The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers
Why Attack Arctus Tor?
dspringer1:
--- Quote ---I'm rereading SmF right now and that's exactly what I was wondering about: Why did Mab bother? Ok, her Accords were broken. But so what, someone who can't defend themselves doesn't have any business joining the club.
--- End quote ---
What value is the accords if the only enforcement is the victim defending themselves? That is the definition of a toothless agreement.
The value in the accords is that community of supernatural agents enforces a code of conduct. In other words, people who break the laws are punished. Mab created the accord for a reason, so she has a good reason to act to punish those who break the accord.
If that is not good enough, the second reason is just as good. The accords are an agreement - a bargain. Mab keeps her word and the agreement binds her to punish those who break it. That is winter law.
And if that is not good enough, the third reasons is helpful. Mab is limited in her ability to act. One of the "loopholes" in these limits are the bargains Mab makes. By breaking the accords, Mab is freed to act. She must certainly act in accordance to her obligations in the accords, but that still leaves her a lot of flexibility in how she chooses to act. For example, in this example she gained additional benefits in training Harry, earned a debt from Marcone, enhanced her reputation, and blocked the actions of a denarian who was almost certainly involved in the assault on Arctus Tor. That's a lot of benefit should would not have been able to achieve without the breach in the accords.
Quantus:
--- Quote from: dspringer1 on August 10, 2017, 03:05:22 PM ---What value is the accords if the only enforcement is the victim defending themselves? That is the definition of a toothless agreement.
The value in the accords is that community of supernatural agents enforces a code of conduct. In other words, people who break the laws are punished. Mab created the accord for a reason, so she has a good reason to act to punish those who break the accord.
If that is not good enough, the second reason is just as good. The accords are an agreement - a bargain. Mab keeps her word and the agreement binds her to punish those who break it. That is winter law.
And if that is not good enough, the third reasons is helpful. Mab is limited in her ability to act. One of the "loopholes" in these limits are the bargains Mab makes. By breaking the accords, Mab is freed to act. She must certainly act in accordance to her obligations in the accords, but that still leaves her a lot of flexibility in how she chooses to act. For example, in this example she gained additional benefits in training Harry, earned a debt from Marcone, enhanced her reputation, and blocked the actions of a denarian who was almost certainly involved in the assault on Arctus Tor. That's a lot of benefit should would not have been able to achieve without the breach in the accords.
--- End quote ---
That makes sense as an official story, but both Mab and Titania were moving on the Board before the initial kidnapping took place, so there has to be hidden motivation, no?
dspringer1:
These are all power players with intelligence operations and agendas. I suspect they are certainly trying to maximize opportunities, anticipate threats and so forth -- and occasionally blindsided by the actions of a clever or lucky participant in the Great Game. I am sure they work constantly to create conditions that allow them to act effectively when necessary.
Quantus:
--- Quote from: dspringer1 on August 10, 2017, 05:15:30 PM ---These are all power players with intelligence operations and agendas. I suspect they are certainly trying to maximize opportunities, anticipate threats and so forth -- and occasionally blindsided by the actions of a clever or lucky participant in the Great Game. I am sure they work constantly to create conditions that allow them to act effectively when necessary.
--- End quote ---
There's being responsive, and then there's being precognitive (which Im 99% 90% sure they are not). This is at the point where you have to question if you have the Cause & Effect in the right order, methinks.
dspringer1:
given all sides have access to some kind of knowledge of the future, I suspect it balances out
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version