War system questions

[Eol]

The Tower has been clipping its own wings for too long. Stop trying to legislate away your opponents. I tried yesterday. It wasn't well received.

[Khahliana]

“Never to use the One Power as a weapon except against Darkfriends or Shadowspawn, or in the last extreme defense of her life, the life of her Warder, or another Aes Sedai"

The important part of the oath is the first part. If the Aes Sedai in question did not channel on the General, she did not break the oath. Whatever political fallout comes from assisting one side or another is a different matter altogether.

(bold/color added)

I disagree that the important part is the first part. The last part, "except in the last extreme defense of her life the life, the life of her warder, or another Aes Sedai" is extremely relevant especially to in-game actions, and it's the part that people always seem to conveniently forget. There is nothing to say an Aes Sedai or a Warder cannot put themselves in jeopardy so that the Aes Sedai can be free to channel. Additionally, the last extreme defense of her life is entirely open to interpretation based on the situation. For example, if Kiryl was hidden in my room, I am most certainly freed from the oath to channel on him because I know bloody well he is going to stab me.

[Aishana]

It's not really a question of oaths, obviously some license has always been taken with the oaths for playability purposes. You can hunt wanteds on an Aes Sedai and it's fine even if they aren't fighting back. The problem, though, is the Tower participating in wars and assaulting nations. If they'll sack Amador, using the One Power or not, what's next? They going to take the Stone? The Tower does not wage war except against the Shadow. Offering aid or assistance to allies in need is one thing, but marching into a foreign city and killing their military leaders is not what the Tower is about.

[Octavio]

Again the way Tear acts against the Tower and how Amador acts against the Tower are two vastly different things. It was said best above...CoL is reaping what they have sown and they don't like it. Seems like it's time to pay up.

[Raeza]

The problem, though, is the Tower participating in wars and assaulting nations. If they'll sack Amador, using the One Power or not, what's next?

You seem to be suggesting that there is no line between Amador and other nations. I disagree with this position. There is a really good reason why the Tower might sack Amador, but not any other nation. The CoL are a direct threat to the Tower and have stepped up their attacks against us in recent months with no sign of ending the aggression. They are basically sworn to kill us.

Amador is not equivalent to any other nation from the Tower's perspective.

[Reyne]

Khahliana Sedai's interpretation is what I've always been told (and thought myself). If you feel that you are in sufficient danger the Oaths do not prevent you from channeling/attacking. Getting aggro'd first is not a strict requirement and the oaths do not preclude first strikes. If an Aes Sedai finds herself in the middle of a battle, that seems like sufficient danger. What, if she sits on the sidelines and watches the Children will then respectfully let her leave? No, I think they'd then immediately attack her next as they do.

Many of these that "serve the light" have gone on to be darkfriends themselves.

Two. How many dreadlords from the Tower? That argument doesn't fly. The oaths still bind them to only attacking and using the power in direct retaliation. These generals are not agro.

That argument absolutely applies. Remember that the Oaths do not function as 'ultimate objective truth tellers.' If an Aes Sedai genuinely believes someone is a darkfriend then there is no issue with use of the Power, even if she ends up being wrong later. The Oaths don't know the difference. The Whitecloaks themselves are convinced that the Tower is entirely darkfriends, why is it so strange to think that an Aes Sedai might think that the CoL leadership/generals are darkfriends?

Neutral doesn't mean "never responds to threats/aggression." As has been mentioned, the Children have been conducting assaults against Tar Valon for months. I was present during an attack meant to kill the Amyrlin Seat. The Tower did not instigate hostility against Amador or Tear. Should there be no response?

The Tower *has* responded to existential threats against itself with organized force before. During the Aiel War, thousands of Valon Guard were sent to fight against the Aiel and the Aes Sedai provided healing and support weaves as well. The Tower didn't just watch an army marching towards the Shining Walls and say "well that's too bad but since we are neutral we can't do anything about it."

Anyway as far as I'm concerned the Children != Amador. They are a rogue organization - a powerful one but nonetheless their authority derives simply from their leverage/threat over the rulers of Amador (could say that about all nobles at the end of the day of course but still). You might as well say the Tower is conducting a war against a nation when Red Ajah go out to fight/still Dragonsworn.

[Eol]

If the Tower could attack itself during the division then probably anything can happen.

We've created an absurd situation - the wars don't make any sense. But if everyone is going to be crazy then the Tower should get to be crazy too.

[Aishana]

Well technically the Tower can declare war, but it does require some agreement in the Hall, and we never have before.

[Octavio]

Time for each clan to announce their affiliations. Of course this is also how world wars start.

I did announce the start of this whole thing, the mastermobs AND the war system, as the beginning of Daes Dae'mar.

Just wanted to revisit what I said a few days ago, and what Elysia returned. The Great Game truly has arrived. Crazy is the new normal.

[Anor]

The question really is between gameplay and RP boundaries. From a gameplay sense being able to instigate an attack on a threat/wanted is a valid justification to how the oaths function. However there are still limits and boundaries in the RP world the game is set in. One of those being that Tar Valon shouldn't be involved the way it is now in skirmishes between nations.

The fact is that Aes Sedai have been declanned for something as simple as telling a lie based on RP. So going against one of the core principals of the clans RP shouldn't be allowed.

On the flip side let's say that it is decided that it is allowed. Then why can they participate when we are not able to retaliate? Instead now they get to act like free agents wherever they like and are immune to any of the negatives.

So the issue here is they have the best of both worlds. They get to ignore a crucial part of their identity from the books because it suits their gameplay. Yet also get to ignore the gameplay aspect of the war (winning or losing) by claiming RP from the books. Not only that it is putting those of us playing within the war rules at a disadvantage because our kills are not counting. Just today I killed 1 Aes Sedai attacking Amador and 1 RE applicant. Which was 50% of the group attacking our general and had it not count at all. This also isn't a whine about why we are losing, as I am pretty sure we are not.