I wonder what the mortality rate on fey nobility is...

[robertliguori]

Just a thought:

Fey creatures cannot break their word.  Not, I point out, they cannot choose to break their word, but they can't do it.  Presumably, this means that if you force a fey creature into a bargain it can't fulfill, it becomes something other than itself, and definitely not fey (presumably, a dead fey).

Let's say that the only circumstances that would result in J. Random Mortal managing to talk a fey noble into an insolvable bargain are a +4 / -4 shift on the fudge dice.  That will happen 0.01% of the time, or once out of every 10,000 encounters.

Now, let's say that on average, one person a year is insane enough to throw down with a noble fey.  That means that you'd expect fey to last, on average, about ten thousand years.

Is there anything backing me up on this?  We know that there are powerful, powerful fey who don't seem to want much to do with humanity; might this be because they are very aware that mortals might just invent Lojban and start a conversation with them in it?

[JosephKell]

I think Aurora is the first Queen of Summer or Winter to die (in any way) in a very long time.  Part of why it is such a big deal.

I think the Mothers (when they get old enough) just fade away and the queens below get "promoted."

[arsieiuni]

Well one thought is that they are very very wily, not just for getting in or out of a deal, but for how they make it.
Most likely, due to their very speech habits, I would say they would be prone to promise to "do their best" or "make every effort" rather than "I will absolutely accomplish this" since they are super-positively stuck with it.

Even with a +4/-4 shift, I would have to hear some seriously good roleplaying for a fey noble to agree to something so stupid as an absolute "I will get this done" kind of deal. That would be probably suicide for them.

 

[Tbora]

I think Aurora is the first Queen of Summer or Winter to die (in any way) in a very long time.  Part of why it is such a big deal.

I think the Mothers (when they get old enough) just fade away and the queens below get "promoted."

Supposedly according to WoJ how a Queen becomes a Mother is that the previous Mother abdicates effectively giving up the majority of there power in return for more leeway in there ability to act.Supposedly there as only been one such abdication in the Dresdenverse thus far - Titania started out as the Summer Lady way back when, and Mab is the original Queen of Winter.

[Belial666]

Actually, since Fae can't lie, they physically cannot promise something they cannot do - that would be a lie. So, no matter how high you rolled in making a bargain, a faerie could never promise you more than they could deliver.
On the other hand, if somebody else's actions make the bargain unattainable, not the faerie that promised it, then said somebody else has to fulfill the bargain, metaphysically speaking. The oath and obligations pass over to them.

[Becq]

I think they are talking about situations where a Fae might actually be mistaken about their ability to accomplish a task.  For example, if a wizard offered a Fae his soul in exchange for killing that bum over there -- yeah, that one -- then the Fae might well agree.  What then if it turned out that the bum was actually a seriously powerful dragon, beyond the Fae's capability to kill?  The Fae didn't lie (rather, she was mistaken), but is also incapable of fulfilling the bargain...

I suspect that in such a case, the deal would be voided (if the other side of the bargain could be undone) or the Fae would owe an unspecified favor ... which could be massively abused by the owner of the favor, given that no restrictions were made on it.

[vultur]

I don't think Fae are actually destroyed by being incapable of fulfilling their word.

Supposedly according to WoJ how a Queen becomes a Mother is that the previous Mother abdicates effectively giving up the majority of there power in return for more leeway in there ability to act.

I don't think the latter half of that has been confirmed, re what happens to a Mother who abdicates.

[wolff96]

For example, if a wizard offered a Fae his soul in exchange for killing that bum over there -- yeah, that one -- then the Fae might well agree.  What then if it turned out that the bum was actually a seriously powerful dragon, beyond the Fae's capability to kill?  The Fae didn't lie (rather, she was mistaken), but is also incapable of fulfilling the bargain...

Unless the Sidhe in question is pretty dumb, s/he still isn't over-committed.  Time, place, method of death...  I think of the Fae as being like an old-school Dungeons & Dragons DM granting wishes in as malicious a manner as possible.  "I wish for money."  <A mountain of gold coins crashes down, killing the character.>

Can't kill the bum?  Vanish.  Go gain power for a few centuries -- the dragon will most likely still be around -- *then* come back and kill it.  Call in your own favors to put the dragon into a really bad situation.  Encourage the bum to start smoking. 

My point is that Faerie bargains are notoriously vague.  Why in the world -- even if the offer on the table is really nice -- would the Sidhe agree to a bargain in the first place if it specified something like "Right here, right now, with no preperation, kill that bum"?

I realize it kind of looks like I'm picking on your example here, for which I apologize, but I'm trying to use it to illustrate my point:  The Sidhe are tricksters of really high order, with centuries of bargain-making experience.  Why would they ever agree to a bargain if there was even a *chance* it would come back on them?  If the wizard was really trying to pin the Faerie down on 'that bum over there, right now', wouldn't they be intelligent enough to start taking a really close look at the bum ESPECIALLY if they could die of the bargain?

[Wolfwood2]

I realize it kind of looks like I'm picking on your example here, for which I apologize, but I'm trying to use it to illustrate my point:  The Sidhe are tricksters of really high order, with centuries of bargain-making experience.  Why would they ever agree to a bargain if there was even a *chance* it would come back on them?  If the wizard was really trying to pin the Faerie down on 'that bum over there, right now', wouldn't they be intelligent enough to start taking a really close look at the bum ESPECIALLY if they could die of the bargain?

Well I think you are picking on the example, because there's a legitimate question here.  What happens when a fey makes a mistake about its own capabilities to accomplish something and can't follow through on a bargain?  It doesn't even have to be a "trick".  Maybe all parties bargained in good faith, and the fey (not being omnipotent) just couldn't make it happen.

To pick a totally off-the-wall example, maybe the Winter Lady promises somebody she's going to see they're the winner of American Idol.  But whoopsy, the Summer Queen promised this other guy she was going to make him the winner, and she has more mojo.

One could argue that there's an implicit "to the best of my abilities" attached to these things.  And yes, there will often be a loophole of some sort in the language.  (Though if it's so easy, then why do sidhe ever bother fulfilling any bargains at all?)  Still, the idea of a sidhe in a tight spot because they can't make good on their bargain is an interesting one.

[Richard_Chilton]

If they can't lie, then can they over promise?

I'm just thinking of the fae noble opening his mouth to say "I'll vanish that bum" only to have the words "I shall use all my abilities in a scheme to make that bum vanish" and then wonder why he said it that way.

I mean, if not lying is a metaphysical law or something, then that's something that they can't break.

The only example we have of someone in a position not to do what she promised is when Lea was imprisoned.  The metaphysics took over and the person imprisoning her was forced to fulfill Lea's bargains to the best extent that Lea could.


Personally, I see the nobles living until they die in combat.

Richard 

[arsieiuni]

They'd be indebted to the person who they made such an overpromise to in the first place. That's what would happen. That is a prevalent theme of how to beat the fey at their own game in many classic legends. Followed by the hero using said debt to say something like "Never trouble our people again! Begone!" or what have you.

Fey can definitely become indebted to someone due to their mistakes. That's part of every classic legend and Butcher usually goes off the legends at least somewhat.

The example about Lea is excellent. "You messed up my bargain, so YOU fix it." is a perfect Fey theme as well.

[wolff96]

To pick a totally off-the-wall example, maybe the Winter Lady promises somebody she's going to see they're the winner of American Idol.  But whoopsy, the Summer Queen promised this other guy she was going to make him the winner, and she has more mojo.

And in this case, my first question would be "yes, but did the Winter Lady promise you would win THIS season?"  But then I'm picking on examples again. 

If it matters, I happen to agree with you on the over-committing due to conflict -- it's not like the Fae are all-powerful, just much more powerful than (most) mortals.

Though if it's so easy, then why do sidhe ever bother fulfilling any bargains at all?

Because Fae are tricksters and spirits.  They have their unchangeable natures, not free will...  so they *have* to strike bargains and fulfill them where they can...  but not always in the way expected.  The Sidhe are the original rules lawyers.  "Why not play a rules-lite system?  Because then there aren't any LOOPHOLES for me to exploit!" 

-----------------------------------------

I like the idea of a Fae being unable to fulfill his/her end of the bargain working like Sponsor Debt, though...  That's a great way to handle it in-system.  Or even trying to sub-contract the PCs to fill the terms of some OTHER bargain they made.  It could be that I enjoy plots-within-plots just a little TOO much, though.   

[robertliguori]

And in this case, my first question would be "yes, but did the Winter Lady promise you would win THIS season?"  But then I'm picking on examples again. 

If it matters, I happen to agree with you on the over-committing due to conflict -- it's not like the Fae are all-powerful, just much more powerful than (most) mortals.

Because Fae are tricksters and spirits.  They have their unchangeable natures, not free will...  so they *have* to strike bargains and fulfill them where they can...  but not always in the way expected.  The Sidhe are the original rules lawyers.  "Why not play a rules-lite system?  Because then there aren't any LOOPHOLES for me to exploit!" 

-----------------------------------------

I like the idea of a Fae being unable to fulfill his/her end of the bargain working like Sponsor Debt, though...  That's a great way to handle it in-system.  Or even trying to sub-contract the PCs to fill the terms of some OTHER bargain they made.  It could be that I enjoy plots-within-plots just a little TOO much, though.   

I'm not sure if these sort of loopholes should be used too much.  Done extensively, they lead to "Yes, I promised to perform three favors for you, but I didn't specify which ones, so I will cheerfully ignore you until you ask me the right three favors."

Likewise, actually using the debt-trading we saw Mab use on Harry might lead to unscrupulous wizards hocking their obligations to the fey to random passers-by and walking away free and clear.  You'd either need a clear, unambiguous set of meta-rules that were universally understood, or (perhaps more interestingly) it's all lies, trickery, and whatever you can con the universe into believing.  What if oaths only had power because people believed they did (as implied by the sidebar on wizards swearing by their power) and you could get around the American Idol oath to some people by transforming them into the winner and having them take the winner's place, or satisfy some others by a best-effort staged season finale in the Nevernever followed with an album deal with a fey-owned studio back in reality, and so forth.  It would play up the transient and capricious nature of fey.

In terms of complications, I think it would be interesting if being in a state of oath-breaking an oath among the fey was treated as a three-fold violation of the laws of magic every session the oath was not resolved.  The fey would gain an Oathbreaker power, and would automatically have one of their Aspects twisted, until they lose their High Concept (and become something other-than-fey).  The fey would basically be forced into doing anything the oath-holder wanted, in return for tacking on a temporary stay to the terms of the oath; the death of the oath-holder would stop the temporary stays and thus need to be prevented at all costs.

Thoughts?

[wolff96]

I'm not sure if these sort of loopholes should be used too much.  Done extensively, they lead to "Yes, I promised to perform three favors for you, but I didn't specify which ones, so I will cheerfully ignore you until you ask me the right three favors."

If you didn't specify "three favors of my choice" in your bargain, then buyer beware.    Remember how closely Harry is monitoring the 'rules' of the bargain when he makes his deal with Mab?  (Summer Knight).  He's actively wracking his brain, trying to find any loopholes or catches to get out of the way before agreeing.

Likewise, actually using the debt-trading we saw Mab use on Harry might lead to unscrupulous wizards hocking their obligations to the fey to random passers-by and walking away free and clear.

We've seen trading favors *and* trading obligations, since Harry gives away his favors.  And the only way we've seen the trading of debts is from a lesser to a higher power -- I don't think a wizard could just trade off his obligation to a random person, unless there was a clear reason to say that he could fulfill it. 

Also, I think it's important to note that when Lea couldn't fulfill her obligations, her superior was OBLIGED to take over for her, lest it damage Winter's honor. 

I'm not sure how to really address this one, other than to be careful when watching my PCs to make sure they don't abuse fae bargains. 

...and you could get around the American Idol oath to some people by transforming them into the winner and having them take the winner's place, or satisfy some others by a best-effort staged season finale in the Nevernever followed with an album deal with a fey-owned studio back in reality, and so forth.  It would play up the transient and capricious nature of fey.

I really like the first option.  The Summer Queen fulfills her obligation by getting her contestant to win.  Then the Winter Lady fulfills her obligation after the fact by having the Winter Knight whack the winner and transforming HER bargain-recipient into the winner...  both bargains are fulfilled, but not in the way either bargainer expected.

[robertliguori]

If you didn't specify "three favors of my choice" in your bargain, then buyer beware.    Remember how closely Harry is monitoring the 'rules' of the bargain when he makes his deal with Mab?  (Summer Knight).  He's actively wracking his brain, trying to find any loopholes or catches to get out of the way before agreeing.

Ah, but Mab didn't specify three favors of her choice, either.  "I'll do it, but not right now and in the manner you specified." is a standard fey dodge; why should they not end up hoisted on their own petard, in the absence of specific magical contract law?

We've seen trading favors *and* trading obligations, since Harry gives away his favors.  And the only way we've seen the trading of debts is from a lesser to a higher power -- I don't think a wizard could just trade off his obligation to a random person, unless there was a clear reason to say that he could fulfill it.

Also, I think it's important to note that when Lea couldn't fulfill her obligations, her superior was OBLIGED to take over for her, lest it damage Winter's honor. 

I'm not sure how to really address this one, other than to be careful when watching my PCs to make sure they don't abuse fae bargains. 

I'm not sure that is quantifiable, in-universe; fey contracts are shown to be tit-for-tat, and there is no reason to assume that one side is more or less inherently transferable then another.  I think that the real restriction on that sort of thing wouldn't be that you couldn't dodge bargains if you're willing to offer up some poor sucker to take your fall for you, it's that Mab would announce "A pile of diamonds and Maeve's hand in marriage to whoever expresses my displeasure to Mr. Clever Negotiator over there." in the worst case, and in the best case fey creatures just won't bargain with you any more.

I really like the first option.  The Summer Queen fulfills her obligation by getting her contestant to win.  Then the Winter Lady fulfills her obligation after the fact by having the Winter Knight whack the winner and transforming HER bargain-recipient into the winner...  both bargains are fulfilled, but not in the way either bargainer expected.

This does rely on a flexible interpretation of what it means to have won American Idol, though; I think that making it context-sensitive on both parties adds a few levels.  For instance, if you're going to come up with a loophole, you need to be able to tie it to an Aspect of the bargain-holder; someone who bargained with the intention of winning American Idol with a fey-supercharged performance wouldn't accept being transformed, because the operative part of the bargain to them was that they would win, not that they would be in a state of having won due to trickery.  I'd assume that's the kind of thing that would lead to publicly breezing about "Sorry, you didn't specify which season you wanted to win, I'll arrange something, and no complaining or I'll turn you into a nightingale." and privately calling in every favor, dirty trick, and PC band the fey has ties to and telling them "Fix this now." before the truth that the fey was one-upped gets out.