Jump to content

frill

Member
  • Content Count

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

98 Fantastic

3 Followers

About frill

Contact Methods

  • Discord
    frill#8584
  • Minecraft Username
    Frill

Profile Information

  • Location
    mr frill

Character Profile

  • Character Name
    mr frill
  • Character Race
    Farfolk

Recent Profile Visitors

491 profile views
  1. BY QUILL OF IDE HARACCUS of VES or Eidr Haraqqa; OF THE WORSHIPFUL GUILD OF WRITERS OF THE GOLDEN CITY OF VES 1720 *** IN RESPONSE TO DIETRICH VAN JUNGINGEN THE WORD OF GOD IS SHARPER THAN ANY SWORD Esteemed Dietrich; I am flattered that you mark my scrivener’s reams by name as something but more than the empty intellectual gesturing of a freeman, but I take to task the body of your treatise. Your matters of fear for race do quell the furor of the beat of my heart, as I arrived in Ves as but a common Rassidi, the lowest of the races of Man - as I was but duly reminded by the followers of the flame-sword of Owyn who I now see as good friends and partners in matters theological and intellectual - but your fears of the papacy are misplaced. Allow me to explain the foundation of the laws of the Imperium Renatum and the Holy Orenic Empire in the most dogged and basest forms - not as some sympathiser to either empire, but as a matter of intellectual exercise that will benefit us both. Both texts begin with a preamble as written by Prince-Father Charles Polycarp so defining the Emperor as the mouthpiece of the Divine Will of GOD, and thus acting as an agent most pious through executing His law; these laws being codified in the Ten Tables that stand as the greatest protectors of the interests and rights of every commoner, burgher et al. in the humble lands of Renatus and beyond. Each of your “Rights and Laws of Man” are so mimicked within the Ten Tables that it is nothing but a sign of an affirmation of them. To pour a salve on your grandiose fears of enslavement of the masses by some edict of a now-deposed antipope arising during the grand schism, I say but one thing; the rights of men were enshrined in law decades prior, and these rights are so affirmed by the Imperial Office, that is, from the office of GOD’s mouthpiece to our mortal plane. Prince-Father Polycarp writes in his preamble as such, that this law has juristic supremacy over any bull issued for the law for the law of the land “is wholly unbound by common or temporal law.” as the Emperor “is inalienable and indomitable, as he must be so as to govern justly and fairly”, as “no man is his judge, and God his only confessor.”. You must hold faith in the Canon without fear of enslavement nor branding nor tattoo for it is but the word of GOD to prevent such a thing; no flesh must be rendered by but a missive alone for it is the word of GOD that does manifest in the law-codes that do protect against it. A man of my lowly skin has found nothing but equity under the guiding hand of the Canon, and this hand does guide the laws that protect all men. GOD, and thus his voice on this plane, has reserved to himself the sole right of being both lawgiver and judge; for he alone can, without injustice, be, at the same time, both one and the other. You are fearing a false-spectre borne of a time of war and forego the just word of law and the true word of Canon, if but due to your own instinctive itch of self-preservation at the hands of some perceived injustice. You have nothing to fear with the appointment of the new Pontiff, good Dietrich. GOD so spoke on this council and His word was good - the schism mended, the rights of all Men remain preserved in both the words of homily and the deft ink of law. Have faith in the GOD, his Canon, and his laws for they will preserve us. As it was written, Eidr Haraqqa, patrician of Ves.
  2. kobolds turning from an npc to a playable race in dnd stole thematic niche of “haha silly trapmaker tinkerer that die in droves” from goblins. the lore you’ve written (tribal system, tinkering+trapmaking, shamans) feels like reskinned goblin and orc lore but with the added bonus that they have more appeal to furries honestly you’ve put a lot of work into this application but my blood boils to pink steam the moment i even think of a “yap-yap” koboldpost getting made thanks to years of failed dnd campaigns getting sidetracked by koboldplayers
  3. id say dragon quest vii for a ps/xbox era turn-based jap rpg where you can turn into a dragon and has time travel as part of the plot, but it didnt have any winter areas.
  4. Lay-sophist, lawman and fledgling theologian Eidr makes note of the date, his heart somewhat soothed by his invite to such an important affair! Perhaps if he can manage to grab Father Haas by the clerical collar in the meanwhile, he can ask a few questions about the event.
  5. Eidr Haraqqa spends a few moments with his compadre, forcefully suppressing his heavy Rassidi cudgel of an accent as he mimicks the High Imperial names that both of the men had been graced with. “Ahh, Mis-terrrr Alber-t. It is ver-y bully to see your assembly-ship! Bully for you Alberrr-t!” The good Rassid men shirking their nomadism, now fixed firmly in the culture of the cultural-occident, have been gifted as patronage a tool for humor for years to come.
  6. Hi, I figured I would make some notes on European law as it hasn’t been mentioned yet. Most of the European law that is followed [edit; for judgements of the ECHR] is case-law, so instead of diving into explanation and analysis of the leading cases I will just explain the legal groundworks for their rulings. If this is out of place, please let me know and I’ll remove the post, or just remove my post from the thread; ---- Most Europe-level legal rulings follow the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989). The CRC establishes in its Article 1 that “a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years”. This is the legal parameter currently used, also in Europe, to define what a child is. In its jurisprudence, the Council of Europe has accepted the Convention on the Rights of the Child definition of a child, endorsing the “below the age of 18 years” notion. The criminalisation of child pornography is also obligatory under Article 20 of the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse; Article 3.1.a - “child” shall mean any person under the age of 18 years; Article 20.2 - For the purpose of the present article, the term “child pornography” shall mean any material that visually depicts a child engaged in real or simulated sexually explicit conduct or any depiction of a child’s sexual organs for primarily sexual purposes. This definition echoes the sentiment on the US law from the original post, that does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. Article 9 of the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime; “For the purpose of paragraph 2 above, the term “minor” shall include all persons under 18 years of age. A Party may, however, require a lower age-limit, which shall be not less than 16 years.”. Some examples of use of this definition in EU case-law; Cited in; AHMET YILDIRIM v. TURKEY (3111/10) BENEDIK v. SLOVENIA (62357/14) CASE OF SÖDERMAN v. SWEDEN (5786/08) These links provide full texts of the conventions used; Convention on the Rights of the Child (General Assembly Resolution 44/25) https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx Convention on Cybercrime (ETS no.185) https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/treaty/185 Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (ETS no.201) https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/treaty/201
  7. Farfolk Magister Eidr Haraqqa brings a copy of the notes of the council to his fellow Guild of Writers members, Abdul al-Samra and Naasirruddeen el-Amini. Some lines are emphatically circled in red ink.
  8. “The Prince and His Assembly” OR In Nomine Populi. As penned by Lesser Magistrate Eidr Haraqqa, proud Freeman of Ves. As printed by the Worshipful Guild of Writers of the Golden City of Ves. AS SO FUNDED by the patrons-of-art of the Worshipful Guild of Writers. SCRIPTA MANENT *** 20th of Malin’s Welcome, 1719 On disregarding the assembly; IT IS KNOWN of the difference between tyrants and princes, with the hope of the Ves res publica to never be subject to one, myself writing in On Treason that “that the latter is obedient to law, and rules through the election of the people by a will that places the prince himself as a man of their service”. The prince is indebted to the will of the people and to rule “under the guidance of law in a way favourable to the vindication of the power of his post.”. The power of the prince thus, as we know, arises from the divine “process of the true democratically elected City Assembly of Ves.”. To disregard this process is but a blasphemous act that foregoes the democratic process of our good City - as the Prince should thus act by the wishes of the people, to act as some autarch is to disregard the very men that so elected him, and to hold in little regard the validity of the powers so awarded to him by the City Assembly who so elevated him. Through disregard of the sole process that so elected the prince, the prince therefore debases his own power; for what power holds an elect-prince if he disregards the process that so elected him? The prince, as common to noble-rulers of those Mannish empires, is but involved in solely individual affairs; he is not governing with the burdens and concerns of the entire city no longer. As this is a great treason of the Prince, we must now think what punishment should be decided for such a prince who subverts his own people and seizes autarchal power of the singular with disregard of his own assembly, a prince whose own privileges make so great a part of the democracy of the Golden City of Ves? I assert that the punishment of treason of the prince should in no wise differ from that of the lowest members of our society. For as the voice of the people, it must be known that the Prince-Tyrant should be held as accountable as all those he so claims to represent. The code of treason, as per article 4 § 1.2 of the criminal codex of the Holy Orenian Empire, is as follows; “Where an individual knowingly [...] attempts or conspires to the usurpation of the government [...] this shall be treason in the first degree or high treason, punishable only by execution as listed.” The code of treason, as per article 4 § 1.2 of the criminal codex of the Imperium Renatum, is as follows; “Where an individual knowingly [...] attempts or conspires to the usurpation of the government [...] this shall be treason in the first degree or high treason, punishable only by execution as listed.” I plead that the prince must thus cede his own usurped power back to his own assembly lest he be admitting to those he so seeks to represent that he disregards their divine will and willingly acknowledges that he usurps the power from those that so bestow it upon him, if but to concern himself with affairs of the individual instead of listening and adhering to the will of the people he was so elected to represent. Our prince must support his assembly and not act with disregard of it. I will assume that the Prince bringing such treatises to the next assembly is but an acknowledgement of this letter and a blessing of his belief in democracy. As it was written, Eidr Haraqqa, of the people. Works so cited; Harraqa, Eidr. Views of a Ves Freeman On ‘Imperial Treason’; OR A Tertiary Thesis on the Act of Treason within The Empire, as both an Affront of Religion and a Curse Beyond Caste. 1716. PANDECTARVM JOHANNES FREDERICVS IMPERATOR The Holy Orenian Empire’s Code of Laws, be they Civil, Criminal or Natural The Empire of Man’s Code of Laws, be they Civil, Criminal or Natural
  9. Eidr takes to written response as he witnesses this back-door treaty be published. No name is attached to his note of response. Matthias; My work in judicial reform under the Holy Orenian Empire is but for nothing. The deaths of the Kazlovs, of Myre, of Rhoul – what grand moral statements, of conviction and belief of falling for some cause greater than themselves, cast into the dirt. You say you act as a head of a democratically elected body in the subversion of their very will and process. To describe you as an idiot would be to lay insult to the swathes of simpering simple-minded fools who act above your own station. The dead remain dead, burned under Marius or beheaded under Ault, and no treatise or work of pen can bring them back. It is a black time for Ves.
  10. CASE OF MARNA v. GAIA GOLDEN COURT OF VES 9th of The First Seed, 1719. PROCEDURE Caius II of house MARNA, as represented pro se, is a citizen of THE HOLY ORENIAN EMPIRE Apollo GAIA, as represented pro se, is a citizen of THE GOLDEN CITY OF VES. THE CLAIM Plaintiff MARNA accuses the defendant of harmed majesty as per Article 8 § 1 of the Code of Laws of the Holy Orenian Empire. THE FACTS CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE Plaintiff Caius II, of the imperial House of Marna, was attempting to write a text in the Bird and the Bard tavern of the Golden City of Ves. Overhearing a teen-aged tavern-goer speak ill of him, he challenged the tavern-goer to a fist-fight. Defendant GAIA drew sword with a third party and attempted to deliver the plaintiff a wound. An unnamed Renatian Dragon-Knight attempted to draw blade against the defendant. On attempt of escape following this skirmish, Defendant GAIA drew a dagger and intended to deliver OTHODORIC AURELIUS HELVETS a deathly wound. II. FACTS OF THE PROCEEDINGS Defendant GAIA pled GUILTY to the charge of unintentional harmed majesty. Defendant GAIA admitted under oath of threat of violence through brandishing. Defendant GAIA admitted under oath attempt of intentional harmed majesty. Witness MARCEAU BEAUX, citizen of Ves, stated under oath that the defendant intentionally harmed the plaintiff. Witness ZAHRET AL-QATAFFI, citizen of Ves, stated under oath that the defendant intentionally harmed the plaintiff. Witness ZAHRET AL-QATAFFI, citizen of Ves, stated under oath that the defendant further attempted to commit the murder of OTHO HELVETS following commission of the crime of harmed majesty. Plaintiff MARNA did not contest the testimony of witness AL-QATAFFI. Defendant GAIA contested the testimony of witness AL-QATAFFI. Witness MARGARET D'AUBIGNY, of no fixed abode, stated under oath that the defendant intentionally harmed the plaintiff. Defendant GAIA did not contest the testimony of witness D'AUBIGNY. Witness OTHODORIC AURELIUS HELVETS, Captain of the city watch of Ves, stated under oath that the defendant pressed a dagger to his neck in an attempt of the crime of murder to the third degree. Defendant GAIA did not contest the testimony of witness HELVETS. Plaintiff MARNA did not contest the testimony of witness HELVETS. ASSESSMENT OF THE COURT The court concludes that Defendant GAIA did intentionally harm the majesty of Plaintiff MARNA through striking him with his gauntlet. The court concludes that Defendant GAIA did attempt to murder OTHODORIC AURELIUS HELVETS. FOR THIS REASON, THE COURT RULED The Defendant GAIA was so sentenced to death by beheading. Eidr Haraqqa, Lesser Magistrate. .
  11. wheres flynnfer??????

  12. CASE OF AL-ABAASI v. ILLOAI GOLDEN COURT OF VES 10th of Snow's Maiden, 1719. PROCEDURE Plaintiff Fareed AL-ABAASI, a citizen of the Golden City of Ves, filed claim. Defendant Arthur ILLOAI, as represented by Chadwick MORRIS, is of no fixed abode. The plaintiff alleged in particular the violation of Article 3 § 1.2 of the Code of Laws of the Holy Orenian Empire. THE CLAIM FAREED AL-ABAASI ACCUSED ILLOAI OF MISDEMEANOUR THEFT OF; SIXTY-FOUR [64] COD, EIGHT [8] SALMON, ONE-HUNDRED-AND-FIFTY [150] MINAS, ONE [1] BLADE ONE [1] SUIT OF ARMOR. THE FACTS CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE When travelling the King's Road nearing the Golden City of Ves, a herd of bandits attempted to rob AL-ABAASI under duress of immediate threat to life, as denoted by their brandishing of swords. The group of bandits included the defendant, who himself brandished a weapon during the commission of the crime. FACTS OF THE PROCEEDINGS. Defendant ILLOAI pled NOT GUILTY to the charge of misdemeanour theft. Defendant ILLOAI pled GUILTY to the charge of infraction theft. Defendant ILLOAI admitted under oath of threat of violence during the commission of the theft. Defendant ILLOAI did not dispute the value of the property being stolen as over 150 minas. Plaintiff AL-ABAASI did not dispute the value of the property being stolen as over 150 minas. ASSESSMENT OF THE COURT The court concludes that Defendant ILLOAI did intentionally deprive Plaintiff AL-ABAASI of his moveable property through threat of violence, and this property totals greater than one hundred fifty minas. The court concludes that Defendant ILLOAI admitted to such as under oath. The court concludes that this admittance under oath of commission of a crime is sufficient to conclude a violation of a crime. The court concludes that admission to commission of a crime under oath within a court of law does not necessitate a re-trial due to inaccurate allegations of the plaintiff. The court therefore sees Defendant ILLOAI as guilty of Article 3 § 3.2 of the Code of Laws of the Holy Orenian Empire. FOR THIS REASON, THE COURT RULED The Defendant ILLOAI was so sentenced to the removal of three fingers to the third-knuckle of his sword-wielding hand. The Defendant ILLOAI had thus removed three finger to the third-knuckle of both hands, as the defendant so claimed ambidextry of his sword-wielding hand. Eidr Haraqqa, Lesser Magistrate. __
  13. BY QUILL OF HARACCUS of VES or Eidr Haraqqa; OF THE WORSHIPFUL GUILD OF WRITERS OF THE GOLDEN CITY OF VES 1718 *** IN RESPONSE TO GUY OF HAAS, TRULY MAN KNOWS NO GREATER PIETY THAN TO BRING STUDY TO GOD’S WORKS.  Esteemed brother, I wish not to begin with disagreement to your glorious missive but I fear it is a folly of a chemist or Dwe’r engineer to reduce the definition of good to its empirical, and pragmatic, capacity of utility. Surely it is within scripture to denote that all things are predicated as good through nature of existence? If all is but created in the image and design of GOD, then it is of a perfect being such as GOD to not err in his creation - and thus, all things of His creation are good innately, as it is not a capability of our perfect GOD to create something that is imperfect nor flawed. This is why I stress, as I am sure a good man of the cloth does remember, that good is an innate status of our being. I fear that I need to expound this with some clarity, if but only to forbid myself from being too deft with the sharp-blows of vocabulary and mincing my own words. It is of GOD to be perfect, for GOD is the highest being known - a man of the clergy such as yourself should thus agree. Therefore, it is impossible for a perfect being to create the imperfect - an imperfection, even purposefully ordained by His divine will, is but perfect in-of-itself; our GOD, through his divine will, can not err. Thus, if all is created perfectly, and goodness is that state of being which is both holily ordained and divined by Him as the superlative state of being, it must be concluded that goodness and being are the same. Your good pen did write itself that in the words of Scripture it is said that the Lord saw all His creation, and that it was good. And thus there is none but in his creation. Therefore, the goodness - as I was so pressing in the canopied bench at the Bird and the Bard on our first foray into such a discussion - is but a privation, a perversion, and thus a lacking of the not-good, so created by some other malicious party. The opposite of good, hereafter referred to as bad for the sake of simplicity [we both very well know this is but an argument we could continue to split to the last hair], is thus not a status of being in its own right - it is but a privation of goodness. There is no bad, only a diminishing of the innate good as created by the Lord. I am sure I have aptly expounded my disagreement with goodness as something to be strived, as you know full well from our days of shamefully unpenned debated that I see goodness as but the basal state of all creation, and that it is but the actions of monsters and Men alike to pervert this goodness, this badness being but a creation of our own. Our first parents in that lapsarian flower-grove would know nothing of badness, for they were those that were closest to the truest form, unadulterated, of His creation - but they would know not of badness to compare it, thus not seeing neither good nor bad for no such binary had been forced into their hands by the actions so wrought by Men. I pray it brings you solace to know that I view the concept of goodness as something of our own creation, if but only to dilute the fact that it is but a by-product of the evils that those who pervert the Divine creation so duly create. I hope this letter reaches you well, Eidr.
  14. Eidr spends the afternoon painstakingly tracing the text onto a fine parchment of vellum. This hard-aging and near-weatherproofed facsimile is soon pinned above his desk, the Farfolk happy that the kind words of his friend have some permanence, especially in such a place where it would be but impossible to not see the dedication at every sitting to write. Rummaging through his desk-draw, the Farfolk sophist takes out a fistful of old quills, taking the slow lick of a pen-knife to their ink-dried tips, preparing his tools of the lay-man’s craft to begin writing in response.
×
×
  • Create New...