This post has the following content warnings:
the nature of the setting really changes the sort of person you're often representing
« Previous Post
+ Show First Post
Total: 88
Posts Per Page:
Permalink

"Can we talk about the crime boss thing now?"

Permalink

 

 

 

"...I think there's still more to say on the topic of the alleged blackmail."

Permalink

"Do you, in fact, have any case law supporting your position -- I'm not condoning misrepresenting the facts of a case, but Khonsu seems to be good law." Probably. He's only actually read the case summary on the first page but he's not about to stop the trial just to read it.

Permalink

There have been billions of trials just of souls in Golarion. There's precedent somewhere to support just about any bizarre argument you can come up with, it's just a matter of finding it. Even once you get past the standard citations there are cases that come up more often and cases that come up less often -- it wasn't sheer luck that he knew the details of Otaro -- but there's a reason most trials don't just turn into a competition of who can cite the most similar case.

He still came prepared, though. If you can't manage to truthfully cite cases that support your argument, what are you even doing?

Permalink

"Your Honor, the obvious analogy is In re Rantella from 1213 -- the petitioner had discovered two attempted murders by another member of his household, deliberately chose not to report them, and took steps to supervise and redeem the would-be murderer. He was judged Neutral Good. Beyond that, you also have cases like In re Greenhilt from 1184, where the petitioner was judged to be Lawful Good even though he wasn't even succeeding at preventing the other person from killing people." He can go on for a while. He has physical copies.

Permalink

He skims them as fast as he can to make absolutely sure the judge realizes Nirvana's argument is unreasonable.

"In re Rantella isn't analogous, the petitioner was the primary target of the murder attempt. Not reporting wrongs committed against you is substantially different from denying justice for wrongs committed against someone else."

It's not a good argument. It doesn't cut to the heart of why Nirvana is wrong. But the judge asked for fewer "abstract arguments" about the "'proper' role of mercy," and he's not stupid enough to ignore him.

Permalink

"Cool, they both have some cases on their side, now can we talk about about the crime boss thing? I really want to talk about the crime boss thing."

Permalink

 

 

"Yes, we can talk about, as you put it, the 'crime boss thing.' We'll return to the blackmail later if it ends up being decisive."

Permalink

"Awesome! Criminal organizations: pretty Evil! Maybe not as much as murder, but still pretty bad. Like, we've got threats, we've got violence, we've got all kinds of things that hurt other people. The, uh, the annoying human god dude who lives in Heaven for some reason, he's Neutral Evil. Even though he doesn't live in Abaddon. Don't ask me how that works. Anyways, they're also Chaotic -- like, you are literally breaking the law, and usually you are also lying to people or breaking promises or other things like that that Lawful people care about for some reason. So, the crime boss thing makes her Chaotic Evil. Hell and Nirvana have barely touched this because they know I'm right and don't want to admit it."

Permalink

There are so many things wrong with that but for some reason the one he's stuck on is the fact that the demon knows Norgorber's realm is not in Abaddon but inexplicably thinks he lives in Heaven.

Permalink

"Wouldn't that make her Neutral Evil? If Norgorber is Neutral Evil? Just saying."

Permalink

"I'm fine either way, I think she'll choose the Abyss if she gets the chance. But she's obviously not Lawful."

Permalink

 

She's been trying to avoid thinking about it, actually.

This Thread Is On Hiatus
Total: 88
Posts Per Page: