Ser Aerek,

Your posts are always an interesting read. I, also, enjoyed playing make-believe as a child and your statements bring back fond memories of simpler times when things like logic and reality didn't spoil all the fun.

Pardon my impertinence in seeking clarification, for I know you encourage such discourse. I'll spare us both from delving too deeply into the numerous other passages of your Asterian Code, for if I were to address them all, I fear the questions would spill over into a tome larger than the Code itself.

Who gets to determine what constitutes 'egregious War Crimes'? Are normal War Crimes permissible? If so, where do we draw the line between those and the egregious ones? If it is a matter of some council of knights with more numerous shiny badges and ribbons on their armour than others making the determination between whether a War Crime is egregious or acceptable, is there a representative from every Order there who gets to give context and cultural information for the accused?

And what do you do in situations where one Nation's ideology and religious doctrines demand of them what other Knights might consider to be dishonorable by their own culture's standards? In your example you use a Knight withdrawing from battle because there are not enough people to kill to achieve the standard of 'glorious battle' that is demanded of him by your Asterian Code. What if a Nation's goal requires them to win a battle at any cost, regardless of how many soldiers the enemy can field? Would a Knight be expected to betray his sworn duty, his city, and his people in order to adhere to your doctrines? Are they to cast aside their duty as a leader and soldier and order others to do the same in order to remain true to the code that you wrote lest they be branded dishonourable for failing to uphold your Asterian Code? As a city leader, it is important for us to know if the Knight's Guild is intending to place restrictions on our warriors who have a duty to see their city's goals accomplished by whatever means their nation's culture, faith, ideology, and factional identity demands.

If a Knight's God tells them to bring low another nation at any cost, is he then expected to raise his armoured fist in defiance of His God because there are too few soldiers for him to cut down fairly? Is it more honourable to obey the commands given to him by his God knowing he'll receive great persecution from other Knights for not conforming to your Asterian Code's demands or is it more honourable to reject the orders of his God and dutifully follow your definitions and codes?

And what of the definition of warfare and its exemptions? You list raids, conquests, crusades and 'similar such conflicts' which I assume extends to things like shrine conflicts? What about two armies clashing in the middle of the desert over nothing more than just hating one another? Who gets to determine which 'similar such conflicts' fall under the umbrella of exemptions where a knight is permitted to cast aside Chivalric norms to do whatever they need to win?

I will say that it is very telling and admirable that you condone throwing all the pomp, horseshit, and pageantry out the window when reality comes knocking and one's enemies simply need to die. I don't think I'll have an issues with the Seat's soldiers playing at being Knights if that continues to be the case. That's how it's always gone with make-believe time though, isn't it? It's all fun and games until an errant swing of the stick-that-is-a-sword bloodies a nose and then all the pretending must be set aside for reality has dipped its cold, cruel finger into the fantasy.

Respectfully,

~II

[X] Overseer Grandue Xeh'ria, Keeper of the Iron Crown

[A small octagon encircles a raised "II" here, inscribed in thick, amethyst ink]


Penned by my hand on the 11th of Aeguary, in the year 965 AF.