Author Topic: Queen Succession Rules  (Read 25133 times)

Offline raidem

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5634
  • Duck's Apprentice
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #45 on: January 17, 2018, 06:01:26 PM »
Quote
If a fetus is sufficiently mortal to prevent a queen from killing it, then it is also sufficiently mortal to make the queen a mother.
I don't think it's as black and white as that just yet, there is still a gray area.

Quote
This is the definition of mother:
a woman in relation to a child or children to whom she has given birth.
Notice that this defintion of mother doesn't include conception as only defining a mother, there needs to be an actual birth. 

Quote
mortal:
subject to death; having a transitory life:
all mortal creatures.

There are multiple definitions of mortal some to include human being, I'd say the fetus is a nonborn human being that is subject to death.  Therefore the Queens are prohibited from killing it even if it's yet unborn.

So, I wonder if the Lady can conceive and just not give birth all the while preserving her mantle up until the last moment.  This would require an ability to bypass the defense mechanism or a preexisting state prior to accepting the Lady mantle, should the mantle even be allowed to choose her.

Looking back, this prohibition of the Lady mantle to go to a mother may have been why the mantle would never go to Mab for safekeeping etc.  It would be unmade if it did so.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2018, 06:09:35 PM by raidem »
"That's it???  It's really that simple? 
LIES!  Damn lies!  It's a cover up!
WOJ: http://www.paranetonline.com/index.php/topic,21772.0.html

Offline Arjan

  • Seriously?
  • ***
  • Posts: 13235
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #46 on: January 17, 2018, 07:16:21 PM »
If a fetus is sufficiently mortal to prevent a queen from killing it, then it is also sufficiently mortal to make the queen a mother.
That is based on a Christian definition of human starting at conception but the mantle is not christian. It probably does not see the foetus as a mortal human that can not be killed.
WG+++: The White God is Mister.
SH[Elaine+++]

Offline raidem

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5634
  • Duck's Apprentice
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #47 on: January 17, 2018, 07:16:37 PM »
Quote
That is why sex was part of the ritual for Mab to make Harry the WK, because it is a tribute to the ritual that the WK makes the Queen.

The other question is whether the WK can always have sex with the Lady (which would add a new twist to why Marve put some much effort into seducing Harry in CD) or whether he needs the Queen mantle to overcome the defenses.

The above preserves the rule of Maiden/Mother while cleanly allowing the transfer of the mantle down the line.

Alright, this is taking me down a similar line of thinking.  I'll probably copy this over to another thread as it applies there also.
Let's postulate that the WK can have sex with the Lady bypassing the defenses.  And, that the Lady won't become Queen until she gives birth.  And that if she gives birth, thereby becoming a mother, while wielding the Lady mantle, she will have destroyed that mantle.

Now, i'm going to borrow some of your argument regarding the exception the Knight poses.  For my purposes with regard to the Murphy/Mab theory coupled with Murphy pregnant with Marcone Wag, I'd venture that WK Harry having impregnated Murphy prior to her TT will 1) provide a beacon for the Lady mantle, 2) bypass defense restriction within Lady mantle thereby allowing Murphy to attract the Lady mantle while being pregnant.
"That's it???  It's really that simple? 
LIES!  Damn lies!  It's a cover up!
WOJ: http://www.paranetonline.com/index.php/topic,21772.0.html

Offline groinkick

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 7556
  • Strike first. Strike Hard. No Mercy! - Cobra Kai
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #48 on: January 17, 2018, 07:24:23 PM »
Yeah, we got one point out of the way.

Now, I'm focusing on the other point.  If somehow the Lady mantle is allowed to take a pregnant Lady (not considered mother yet) I don't think the mantle would take action against the fetus as that would probably violate the prohibition regarding the Queens not killing mortals.  I see the defense mechanism depicted in Molly's encounter with Ramirez as the first defense mechanism we've seen. If somehow it gets bypassed, and the mantle isn't destroyed by the Lady becoming just short of a operative definition of 'mother', then I think the pregnancy would get inside the mantles defenses such that it couldn't touch it.  The mantle would then push the Lady toward becoming Queen at all costs.  It wins either way by having the Lady vacate its mantle.  Lady dies in attempt, Lady mantle passes.  Lady becomes Queen, Lady mantle passes.  Each of which would need to occur before 'birth' if that is the definition of 'mother.' This is entirely mute however if conception is considered adequate by the mantle to be a 'mother.'  This then would allow for possible sex between the Lady and another with the exception that if such a conception occurred as a result, fulfilling the 'mother' definition, this would then destroy the Lady mantle.

In short, I'd argue the mantle could not cause a miscarriage.  This circumstance, if it hadn't already caused the Lady mantle's destruction, would be inside the mantles defenses and prohibited by law that prevents the Queens from killing mortals.

Now, the question becomes if on the off chance this may be accurate, would it be at all relevant.  That answer at this point is a probable no.  It, in my theories, mainly applies to Murphy and on the chance she TT's into the past pregnant with say Harry's child, who may be Marcone.  All of these Wag's are increasingly unlikely when combined together.  They also require a more complex storyline to back them.

My opinion is that if a woman is pregnant, the Mantle will not take her.  Mantles appear to be black, and white.  Outside of Nemesis manipulation the Mantles seem to be unchangeable.  I don't think the Mantle is capable of going to someone who is pregnant, or ever was pregnant. 
Stole this from Reginald because it was so well put, and is true for me as well.

"I love this place. It was a beacon in the dark and I couldn't have made it through some of the most maddening years of my life without some great people here."  Thank you Griff and others who took up the torch.

Offline raidem

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5634
  • Duck's Apprentice
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #49 on: January 17, 2018, 07:29:35 PM »
My opinion is that if a woman is pregnant, the Mantle will not take her.  Mantles appear to be black, and white.  Outside of Nemesis manipulation the Mantles seem to be unchangeable.  I don't think the Mantle is capable of going to someone who is pregnant, or ever was pregnant.

I largely agree.  I was focusing on the most extreme case of what is allowed except for its destruction. (I was totally in agreement with you prior to looking further at the quote and the point at which the Lady mantle is destroyed.) That point is defined in Mab's quote:

Quote
"Three Queens of Summer; three Queens of Winter," she said, that alien gaze returning to me.  "Maiden, Mother, and Crone.  You are the Maiden, Lady Molly.  And for you to be otherwise, to become a mother, would be destroy the mantle of power you wear."  The mantle protected itself--as it must.
"What?" 
She tilted her head and stared at me.  "It is all within the law.  I suggest you spend a few hours each day meditating on it in the future. In time you will gain and adequate understanding of your limits."

(There is also the exception someone suggested that couplings with the Knight as being allowed to bypass the defense mechanisms and rules, etc but short of Lady becoming a 'mother.')

To me, "becoming a mother" is the case which is MOST incompatible with the Lady mantle.  So, there seems like circumstances could get stretched to an extreme point before the nuclear point is reached.  It's that stretch which is what I'm exploring.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2018, 07:40:38 PM by raidem »
"That's it???  It's really that simple? 
LIES!  Damn lies!  It's a cover up!
WOJ: http://www.paranetonline.com/index.php/topic,21772.0.html

Offline groinkick

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 7556
  • Strike first. Strike Hard. No Mercy! - Cobra Kai
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #50 on: January 17, 2018, 07:53:22 PM »
To me, "becoming a mother" is the case which is MOST incompatible with the Lady mantle.  So, there seems like circumstances could get stretched to an extreme point before the nuclear point is reached.  It's that stretch which is what I'm exploring.

Ok, cool.

You know I wonder if Mab will want to have another child because it will be her Mantle's instinct to create another to become Lady.
Stole this from Reginald because it was so well put, and is true for me as well.

"I love this place. It was a beacon in the dark and I couldn't have made it through some of the most maddening years of my life without some great people here."  Thank you Griff and others who took up the torch.

Offline Cozarkian

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1981
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #51 on: January 17, 2018, 09:13:57 PM »
That is based on a Christian definition of human starting at conception but the mantle is not christian. It probably does not see the foetus as a mortal human that can not be killed.

Let's back up here, I'm not advocating any particular viewpoint.

I'm just pointing at that you can't have it both ways. If raidem wants to argue that the Lady can get pregnant but can't give birth, it is inconsistent to argue the mantle couldn't force a miscarriage to prevent birth.

I don't know the specifics of the timing for what is a mother in the DV, that is a question for JB. I'm just arguing that it raidem's argument is internally inconsistent because it is twisting a definition to suit a particular purpose, rather than picking a definition and then applying it logically in all situations.

Offline raidem

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5634
  • Duck's Apprentice
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #52 on: January 17, 2018, 09:15:10 PM »
Quote
I don't know the specifics of the timing for what is a mother in the DV, that is a question for JB. I'm just arguing that it raidem's argument is internally inconsistent because it is twisting a definition to suit a particular purpose, rather than picking a definition and then applying it logically in all situations.

And, I'm arguing it is internally consistent as I just outlined previously based on the words definitions.
mother is defined as having given birth
mortal is subject to death. 
human being applies both to the unborn fetus and born fetus.

If the Queen can't kill human being, then she can't kill the unborn fetus.  This isn't yet a condition of 'mother' which I'm arguing from.

Toward your point there are two rules in play not just one to which you allude to which is why my argument remains consistent. The 'mother' rule is distinct from the Queen can't kill 'mortal' rule.  They have different definitions but have some overlap but not in the case in which is being argued: that of the unborn fetus.
Quote
I'm just pointing at that you can't have it both ways. If raidem wants to argue that the Lady can get pregnant but can't give birth, it is inconsistent to argue the mantle couldn't force a miscarriage to prevent birth.
Oh, I see where you may be arguing from.

Let me be clear on one point that may explain my approach.  I do argue "that the Lady can get pregnant but can't give birth." I also realize the Lady has a defense mechanism to prevent sex, which then prevents conception, which prevents birth.  I view the defense mechanism against sex as the wall of a castle, once you are able somehow to get past it you're potentially inside the mantles defenses whereby conception is possible.  Should conception occur, you are now pregnant. By virtue of rules regarding the Queens killing mortal humans, the Lady mantle may make no attempt at this point to kill the fetus.  Its primary defense mechanism, the wall, is irrelevant and now the mantle is in overdrive to push the Lady to become the Queen.  This drive then becomes the second line of defense, the Lady will succeed in becoming Queen prior to giving birth therefore it is a nonissue for the Lady mantle or the Lady dies in the attempt, the Lady mantle passes, therefore it again is a nonissue for the lady mantle.  Only when the Lady mantle is trapped when the Lady gives birth is the Lady mantle destroyed in the process.

So, given my argument above, I have shown a internally consistent way in which the mantle lives with the condition of pregnancy and the drive to protect itself.  I believe you assumed that I asserted no further self-defense mechanism past the no-sex mechanism.  I didn't.  Again, the self-defense mechanism then becomes unseat the Queen at all costs prior to birth.  This could then allow an additional pressure taking place within faerie back in the time when both Queens died 1000+ years ago.  The ladies were also on a timetable.

Murphy was on a timetable.  (It's a fiction I'm creating in my head, and I like it.)
« Last Edit: January 17, 2018, 09:40:50 PM by raidem »
"That's it???  It's really that simple? 
LIES!  Damn lies!  It's a cover up!
WOJ: http://www.paranetonline.com/index.php/topic,21772.0.html

Offline Arjan

  • Seriously?
  • ***
  • Posts: 13235
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #53 on: January 17, 2018, 09:54:19 PM »
And, I'm arguing it is internally consistent as I just outlined previously based on the words definitions.
mother is defined as having given birth
mortal is subject to death. 
human being applies both to the unborn fetus and born fetus.
That is your definition of human. The problem is that the definition of human is flexible as shown by the different definitions used by different groups in the books. The white councils definition differs from the knights of the cross definition. Mab thought Thomas was human enough for her purpose etc.

The question is not whether the foetus is human or you and I consider it human, the question is whether the mantle considers it human and so not killable and and from what we know about pre christian pagan culture we have to guess but probably no.

Quote
If the Queen can't kill human being, then she can't kill the unborn fetus.  This isn't yet a condition of 'mother' which I'm arguing from.
And even if it is, the foetus is clearly attached to the court so different rules apply.
Quote
Toward your point there are two rules in play not just one to which you allude to which is why my argument remains consistent. The 'mother' rule is distinct from the Queen can't kill 'mortal' rule.  They have different definitions but have some overlap but not in the case in which is being argued: that of the unborn fetus.Oh, I see where you may be arguing from.

Let me be clear on one point that may explain my approach.  I do argue "that the Lady can get pregnant but can't give birth." I also realize the Lady has a defense mechanism to prevent sex, which then prevents conception, which prevents birth.  I view the defense mechanism against sex as the wall of a castle, once you are able somehow to get past it you're potentially inside the mantles defenses whereby conception is possible.  Should conception occur, you are now pregnant. By virtue of rules regarding the Queens killing mortal humans, the Lady mantle may make no attempt at this point to kill the fetus.  Its primary defense mechanism, the wall, is irrelevant and now the mantle is in overdrive to push the Lady to become the Queen.  This drive then becomes the second line of defense, the Lady will succeed in becoming Queen prior to giving birth therefore it is a nonissue for the Lady mantle or the Lady dies in the attempt, the Lady mantle passes, therefore it again is a nonissue for the lady mantle.  Only when the Lady mantle is trapped when the Lady gives birth is the Lady mantle destroyed in the process.

So, given my argument above, I have shown a internally consistent way in which the mantle lives with the condition of pregnancy and the drive to protect itself.  I believe you assumed that I asserted no further self-defense mechanism past the no-sex mechanism.  I didn't.  Again, the self-defense mechanism then becomes unseat the Queen at all costs prior to birth.  This could then allow an additional pressure taking place within faerie back in the time when both Queens died 1000+ years ago.  The ladies were also on a timetable.
This is too mechanistic. The mantle is life and has a certain awareness. It is not a castle wall it will keep pressure on to change the situation and killing the foetus is the most logical way to do it. It would probably do so immediately after taking the host when the host is still unconscious.

It takes the host if it finds the host suetable (which a pregnant whoman is anyway) and if it is not suetable it will make it suetable.
WG+++: The White God is Mister.
SH[Elaine+++]

Offline raidem

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5634
  • Duck's Apprentice
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #54 on: January 17, 2018, 09:58:29 PM »
Nicely laid out. It paints a different picture than mine though I disagree with the conclusions.

I agree it depends on what the mantle considers not killable.  I simply stated my opinion on the matter based on some definitions.

Quote
And even if it is, the foetus is clearly attached to the court so different rules apply.
The previously stated "what the mantle considers not killlable" still applies.

Quote
It takes the host if it finds the host suetable (which a pregnant whoman is anyway) and if it is not suetable it will make it suetable.
If it is as you argue, coupled with an idea someone else suggested that the Knight could impregnate the Lady, then a impregnated Lady may be allowed by the defense system.

This could be a case in which Murphy impregnated by the Knight, in a TT event, attracts the Lady mantle under right circumstance.  The defense mechanism allows the fetus through.  This combined with my idea regarding Lady mantle being preserved up until such time she gives birth then would allow for a Murphy to be pregnant with Harry's child, TT into the past, acquire the Lady mantle, keep it until she can acquire the Queen mantle, then give birth.  I guess that would be how I'd have to fit this piece into the story for Murphy/Mab/Harry/Marcone to work.  It would be much easier if she wasn't pregnant but I like the idea that she is.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2018, 10:11:58 PM by raidem »
"That's it???  It's really that simple? 
LIES!  Damn lies!  It's a cover up!
WOJ: http://www.paranetonline.com/index.php/topic,21772.0.html

Offline Arjan

  • Seriously?
  • ***
  • Posts: 13235
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #55 on: January 17, 2018, 10:19:55 PM »
Nicely laid out. It paints a different picture than mine though I disagree with the conclusions.

I agree it depends on what the mantle considers not killable.  I simply stated my opinion on the matter based on some definitions.
The previously stated "what the mantle considers not killlable" still applies.
If it is as you argue, coupled with an idea someone else suggested that the Knight could impregnate the Lady, then a impregnated Lady may be allowed by the defense system.
If the knight could Fix would have done so and Lilly would have gotten her family. Maeve would have been a different person as well.

It would not make sense to me. The knight can not.
Quote
This could be a case in which Murphy impregnated by the Knight, in a TT event, attracts the Lady mantle under right circumstance.  The defense mechanism allows the fetus through.  This combined with my idea regarding Lady mantle being preserved up until such time she gives birth then would allow for a Murphy to be pregnant with Harry's child, TT into the past, acquire the Lady mantle, keep it until she can acquire the Queen mantle, then give birth.  I guess that would be how I'd have to fit this piece into the story for Murphy/Mab/Harry/Marcone to work.  It would be much easier if she wasn't pregnant but I like the idea that she is.
WG+++: The White God is Mister.
SH[Elaine+++]

Offline raidem

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5634
  • Duck's Apprentice
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #56 on: January 17, 2018, 10:50:53 PM »
Quote
If the knight could Fix would have done so and Lilly would have gotten her family. Maeve would have been a different person as well.
I agree on second thought. To keep arguing the Knight could impregnate the Lady is a fools errand.  That is joshed. It may be possible though for the Knight to have sex but not conceive with the Lady, or as was suggested the defense mechanism takes care of the fertilized egg.

Quote
It would not make sense to me. The knight can not.
I've slight amended the following and pointed out that it is a slightly different case than what was suggested previously.  This isn't Knight having sex with Lady so the knight can not doesn't really apply.

Quote
This is a case in which the Knight impregnates a non Lady Murphy, who later gets the Lady mantle.  And, because the fetus was conceived by the Knight (or per Mother Winter's orders), the Lady mantle allows fetus through due to this special case for whatever reason.  This combined with my idea regarding Lady mantle being preserved up until such time she gives birth then it would allow for a Murphy to be pregnant with Harry's child, TT into the past, acquire the Lady mantle, keep it until she can acquire the Queen mantle, then give birth.  I guess that would be how I'd have to fit this piece into the story for Murphy/Mab/Harry/Marcone to work.  It would be much easier if she wasn't pregnant but I like the idea that she is. 

Just because the Winter Lady mantle, as you argue, views the fertilized egg or fetus as killable, it doesn't mean that it has to.  And, it may proceed in the fashion I've argued before where it wouldn't kill it in any event.


« Last Edit: January 17, 2018, 11:00:20 PM by raidem »
"That's it???  It's really that simple? 
LIES!  Damn lies!  It's a cover up!
WOJ: http://www.paranetonline.com/index.php/topic,21772.0.html

Offline Arjan

  • Seriously?
  • ***
  • Posts: 13235
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #57 on: January 18, 2018, 04:50:10 AM »
I think being sexually frustrated is part of the Sidhe Lady experience so a knight loophole is out of question.
WG+++: The White God is Mister.
SH[Elaine+++]

Offline jonas

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1258
  • Surpassed Ms. Duck
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #58 on: January 18, 2018, 08:02:36 AM »
I think being sexually frustrated is part of the Sidhe Lady experience so a knight loophole is out of question.
Na see I figured this out too talking on facebook with others. It's summers opposition to Winter that changes the role and the outcome, the Winter Consort is meant to take the Lady, But Summer is inherently different. It focus's more upon the Husbandry aspect in the knight. The way Fix doted on her, followed her commands with a genuine affection, worried over her when she was emotional even. All the signs are there. So idk what precise things the Summer Lady has going for her celibacy. But the Knight wouldn't push. Notice also such suggestions are what drives him into a heat fighting Dresden. Take a look again at the previous Knight, Reul and his methods of protecting and shielding others. His drives are different.

Quote
To keep arguing the Knight could impregnate the Lady is a fools errand.
*doffs hat dramatically* Just don't call me Quinten Coldwater and I shan't be offended.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2018, 08:07:08 AM by jonas »
Quote from: A. Lanning
I'm sorry, My responses are limited. You must ask the right questions.
Quote from: C Chaplin
...And so as long as men die, Liberty will never perish.

Offline Arjan

  • Seriously?
  • ***
  • Posts: 13235
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Succession Rules
« Reply #59 on: January 18, 2018, 12:23:23 PM »
Na see I figured this out too talking on facebook with others. It's summers opposition to Winter that changes the role and the outcome, the Winter Consort is meant to take the Lady, But Summer is inherently different. It focus's more upon the Husbandry aspect in the knight. The way Fix doted on her, followed her commands with a genuine affection, worried over her when she was emotional even. All the signs are there. So idk what precise things the Summer Lady has going for her celibacy. But the Knight wouldn't push. Notice also such suggestions are what drives him into a heat fighting Dresden. Take a look again at the previous Knight, Reul and his methods of protecting and shielding others. His drives are different.
*doffs hat dramatically* Just don't call me Quinten Coldwater and I shan't be offended.
Of course the expression is different. Lilly was frustrated about not being able to get children, start and raise a family. Maeve was just frustrated sexually.
WG+++: The White God is Mister.
SH[Elaine+++]