RULER: Peridot | EX-CONSORT: Carnelian -- NEW CONSORT: TURQUOISE

[dramatispersonae]

"As a ruler, I have many responsibilities, and one that I am -- at least, to the best of my knowledge -- relatively known for is my willingness to hear people's cases and provide some form of legal ruling on them. It has always been important to me to be fair, merciful, and kind. Of course, I need not do this all by myself.

In this game, I will present to you some suits and ask you to discuss between yourself and the team you are partnered with to rule on their situations and their requests."

Guinevere finishes speaking, and you find yourself in a tent with one other team.

RULER: PERIDOT
CONSORT: CARNELIAN

((OOC: For various reasons, I need to move along the teams reeeeelatively at the same pace at various points, so there may be occasional delays for some teams. I apologize in advance if this happens!))

Comments

ROUND 1

[dramatispersonae]

A wealthy man has gone away to war and left behind his wife. It has only been three months and the war isn't over, so he isn't expected to return yet, but all her neighbors have been receiving letters and money from their spouses and she has received nothing, and her marriage contract gives her no rights to the wealth of his estate until he dies. She has sent letters to the front and received no information at all, nor have any of her attempts to learn more of his situation brought any news. She can only assume that he has died, and in light of that, wishes to both keep his estate and remarry a man of her acquaintance. Should she or should she not be permitted to either or both of these?

DISCUSSION

[dramatispersonae]

Re: DISCUSSION

[crueltobekind]

This is depressing . . .

Re: DISCUSSION

[kneejerk]

. . . what kind of game is this?

Re: DISCUSSION

[itsjustafayz]

Uh...

DECISION

[dramatispersonae]

Re: DECISION

[crueltobekind]

We've decided that she can't claim ownership of the estate but should be allowed an allowance from it until word one way or the other arrives from the front. Likewise remarrying should wait until word arrives.

ROUND 2

[neverhesitate]

Three months pass and the war comes to an end.

Her husband returns from the war. He finds himself at quite a loss; his wife is still his, but quite unhappy with him and in ownership of parts of his property by rule of the crown, which has overridden his marriage contract. This time, he brings the case -- unfair loss of property and violation of legally binding contracts. Who owns the property that was granted to her? For elements invested, who owns the gains? By rights it should be his, but it was handed over to his wife, and yet it was only meant to be handed over on his death. This is a legal mess. He was too busy to write, he claims, but there's no reason to assume him dead. How do you rule on this?

DISCUSSION

[neverhesitate]

Re: DISCUSSION

[crueltobekind]

Jerk.

DECISION

[neverhesitate]

Re: DECISION

[crueltobekind]

The court finds that you're a jerk who can't expect people to assume you're doing fine when you decide to drop off the radar in the middle of a war. Instead you should extend your gratitude to us for not giving her full control of your estate and apologize for making her live in fear of your death and for neglecting to send her funds to support herself with.

PARTNER SWAP

[neverhesitate]

A wind fills the area, bringing a sense of both sadness and heart-pounding excitement -- you can tell the feeling's not yours, can tell it's external much in the way of viewing someone else's memory -- and when it fades, the "Consort" team that was previously here no longer is. Instead, a new team is here; you know instinctively that you are now partnered with this other team as the game continues.

RULER: PERIDOT
CONSORT: TURQUOISE

(( Carnelian, please exit this post and go play in THIS post instead. ))

ROUND 3

[neverhesitate]

The husband withdraws his suit with a great deal of simmering resentment on being told off so thoroughly.

Yet another 3 months passes, making nine altogether. The woman from the other cases gives birth to a healthy baby boy. She claims that it is the child of her husband, conceived right before he went away to war; the original husband agrees. However, her lover claims the child is actually his and wants to take the son as his own. The birth registry requires that it have one female parent and one male parent, or will be listed as her child with an unknown man and be declared illegitimate to ANY possible inheritance. How do you rule?

DISCUSSION

[neverhesitate]

Re: DISCUSSION

[twindividualism]

This is getting ridiculous.

[also waving at Turquoise I guess. Hello new subjects.]

Re: DISCUSSION

[thatsmycue]

. . .

[this is stupid]

DECISION

[neverhesitate]

Re: DECISION

[crueltobekind]

The court is getting tired of this family's drama, but orders the husband and lover to both submit letters to the court explaining their intentions regarding the child. The court will, of course, read them to get a sense of what kind of father both men hope to be, but ultimately the authors of the letters will be disguised so that the woman can read them. Without knowing who wrote which letter, she will be free to choose the man she feels is best suited to raising her child.

ROUND 4

[neverhesitate]

The two men write the letter. One letter details how he wishes an heir who can succeed him and carry on the bloodline. The other details how he wishes to raise and nurture a child and thinks the child will want for nothing. The woman chooses the second one, and her child is no longer in her estate, being raised by her lover rather than herself and her husband.

After ANOTHER three months -- what an intense year this has been with this increasingly troublesome family -- another woman shows up with a newborn baby and claims that the original husband had married her while he was abroad, and got her with child while there. This new woman has one of the original husband's rings, which is something as close to proof as she is capable of. She wishes to live with him as his wife, and for her son to be raised as his heir and heir to the estate he had bragged of. The husband denies it and says that while he was out, the ring was stolen from his belongings and he had never been infidelious to his (current) wife. Due to the known precedent of the (current) wife's affair, the new woman demands the wife be cast out and her own marriage be treated as legal and binding; otherwise, she wishes an ongoing stipend for raising the child and quite impressively large financial recompense. After all, she had been told any child she bore him would be supported with wealth and rank. Obviously, he denies all this. How do you rule?

DISCUSSION

[neverhesitate]

Re: DISCUSSION

[thatsmycue]

[N O]

Are you kiddin' me?!

DECISION

[neverhesitate]

Re: DECISION

[crueltobekind]

The court refuses to force anyone to marry when they don't want to, but will give this new woman a chance to prove she actually has a deeper connection with the husband. If she can prove she knows intimate details about him—things like birthmarks or private information he'd only share with someone like a lover—then we'll consider that proof enough that the child may be his and agree to arranging a stipend for them. She won't be allowed to take an excessive amount since the goal is making sure this new child is raised well, not to unfairly take money away from this man and his current wife.

RESULTS

[neverhesitate]

The woman is able to reveal a few personal details, but not terribly many. It's enough that she's given a (reasonable) stipend, which she leaves with. This seems to satisfy the people involved.

Go to Endgame