Post/Author/DateTime	Post
JulesCARV 07-16-07, 08:25 PM	I'm just wondering: how much criticism do you think the Dragonmarked houses tolerate before deciding that they'd like a bit of peace and quiet? I'm thinking that you can probably complain about poor service to some extent ("The soup that I got at the Ghallanda inn had three times as much salt as it should have, and the meat was undercooked! Just because I'm a shifter doesn't mean that they should just assume that I like my venison so rare that it still bleeds."), and still be quite safe. On the other hand, a journalist who writes an exposé of the Phairlan, places himself in considerable danger, I'd assume. There's a good deal of room between those two, though. I'm not quite sure where the line would be drawn. Thoughts?
Charles Phipps 07-16-07, 10:56 PM	In general, I tend to think that the Dragonmarked Houses wield considerable authority but not enough authority to keep themselves from being criticized. You can rail against Merrix D'Cannith being a complete bastarve and how the Deneith are all blood sucking traitors. That may get you into a couple of fights with Warforged who like their creators or their members but it won't get you assassinated. Stopping a Dragonmarked House plan? That's a different story.
Kaizer_Ryu 07-16-07, 11:36 PM	There's also the combination of resentment the D'marked houses incur due to their monopolies and the respect they get for the same reason. I'd bet money that every House has a PR division that could sell you the air you breathe and make you think you're getting a great deal (ok, maybe not THAT good, but you get the idea). Like any grumbling, it depends on the source, the audience, and the allegations. The rumor that Merrix still runs a Creation Forge may be true and potentially devistating to House Cannith's reputation, but responding to it would merely confirm for many that it has at least some truth to it. Letting it remain a rumor (and even portraying it as the ramblings of a crackpot) ensures it does no real damage. There is a fine line between responding to threats and confirming suspicions. If a theory is popular and/or believable, doing something about the spreader of the theory risks turning them into a martyr and solidifying their claims, erronius or not, as truth in the popular consciousness.
Kamikaze Chicken 07-16-07, 11:47 PM	Personally i think house sivis excercises entirly to much censorship. I had a cousin who tried to complain about his paper being delivered late, and he hasnt been seen in weeks. SPeaking of that... My paper didnt arive this morning either. That is just so annoying... why can house sivis take care of their mistakes? i mean seriously how hard can it be to deliv....... House sivis apologizes for the disruption of the peace. We have now fixed our mistake. thank you. KAMIKAZE! :chicken: out.
Shady314 07-17-07, 04:00 AM	I'm just wondering: how much criticism do you think the Dragonmarked houses tolerate before deciding that they'd like a bit of peace and quiet? I'm thinking that you can probably complain about poor service to some extent ("The soup that I got at the Ghallanda inn had three times as much salt as it should have, and the meat was undercooked! Just because I'm a shifter doesn't mean that they should just assume that I like my venison so rare that it still bleeds."), and still be quite safe. On the other hand, a journalist who writes an exposé of the Phairlan, places himself in considerable danger, I'd assume. There's a good deal of room between those two, though. I'm not quite sure where the line would be drawn. Thoughts? They're not tyrannical regimes. You can complain till you're blue in the face. Unless you pose a dire and direct threat to the house they will most likely just ignore you. Even if you did pose a direct threat I think it's more likely the Baron or other prominent figure will take it upon themselves to have the issue settled than a shadowy meeting with cloaked and hooded figures around a table deciding if that food critic in Zilargo should die for his nasty review. That respected Korranberg reporter is going to print a story that the Shadow houses are involved in espionage and has proof=assassination. A half-mad conspiracy theorist says the same thing and has no real proof=actually kind of good for the house. "How do these crazy rumors get started?" The Houses are monopolies. I'm sure everyone loves to complain about them. They're probably too busy counting their money to care. EDIT: To summarize. The line is drawn at when you go from simple detractor to a threat that poses a danger to a significant portion of the House or the Houses resources. Even then it's not legal for them to kill you.
Rechan 07-17-07, 06:47 AM	It boils down to: "Yeah, what are you going to do about it?" Until you can actually effect the Houses' business, then you're just whining. When you can effect their business, then it's time to appease you or silence you. The degree of which depends on your effect. If you're offering actual competition beyond a local mom and pop store, then they may try to buy you out, invite you into the family, or make some other business deal. If you're a thorn in their side beyond money, then they might employ everything from getting the government/authorities to take a notice ("Why sir, it says here that you havn't paid your taxes to the copper; time for an audit") to discrediting your credibility ("Oh yeah? Well why would I listen to someone who just so happens to have a conveniently located dreamlily vial in their property?"). But that depends on the House, too. If the House's general attitude is individual based rather than Family First, criticism of one member or one enclave may be dismissed as just bad members of the family - the House is less a cohesive network and more a franchised brand name. It might be easier for the House to "fire" the person you have an issue with and say "We fixed the problem, carry on, nothing to see here."
okaynowa 07-17-07, 08:35 AM	Fun historical fact (in my campaign): "Slander" and "libel" were added to the Galifar code of justice as punishable offenses after extensive lobbying by the Dragonmarked Houses. Originally proposed as an alternative to messy duels of honor, the true purpose of the new laws was to say, "Take that back, or I'll take everything you've got." Considering that the average House Sivis barrister has been practicing longer than a human judge lives, and the average Dragonmarked plaintiff has the money to pursue a case for three generations, the mere threat of litigation is enough to silence all but the most sincere accusers. But of course, people love a challenge. The definitions of "slander" and "libel" have mutated over the centuries (ask Darth Syntax, our friendly neighborhood linguist!), and the popular journals, broadsheets, ballads, and bards have gotten very good at exploiting the technicalities. Insulting House Cannith directly? Economic suicide. Singing a song about a clumsy gorgon that can't sew because of its oafish hooves? A tavern favorite all the guildsmen can get behind. Those dumb gorgons! House Sivis was very careful about excluding "satire" from the definition.