Are some vampire feedings protected under the Accords?

[GamingInSeattle]

Hey folks!

So after a successful introductory game, my players and I are are rolling characters from scratch, doing a city creation process and talking about what kind of game we want to play.

Here is a question that my players and I have been thinking about.  Do the Accords or other treaties cover legal vampire feedings?  If I remember the various books, people who willingly agree to be fed upon (by any Court) seem to be considered legal game by the vampires.  By that i mean to interfere with this relationship/agreement is a breach of some treaty.

I have an idea for a Seattle game that locally there was pushed an even more broad agreement, that within a certain area all vampire feedings are legal.  This was to avoid an all out war or to pay off a large debt owed to a specific court.  Though the White Council would likely not willing agree to this, they may not have much choice if enough other local powers all agreed to it.  Wizards will be somewhat on their own to interfere in a local matter.

So, if a mortal agrees to be fed upon by a Vampire, is this protected under the Accords? Other agreements? If a Wizard or other member of supernatural nation interferes, can Vampires call foul?

~ GiS

p.s. Quick note, I know that I could run it any way I wanted in my game, I'm just looking for other opinions.

[bobjob]

I believe they are, in the same vein that Trolls are allowed to abduct naughty children on bridges. I don't think the Vampire nations would sign onto the Accords if they weren't given the right to exist and I doubt Mab would force them to, considering how Faeries interact with mortals. I'm sure any supernatural creature that feeds on mortals can go through and take whatever they want from mortals as long as it doesn't draw undo attention (because then they could be hunted down) or they aren't in the territory of another Accords member.

The foul up is PCs and wizards who stake out (pun intended) their own territory coming into conflict with Vampires.

[Dougansf]

In my opinion, the willingness of the human victim doesn't really enter into it.  What matters more is territory or "ownership" of that human.

Essentially, it could be considered poaching to feed in someone else's territory, or someone's declared charge.  It would be a big deal if someone messed with Justine since she's "property" of the White Court in more ways than one.

To put it another way: no one is asking the cow for consent.  But steal another mans cow, and there will be repercussions. 

[Quantus]

In general, the accords dont particularly care;  they are not a body of Laws, rather a set of diplomatic regulations to make war and peacetime more orderly.  Ultimately they arent a matter of legality, they are a matter of diplomacy.  Signatories can do most anything to each other, so long as they dont violate protocol when they do it.  Harry didnt start a war by killing Bianca, he started a war by killing her while a guest at an official Accords function.

And it's worht noting that vanilla human's have no official representation on their own.  The White Council has successfully claimed a certain amount of interest in them, as seen in WN, but acting against a mortal is not acting against any Accorded body itself.  Some are claimed by others, for example either Marcones or Lara's staff and retainers could be claimed as such.  But whether one party would be brought to task for poaching claimed mortals from another, it all depends on the relative sizes of the two parties, and how much they each were willing to push the matter.  The Black Court is still a signatory, but not a true world power.  Similarly independent signatories have less leverage, such as when Gard needed Harry to make an official complaint when the Nickleheads snatched Marcone. 

FWIW, It is stated specifically in one of the books that a big reason more people/groups dont try to sign onto the Accords is because they could potentially be required to play host to vampires, which would include an obligation to provide for their dietary needs. 

[Haru]

Humanity as a whole never signed the accords, because they are not a supernatural faction. A vampire feeding on a human would no more break the accords than a wizard eating a cow. That's why picking up the minor powers in White Knight was so easy, they had no right to be protected, because they are not part of a supernatural faction.

However, as other noted, there are some exceptions. If a member of the accords claims people as his under the accords, and another member of the accords attacks those people, he is in violation of the accords and can be held accountable. Chicago is claimed as a protected zone by at least 2 members of the accords (Marcone and Dresden, though I'm not sure if he counts as one or two members of the accords), I'd say, so you'd have to take it up with them.

[Quantus]

Humanity as a whole never signed the accords, because they are not a supernatural faction. A vampire feeding on a human would no more break the accords than a wizard eating a cow. That's why picking up the minor powers in White Knight was so easy, they had no right to be protected, because they are not part of a supernatural faction.

However, as other noted, there are some exceptions. If a member of the accords claims people as his under the accords, and another member of the accords attacks those people, he is in violation of the accords and can be held accountable. Chicago is claimed as a protected zone by at least 2 members of the accords (Marcone and Dresden, though I'm not sure if he counts as one or two members of the accords), I'd say, so you'd have to take it up with them.

Precisely.  The key point to me though is the "Can be held accountable" not necessarily "Will."  It only becomes an international insident if one of the signatories cares enough to throw a fit about it.  It's also on of the notable downsides of being an Independant signatory like Marcone and not an actual Nation; as seen in SmF, when an Independent Signatory is taken, his subordinates/organization has no kind of proxy authority, which is why Gard needed to ask harry to raise the diplomatic stink for her.  Had the same happened to a leader of a Nation, the next in line would assume full authority.

[Haru]

Precisely.  The key point to me though is the "Can be held accountable" not necessarily "Will."  It only becomes an international insident if one of the signatories cares enough to throw a fit about it.  It's also on of the notable downsides of being an Independant signatory like Marcone and not an actual Nation; as seen in SmF, when an Independent Signatory is taken, his subordinates/organization has no kind of proxy authority, which is why Gard needed to ask harry to raise the diplomatic stink for her.  Had the same happened to a leader of a Nation, the next in line would assume full authority.

True. But keep in mind that Mab had intervened as well. They are her rules, and rules are only ever as good as how much they are enforced. If she had let this slide, because nobody was second in line to the freeholding lord Marcone to scream foul, she would have set a precedent where killing off people signed to the accords would be fair game, as long as they don't say anything. Similarly, any other signatory has a stake in enforcing the accords, since anything might happen to them, otherwise.

[Quantus]

True. But keep in mind that Mab had intervened as well. They are her rules, and rules are only ever as good as how much they are enforced. If she had let this slide, because nobody was second in line to the freeholding lord Marcone to scream foul, she would have set a precedent where killing off people signed to the accords would be fair game, as long as they don't say anything. Similarly, any other signatory has a stake in enforcing the accords, since anything might happen to them, otherwise.

True, which is why by then she had already put Harry into play.  Which was, methinks, part of a political choice itself, since it allowed a Non-winter member to be the one to raise the stink. 

That is, admittedly, a particularly extreme example.  If say Justine were taken, Thomas would have to BS a much stronger case to Lara or somebody for why she was worth the risk of war with some other nation, much like Harry had to do to claim responsibility for the Ordo in WN.

[Tedronai]

Harry had to do to claim responsibility for the Ordo in WN.

Well, the vampires went quite a long way to making his case for him when they described their actions against minor practitioners as a method of indirectly attacking the Council itself.

[Quantus]

Well, the vampires went quite a long way to making his case for him when they described their actions against minor practitioners as a method of indirectly attacking the Council itself.

Precisely.  And had they not just done that, it would have appeared (politically) as if the Council was just showing up to rattle warden sabers and complain about things that bothered their sensibilities.  They were only able to push the claim as legit because the other party was caught bragging. 

The thing to remember is that the Accords are a) Not Laws, or a peace treaty, or anything other than Rules of Engagement, and B) the Council is in the tiny minority of signatories that are not openly predatory on the Mortal population. 

[HumAnnoyd]

Precisely.  And had they not just done that, it would have appeared (politically) as if the Council was just showing up to rattle warden sabers and complain about things that bothered their sensibilities.  They were only able to push the claim as legit because the other party was caught bragging. 

The thing to remember is that the Accords are a) Not Laws, or a peace treaty, or anything other than Rules of Engagement, and B) the Council is in the tiny minority of signatories that are not openly predatory on the Mortal population.

Yeah I think ultimately the Accords are sort of like the Geneva Conventions.  Everyone is a part of them and they can be used to justify extreme actions (like invading another country) but they also can be easily ignored (like when invading a country under false pretenses).

[Quantus]

Yeah I think ultimately the Accords are sort of like the Geneva Conventions.  Everyone is a part of them and they can be used to justify extreme actions (like invading another country) but they also can be easily ignored (like when invading a country under false pretenses).

Indeed 

the Unseelie Accords—sort of the Geneva Convention of the supernatural world

The Unseelie Accords had supported the various supernatural political entities over the past few turbulent decades. They were a series of agreements that, at the end of the day, were basically meant to limit conflicts between the various nations to something with a definite structure. They defined the rights of those lords who held territory, as well as the infractions that could be committed against those lords by other lords. Think of them as the Geneva Conventions of the spooky side. That’s kind of close.