Kevin's Watch

I don't think it's a matter of "If," Brother.

Frankly, none of us know what any laws are. We tend to make our own. Either there are no laws, as we've made none, or they exist without our cognizance much less approval. I side with the latter view. And accordingly, I believe that god or not, Hedra would know more than any of us. And as I've heard mortals say, "Ignorantia juris non excusat."

However, just because Hedra says a law has been broken doesn't mean Maeror will be dragged off in shackles (even if such were possible). As I said, Adomorn would determine the course of reparations, should they be necessary. And I'm sure he'll take in all mitigating factors.

If knowledge of the Law is required for Law to be broken then Maeror is guily of no more than rudeness for erecting his Spire in lands where he knew the populace worshipped Melirelle. Certainly I know of no written Law that forbids one deity to build in lands claimed by another. Yet we do not do so by unspoken agreement.

Therefore either the Law exists but was until now unknown, in which case I believe Hedra Iren should be the judge of guilt or innocence rather than Adomorn, or the Law does not exist and therefore Maeror has merely oppoerated outside the accepted norms of our society. In that case I believe a warning would be sufficient.

Simjen wrote:I don't think it's a matter of "If," Brother.

Frankly, none of us know what any laws are. We tend to make our own. Either there are no laws, as we've made none, or they exist without our cognizance much less approval. I side with the latter view. And accordingly, I believe that god or not, Hedra would know more than any of us.

Although this is not the point I'm really trying to make, I might argue this, also. Am I allowed to narrow the definition of Love so that it only means X or Y? Or expand the definition, so that it also includes the wind's caress of the earth? I'd surely gain Power it I did that. I am the God of Love, after all, so who could say I can't say what is Love and what is not?

Simjen wrote:And as I've heard mortals say, "Ignorantia juris non excusat."

Truly, no excuse. And so, I am attempting to lose my ignorance. Hedra, can you help me? As I was just saying to someone or other (:haha:), in some places (I believe I heard a large, powerful society on Old Earth is an example), it is against the Law to threaten someone with Destruction. You have informed us that such is not the case on Eiran. However, that does not necessarily mean that it is against the Law to act against someone who does threaten us with Destruction. But you have informed us that it is against the Law on Eiran. With nothing written or spoken, it is difficult to know ahead of time when I am about to break a Law. Had you not warned us ahead of time, someone or other might have acted against AK, so that he could not grow and give us the Destruction he promises. If there is no punishment for breaking the Law, then there is no point in having the Law. And the one who safeguarded Eiran from AK would likely not be happy with being punished for having done so if you had not happened to hear the conversation and warn against it.

Simjen wrote:If a ruling is needed, i.e., Maeror and Melirelle do not resolve it between themselves, it should be a ruling of law...

I will agree with Simjen's stand here. If a ruling is needed. Better by far that they come to an agreement themselves. If they cannot, I will support the call for Hedra to make judgement, and[/] for Adomorn to rule on whether the outcome is just.

I agree that if compromise is possible without an oustide infulence, then that would be the best course of action. If Maeror and Merielle can come to terms, then it will not require and enforcement of a decision that may not be to the liking of both parties.

Bhakti wrote:

Simjen wrote:And as I've heard mortals say, "Ignorantia juris non excusat."

Truly, no excuse. And so, I am attempting to lose my ignorance. Hedra, can you help me? As I was just saying to someone or other (:haha:), in some places (I believe I heard a large, powerful society on Old Earth is an example), it is against the Law to threaten someone with Destruction. You have informed us that such is not the case on Eiran. However, that does not necessarily mean that it is against the Law to act against someone who does threaten us with Destruction. But you have informed us that it is against the Law on Eiran. With nothing written or spoken, it is difficult to know ahead of time when I am about to break a Law. Had you not warned us ahead of time, someone or other might have acted against AK, so that he could not grow and give us the Destruction he promises. If there is no punishment for breaking the Law, then there is no point in having the Law. And the one who safeguarded Eiran from AK would likely not be happy with being punished for having done so if you had not happened to hear the conversation and warn against it.

Hedra Iren

It would take a very long time, my Lord Bhakti, to share with you all the nuances of Law which are graven in my very being. But as for this particular case you speak of - Law makes no distinction between intentions, only between facts. For one could easily disguise his intentions as good, and therefore otherwise avoid punishment. What if, for example, an active, evil God lusted after another active God's power, decided to slay him in order to take it, despite the second God having done nothing to him or to the world as a whole that would justify such a killing? Should the first evil God avoid punishment by saying he committed murder out of goodness, hoping to spare the world from the second God's evil? Would that be justification enough to avoid punishment?
And Law does not concern itself with good or evil, either; who has the right to judge a being as being simply "good" or "evil" with nothing in between them?
Because of this, the Law says that an active god cannot act against another active god just based on the other god's threats, or sphere of influence, without the other god having performed any action aimed at harming the first one. To do otherwise would plunge the world into chaos.

But please notice, my brethren, that the Law is clear in that only gods who are active in Eiran are so protected. This is because a god's first duty is not to himself, but to Eiran, and those gods who unexplicably refuse to do so - those gods who, without warning or reason, simply retreat from Eiran , such as The Fallen did long ago - having already broken the covenant of duty they chose to accept when they entered Eiran, are no longer protected by Law against those who would slay them, for this is then the only way in which those gods's domains can return to Eiran itself.

Hedra Iren wrote:It would take a very long time, my Lord Bhakti, to share with you all the nuances of Law which are graven in my very being.

Indeed!! I do not know how such a thing could be done. I wish to gain a better understanding of you and your domain, but I cannot suggest a way to go about it.

The only thing I know for certain, or at least I think I know it for certain, is - Something is Law if it is written in your Book of Law.

And two conditions must be met for something to be written into you Book:
1) You must agree to write it.
2) There must be an expenditure of DRP's.

I am not aware that anything has yet been written into your Book. Therefore, although we may hope and assume that we all more-or-less agree on at least the major points of Law, such will not always be the case. For example, Melirelle believes no other deity can attempt to settle anywhere in Khenstorn without her permission, while some of us have said we do not agree with the underlying principle.

Hail Sister. *bows*

From whence does this particular Law come? And how will it be enforced?

And what penalties are associated with it?

An agreement has been reached. To satisfy our part of it, we hereby swear that we will at no point in the future alter the properties of the spire to the detriment of Melirelle or her people, nor will we use it again to cloak any part of her lands from sight.


On the subject of Law, I had believed that Hedra's purpose was to maintain the laws we make for ourselves. Yet now she suggests that these laws exist without our wishing them and without our knowledge.
You say a god cannot act against another unless they have been acted against first? Then there would be no conflict until this Law is broken, and the breaker would suffer punishment. If ever one god is threatened--deliberately--by the indirect action of another, then this law becomes a trap laid to make them helpless against it.

Murrin wrote:An agreement has been reached. To satisfy our part of it, we hereby swear that we will at no point in the future alter the properties of the spire to the detriment of Melirelle or her people, nor will we use it again to cloak any part of her lands from sight.


On the subject of Law, I had believed that Hedra's purpose was to maintain the laws we make for ourselves. Yet now she suggests that these laws exist without our wishing them and without our knowledge.
You say a god cannot act against another unless they have been acted against first? Then there would be no conflict until this Law is broken, and the breaker would suffer punishment. If ever one god is threatened--deliberately--by the indirect action of another, then this law becomes a trap laid to make them helpless against it.

Hedra Iren

My purpose is to maintain the Laws of Eiran, both those the gods create, and those that predate the gods themselves. The fundamental Laws were written before anything else was born on Eiran, and without Law, there would be no Eiran at all. The Law I mentioned earlier is one such; it is a Law which was already in existence when I took over the mantle I now wear. I cannot know who established it, if the gods of old or the AllFather himself.
I know this, however. It is a Law that can be changed, if ALL the gods of the Pantheon agree to it, and if its new wording is inscribed in the Book of Law. So, if this is the wish of the Pantheon, let us discuss how best to regulate conflict between gods, that this may be written in the Book and thereby superimpose the old Law.

Hedra Iren:

the Law says that an active god cannot act against another active god just based on the other god's threats, or sphere of influence, without the other god having performed any action aimed at harming the first one. To do otherwise would plunge the world into chaos.

If ALL the gods need to agree to change this law, then it shall not be changed, for I shall NOT agree. That law is fine just as it stands, and if all our brothers and sisters obeyed it, Eiran would be a much more pleasant place.

Undine

But all cannot or will not obey it, for that is not the nature of our kind. And thus it becomes what Maeror has called it.

If ever one god is threatened--deliberately--by the indirect action of another, then this law becomes a trap laid to make them helpless against it.

The world is chaos and Law does not change that. My question remains...how can it be enforced and how punished? At best, those who agree with the injured party can attacker the original attacker, just as they would do anyway. *shrug*

Mistake me not, I do not have a solution yet...but the flaws in this law seem to render it worthless.

And if one god commissions my services against another, who is breaking the law? I act within my nature, as do you all.

And if one god commissions my services against another, who is breaking the law? I act within my nature, as do you all.

Excellent point, Vadhaka.

Vadhaka wrote:....And if one god commissions my services against another, who is breaking the law? I act within my nature, as do you all.

Agreed cousin ... we act as we are formed.

Hedra Iren

Such reasons as you propose, Brother Vadhaka, are why the chance to change that Law is given to us. It is, without a doubt, a Law that might require amendments; but nevertheless, it does exist. It is a Law which was established, I believe, when the world was born, perhaps by the AllFather himself, or by one of the old gods; the penalties for breaking it are unknown. But there are degrees of breaking the Law, and we have seen that during the conflict between Maeror and Adomorn; I have a belief that punishment for breaking the Law comes from the world itself, not from any assembly of gods.

Hmmm, I will not presume to disagree Sister, although that would make it prospect worse than if by any act of ourselves I suspect.

Choose you all as you will. *shrug* I have not the stomach for debate today. To answer my own question though, it is the purchaser of the deed who commits the crime if any there is.

The assassin is merely the knife in his hand, and I refuse judgement against my nature, as I would refuse to judge the nature of others. *bows*

Vadhaka wrote:Choose you all as you will. *shrug* I have not the stomach for debate today.

Vadhaka has not the stomach for debate? Is everything well with you (not necessarily your followers), brother? Must I insist you sit and drink a hot ambrosia whilst you put up your feet?

Bah, these petty squabbles begin to annoy me in honesty. We are gods bretheren...ours is to do as we please.

Vadhaka wrote:Bah, these petty squabbles begin to annoy me in honesty. We are gods bretheren...ours is to do as we please.

Well said, m'l-rd...

It is a valid school of thought. Alas, our followers often turn against us for such attitudes. And these mortals have a way of finding immense Power when they want to get back at us.