you're bringing up Toturi in this context since his not acting hastily would seem to be evidence against the existence of some sort of corrupting darkness. Unless you're suggesting that the fact that he considered being hasty at all is evidence that some foreign influence planted that idea in his mind.

The point is, not everyone is as susceptible to giving into selfishness and dishonor as Tsuko or Sotorii or Altansarnai or Kachiko. Characters like Toturi, Tsanuri, Shoju, Yojiro, and Shono, to name a few, are shown holding onto what is right despite their personal difficulties.

1 hour ago, Manchu said:

The point is, not everyone is as susceptible to giving into selfishness and dishonor as Tsuko or Sotorii or Altansarnai or Kachiko. Characters like Toturi, Tsanuri, Shoju, Yojiro, and Shono, to name a few, are shown holding onto what is right despite their personal difficulties.

Or at least, are consciously trying to figure out what is right.

Toturi may be guilty of overthinking...pretty much everything, to be honest...but at least he's working through his actions and their likely consequences; he can make a fair claim his actions were the best choice based on his knowledge at the time.

Which isn't the same as being objectively 'right', of course. Going back to the capital 'to hunt for the assassins' is not a great decision in the abstract when we (as the readers) know that Kachiko (and presumably Aramoro) and Sotorii have both left, so the 'assassins' are gone, and the capital is currently about as secure as it's getting, with several honourable characters parked in positions of power, sizeable military force at their disposal, and arguably no-one to protect right at the moment.

1 hour ago, Manchu said:

Tilt all you want, we have an entire story about Tsuko resisting her impulse to kill Kuwanan. We know she is capable of better judgment than betraying her Clan Champion. Also, NOT betraying your Clan Champion is hardly an impossible expectation of perfect adherence to bushido. Tsuko and the traitors who followed her have breached a fundamental social norm here.

I agree it's the wrong choice. Playing devil's advocate, Bushido is a balancing act between the various virtues - in this case:

• Righteousness (obey the law and custom as written)
• Duty (obey your sworn lord)

versus

• Honour (avenge dishonourable slights and brook no insult, and do what should be done, not what the rules say should be done)

Now in Tsuko's (paper-thin) defence, the latter is seen as the cardinal virtue by the Lion. Arguing for breaching one bushido virtue to uphold another is commonplace, and sacrificing another virtue in the name of honour is 'correct' based on the traditions of the children of Akodo (especially if that virtue is Compassion, the least important in their eyes.

But the problem, and the place that argument fails completely , is that only through a very vague distorted squint are Tsuko's actions in line with Honour in the first place. Hotaru - the person she has a credible grievance with - is - as far as we know - commanding the forces at Kyotei. If she were to launch an attack on Hotaru's headquarters, fine. She is, after all, the field commander.

If she were leave her army to go challenge her in person, that's a violation of Duty (because theoretically a samurai needs their lord's permission to issue a challenge and because it's absenting herself from her command) but choosing honour over duty if the two are opposed is defensible by Lion ethics.

Attacking Kyuden Kakita is basically striking at a 'because I can' target, and rebelling against the current clan champion has no particular justification I can see. The argument that he 'gave the Scorpion Toshi Ranbo' is flawed and only holds water with an audience who don't care about the details of politics at the capital.

And frankly, holding a briefing conference and marshalling a huge army is rather too complex and long-winded task to claim it's being done in the scope of 'an emotional outburst'. You can insult someone, or punch someone, or say something leading inevitably to a challenge, in the brief grip of an excusable rage. You can't really plan a major night march and storming action and then plead temporary distraction.

I'd just like to point out that I'm being asked to prove a negative here. I've yet to see anyone present evidence of widespread moral corruption other than character actions that could be more easily explained by the fact that people are flawed and don't always make the best decisions.

5 hours ago, Manchu said:

Lion is in the enviable position of having created its own problems. Under Arasou’s leadership, Lion aggressively bullied both Crane and Unicorn. These conflicts are not about anything but a clan with a big army wanting to use it. Tsuko isn’t in any sense “saving” the Clan. To the contrary, she simply stole power because she wants to fight an unnecessary war.

I'm a bit taken aback considering you usually blame the Unicorn for their conflict with the Lion.

I would argue that the Lion see the prestige that comes from battlefield victories as being key to maintaining the place in Rokugani society. So the wars aren't really unnecessary from their point of view.

5 hours ago, Manchu said:

Restraint is obviously a key ethical practice in a society where nearly everyone of import walks around with three foot long razor blades. Ever noticed how important good manners are? (I mean, Crab mon aside.) Samurai who can’t control their base impulses are just bandits.

That's a rather all or nothing stance to take. Just because you're expected to act a certain way doesn't mean you will and failure to do so isn't really evidence of supernatural compulsion.

5 hours ago, Manchu said:

Tilt all you want, we have an entire story about Tsuko resisting her impulse to kill Kuwanan. We know she is capable of better judgment than betraying her Clan Champion. Also, NOT betraying your Clan Champion is hardly an impossible expectation of perfect adherence to bushido. Tsuko and the traitors who followed her have breached a fundamental social norm here.

But at the end of the day who was Kuwanan to Tsuko other than a high ranking Crane whose capture was very suspicious. Toturi, on the other hand, is someone who she knows personally and has a long list of reasons she doesn't like him and finds him unworthy of the Championship. And once you have enough reasons ton not like someone they tend to snowball as you start finding fault with all of their actions.

Plus, I think Tsuko and the others would see it as Toturi having betrayed them by failing to uphold his responsibilities as Champion by advancing Lion interests.

5 hours ago, Manchu said:

Between the extreme poles of being non-existent and being so overwhelming as to totally eliminate free will one can imagine a wide range of possibilities.

But given that we have no evidence that this effect exists we can't really make a judgement on where it falls in that range.

5 hours ago, Manchu said:

The point is, not everyone is as susceptible to giving into selfishness and dishonor as Tsuko or Sotorii or Kachiko. Characters like Toturi, Tsanuri, Shoju, Yojiro, and Shono, to name a few, are shown holding onto what is right despite their personal difficulties.

I mean, yes? Some people are more moral or more disciplined than others. That's really not evidence of any sort of supernatural influence.

4 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

And frankly, holding a briefing conference and marshalling a huge army is rather too complex and long-winded task to claim it's being done in the scope of 'an emotional outburst'. You can insult someone, or punch someone, or say something leading inevitably to a challenge, in the brief grip of an excusable rage. You can't really plan a major night march and storming action and then plead temporary distraction.

I think it's important to remember that that meeting is the climax of months of growing dissatisfaction with Toturi's "leadership." Most of them were probably already primed to rebel against Toturi's perceived failure and just needed Tsuko's shove to get them over the edge.

10 hours ago, Manchu said:

If you think about it, there is no valid “greater good” justification for Tsuko’s crime.

Toturi is kind of an idiot to be honest and his leadership qualities are... questionable . Tsuko is right that Toturi is too much of a wet jelly for being the Lion Champion the Lion Clan needs and him staying in the position is a potential danger to everyone including himself (as we already know it). In this regard, Tsuko has first-hand experience about what happens when Toturi gets to decide what happens, so if there is one character in the entire setting who would think that Toturi is about to drive the entire Lion Clan right into the ground, that's her.

As per the Bushido, her actions only violate Courtesy for not winding this out with Toturi in person first and being a huge c*nt about it, and Sincerity for doing this behind Toturi's back, but I think the the Virtues check out fine: Compassion is not involved, there is a lot of Courage here obviously, Duty can and in this case does lead the honorable soul to strange acts, Righteousness is good because Tsuko is right, and Honor is good because Tsuko is being 100% herself.

My only gripe is that this is all set in a very weird emotional rollercoaster and I'm now completely lost on what was her deal with Kuwanan.

43 minutes ago, shineyorkboy said:

I'm a bit taken aback considering you usually blame the Unicorn for their conflict with the Lion.

Regardless of who holds what balance of blame for the 'peace deal' falling through (for the love of god let's not start that again), the fact that a peace deal was needed in the first place is a result of the Ikoma deciding to opportunistically poke a historical claim so stale you could scrape penicillin off it.

43 minutes ago, shineyorkboy said:

Plus, I think Tsuko and the others would see it as Toturi having betrayed them by failing to uphold his responsibilities as Champion by advancing Lion interests.

Probably, yes. The problem is that that is exactly what the Emerald Champion isn't supposed to do. In much the same way that blaming him for his absence when the whole idea of pushing him into competing was to get him out of the way seems rather hypocritical.

43 minutes ago, shineyorkboy said:

I think it's important to remember that that meeting is the climax of months of growing dissatisfaction with Toturi's "leadership." Most of them were probably already primed to rebel against Toturi's perceived failure and just needed Tsuko's shove to get them over the edge.

Agreed, but as noted, that perception seems largely due to not paying attention to - probably not caring about - the political situation in the capital.

In fairness, what Tsuko's faction actually wanted from Toturi - at least immediately after Arasou's death - is an open declaration of unrestricted warfare. Which there's no indication he's ever proposed in the Imperial Court. In practice, such a motion would probably have been shut down rather quickly and he hadn't a hope in heck of getting one - but I suppose the argument can be made that he should have asked for such a declaration regardless, for form's sake if nothing else.

24 minutes ago, AtoMaki said:

Toturi is kind of an idiot to be honest and his leadership qualities are... questionable .

I'm not convinced he's an idiot. Rather the reverse - he seems to overthink things too much - but I wholeheartedly agree he's not much of an inspiring leader as a result.

24 minutes ago, AtoMaki said:

In this regard, Tsuko has first-hand experience about what happens when Toturi gets to decide what happens

The problem is that that's a game of perceptions; Tsuko is too wound up in her own self-righteousness and anger to consider for a moment the blame she holds for Arasou's death.

The events in The Price of War:

1. Tsuko blames Toturi for hesitating before launching the pincer move that breaks the Crane counterattack - Toturi isn't, he's waiting for the right moment (and picks it)
2. Tsuko then happens on Arasou and Toturi arguing what to do now the Crane are retreating and she talks Arasou into leading a frontal assault
3. Said frontal assault ends the way attempted coup de main on a well-garrisoned fortress usually does - failing badly, with the first wave getting cut to ribbons.

10 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

I'm not convinced he's an idiot. Rather the reverse - he seems to overthink things too much

That's really just a different kind of idiot.

11 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

The problem is that that's a game of perceptions

Welcome in the world of Bushido where the one who believes in their own righteousness the hardest is actually the one who is right and everyone else can stick their opinions up in their arses. Tsuko believes really hard that it is Toturi's failure so it is .

On 11/8/2019 at 7:28 PM, Tonbo Karasu said:

In the Shadowlands book for the RPG. The Obsidian Flower aka The Demon Bride of Fu Leng, was once a Crane lady. She stole a Black Scroll, ran off to the Shadowlands and used the power within to transform herself into her new form.

In other news, one of the recurring villains in the RPG apparently found an ancient scroll of great power and learned a spell from it that allowed her to curse her brother with a wasting disease. That's the might.

I may be a bit behind in commenting on this...I haven't all caught up. But if I remember correctly, in Old5R Lore a couple of the Black Scrolls were mentioned as being opened a number of times through the centuries. It never made any impact on the number that needed to be opened together to make the prophecy fulfilled.

It was a throwaway line really, in I think the Way of the Scorpion book, and I remember thinking 'that's odd..I thought they had only been opened once' when I read it, but it was there. I would not put much weight on the mention of the Wasting Disease Scroll being opened in that context in New5R...it could be that, like the old lore, the scrolls had been opened before and were being reopened together and that's what really counted. We know they can be used more than once...Iron Citadel was used twice in old lore.

Even if that's so - which isn't impossible, since they work as a 'set' for their primary purpose - that still leaves the question where they are now.

If the Obsidian Flower still has her Black Scroll, that's a serious issue given she hangs out in Fu Leng's tomb in the shadowlands most of the time.

What happened to Sokorii's Black Scroll (if it was one) is unclear - she may have left it in the shrine where she found it; there's no indication she has it on her by the time she reaches Shiro Hiruma.

1 hour ago, shineyorkboy said:

I think it's important to remember that that meeting is the climax of months of growing dissatisfaction with Toturi's "leadership." Most of them were probably already primed to rebel against Toturi's perceived failure and just needed Tsuko's shove to get them over the edge.

We also have to remember that we have had hints that Ikoma Ujiaki and some faction of the Lion (or possibly another interest) have been actively working to undermine Toturi's leadership since he took power. Part of the plan to have him take the position of Emerald Champion was specifically to either split his time between the clan and capital so that they could use that as a wedge to drive him further away from the clan, or as would be normal for most Champions who take the position of Emerald Champion he would abdicate the Clan Championship to another so that his focus would not be split.

It was a point of contention that Satsume hung onto his championship as long as he did while serving as Emerald Champion, and I'm sure the expectation was that Toturi would do the "honorable" thing and either abdicate, or else fall in line and push a Lion agenda with the authority of his new office, something which he hasn't been able to do due to his own sense of duty to put the interests of the Empire as a whole and the throne ahead of those of the Lion.

So what did the winner of worlds pick for Toturi to do?

Also why was "duel wield Bloodswords and wreck stuff" not an option?

The winner picked option #2 - Find the assassin.

1 hour ago, Ishi Tonu said:

Also why was "duel wield Bloodswords and wreck stuff" not an option?

I don't think he has access to two of them.

4 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

I don't think he has access to two of them.

Yet...…………...

9 hours ago, shineyorkboy said:

I'd just like to point out that I'm being asked to prove a negative here.

No, you have voluntarily taken that on yourself. I have always been clear that the influence of supernatural darkness is my own theory. Beyond that, the actual point of contention between you and I is YOUR interpretation of my speculation; namely, you insist that my theory of supernatural influence is just a way for me to excuse the immoral actions of Lion characters. And that is a bizarre claim on your part considering I have actually condemned their actions in the strongest possible terms and posted that execution is too good for them.

8 hours ago, AtoMaki said:

Toturi is kind of an idiot to be honest

Not at all. Objectively false. But as to ...

9 hours ago, AtoMaki said:

and his leadership qualities are... questionable .

I presume you probably actually mean something stronger than questionable because high level leadership is never black and white. This is exactly why loyalty is so important. A leader must be able to trust that her or his policy is executed rather than questioned. And I will concede that Toturi has not been depicted as earning the trust of his generals and diplomats. It’s like he simply assumes they will be loyal because he assumes their honor is above question. But he was clearly very wrong about that. I am ashamed to say, unchecked lust for blood and glory is currently dominating the Lion Clan. And Toturi did not seem to do anything to contain that lust, neither in Tsuko or the clan overall. Perhaps this is because he has not seriously considered whether his brother might have been an effective leader with a bad policy.

8 hours ago, AtoMaki said:

As per the Bushido, her actions only violate Courtesy

Betraying your lord is merely discourteous? It’s like some of you have never even heard of Rokugan when it suits you.

8 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

The events in The Price of War:

1. Tsuko blames Toturi for hesitating before launching the pincer move that breaks the Crane counterattack - Toturi isn't, he's waiting for the right moment (and picks it)
2. Tsuko then happens on Arasou and Toturi arguing what to do now the Crane are retreating and she talks Arasou into leading a frontal assault
3. Said frontal assault ends the way attempted coup de main on a well-garrisoned fortress usually does - failing badly, with the first wave getting cut to ribbons.

This is a very good point and probably what it all comes down to. At the heart of all her bluster, Tsuko is not able to really look at herself objectively. Toturi meanwhile actually can do so.

9 hours ago, Manchu said:

Betraying your lord is merely discourteous?

It is not even that, but Tsuko's poor conduct makes this one. As I said, the tenet of Loyalty can lead a samurai to strange ways as they can't let harm come for heir lord even if said harm was caused by the lord. The harm must be averted, and if it requires saving the lord from themselves... well, that's harsh but necessary.

First, that's probably casuistry. Second, even assuming that makes sense for the sake of argument, it clearly doesn't apply in this case because Tsuko understands her own motive as a repudiation of her lord.

7 hours ago, AtoMaki said:

It is not even that, but Tsuko's poor conduct makes this one. As I said, the tenet of Loyalty can lead a samurai to strange ways as they can't let harm come for heir lord even if said harm was caused by the lord. The harm must be averted, and if it requires saving the lord from themselves... well, that's harsh but necessary.

I dont know if this reasoning was true in real life or not, but in rokugan it doesnt make much sense what with the social order, celestial order and all that. By your logic a samurai could prevent sotorii from doing a lot of what hes done but that hasnt happened. I think thats proof enough and its applying a modern western line of thought. I think the correct line of thought is "my lord is a higher station, and has more honor, who am I to question and oppose it" and a "how dare I think I can protect him from himself".

I agree with Manchu in his point about Tsuko.

21 minutes ago, RafaelNN said:

I dont know if this reasoning was true in real life or not

Real-life samurai were some of the most treacherous and backstabbing bunch ever.

And normally I would agree that this is not working in Rokugan, but looking at the current story... it very well does. Shoju might be the only character in the setting now whose loyalty to his superior(s) is beyond reproach. Pretty much everyone else is running some kind of low-key (or not-so-low-key) rebellion against the Celestial Order.

14 minutes ago, AtoMaki said:

Pretty much everyone else is running some kind of low-key (or not-so-low-key) rebellion against the Celestial Order.

Yeah this is getting to be widespread. It's the Suijindai, IMO. Now if we want an example of someone who is doubting their lord from a position of actual righteousness, however, we can find at least one: Shinjo Shono.

DORAYAKI

9 hours ago, AtoMaki said:

As I said, the tenet of Loyalty can lead a samurai to strange ways as they can't let harm come for heir lord even if said harm was caused by the lord.

Strictly speaking, as per the RPG book, disobeying your Lord for their own greater interests/safety is a breach of Duty - The Samurai is expected to carry out their Lords instructions and orders regardless of any other factor, and if the samurai is opposed to these orders then the only honourable action they can take is to offer to (or just go ahead and) commit seppuku in protest. It's even highlighted in the Castle Kyotei adventure that the Crane samurai at the castle would be expected to follow their Lord even should he defect to the Lion (or commit seppuku to show their displeasure). An example would be Daisetsu's yojimbo, whom he ordered away the night he and Shahai legged it - their duty was to see to Daisetsu's safety and yet they (after protests) obeyed Daisetsu's command to leave.

Of course, how a samurai should behave and how they will behave are two seperate things, and the higher up the status/glory ladder you go the more you can get away with (it'll be an absurdly brave person who would call Tsuko out on her actions, for example).

17 minutes ago, 987654321 said:

DORAYAKI

The follow up did make me hungry. I was so angry at Toturi for letting his get cold.

55 minutes ago, Hydraxus said:

Strictly speaking, as per the RPG book, disobeying your Lord for their own greater interests/safety is a breach of Duty

Oddly enough, if you do it right (explain the reason, take responsibility, etc.) you end up with a net Honor gain .

57 minutes ago, Hydraxus said:

it'll be an absurdly brave person who would call Tsuko out on her actions, for example

I agree, Courage / Righteousness interactions are tough .