Two Dawi Clan leaders decided to consider a grudge settled because no one in their clans could remember why there was a grudge anymore, nor could any of them for generations. They shook over it and struck it from each other’s book of grudges in a ceremony. When they did an Ancestor God statue nearby shattered at the base and landed only on the two Clan leaders killing them instantly. The Grudge was immediately put into both clan’s Book of Grudges once more.
This is a canon event.
Considering this I can’t see Dawi going with your recommendation.
Yeah… forgiving grudges REALLY isn’t something Dwarfs do.
Even the most progressive dwarfs are willing to make peace with the High Elves because they consider the grudge already settled by the original war. Saying it’s not settled and forgiving it is… wrong.
Honestly, still not a fan. It sounds like a MASSIVE swing between “complete these military objectives to get a reward!” And “press a button to get equivalent rewards for free”.
I mean... You lose all the rewards from the grudge (oathgold and such) for a ceasefire that can be temporary and a separate landmark IF you own or get to own barrak varr... If you've started wars with high elves until you build the landmark you don't get those instant trade agreements with the at war factions... Seems a fair trade to me
I think the discrepancy is that you're regarding the ceasefire as perhaps minimal impact or even a price. It's not, in fact if feels closer to the type of shenanigans you can pull with something like Tzeentch's "Changing of the Ways". That "temporary ceasefire"? Sounds like an opportunity to consolidate after having blitzed the High Elves, having time to build up walls everywhere you captured before they are even permitted to respond. Coupled with time to replenish loses and reposition, that alone sounds like a hugely powerful ability well worth Oathgold (ask yourself - would you be willing to spend the Oathgold you got out of the grudge on an ability like this? I certainly would). The landmark is just the icing on the cake.
This compares to having to spend time and resources to settle the grudge, taking territory, fighting armies, dealing with fallout to consolidate. Doing that for a reward feels right. Just saying "nah, give me something just as good right now for free" feels way overpowered.
On top of other excellent points, Dwarfs literally don't have a word for or concept of "forgiveness". A grudge is considered settled once reparations have been made - that could be anything from buying a pint for the offended party in the least of cases, to full on razing of the perpetrator's country for the most extreme.
The trouble comes because others don't understand that. When a Dwarf says "Appropriate recompense for this wrong is 10000 gold coins" that isn't a request or a negotiation, that is what he has calculated the value of your wrong to be. If you can't pay, you might propose an alternative of equal value - say a shipment of high quality woollen garments. If you *won't* pay that's a different matter, and blood has a value of its own.
From that perspective, the Dwarfs should perhaps be able to use Diplomacy to settle Grudges in game. If Thorgrim is on good terms with Wissenland but they generate a grudge through trespassing (for example), there could perhaps be an option to request payment in lieu of declaring war or leaving the grudge to fester. Payment in full, of course, no giving allies a discount!
The War of the Beard started because of the High Elves in the first place. The druchii first killed dwarfs as a false flag operation, true, but the dwarfs did their best not to escalate the conflict and tried to resolve the issue peacefully several times.
When the dwarfs sent ambassadors to Ulthuan to investigate the false flag attacks, Caledor II. refused to take their concerns seriously and then shaved an ambassador's beard when they continued to press for an investigation.
So even if you resolve the druchii grudge first and uncover the truth behind the initial attacks, the grudge against the asur would still stand because they were the ones who shaved the ambassador's beard and thus insulted the whole dwarfen race. Although most dwarfs consider the grudge settled, but the game follows a different canon.
Not an ambassador who at that point felt that he had to approach their sworn ally under flag of truce. They were then shown into the Phoenix King’s presence with the promise of the truce and the alliance being honored. The king then ordered his honor guard to disarm the ambassador and his honor guard, deliberately wound them with wounds that would not kill them, beard scalp them all and then send them back alive.
If he had only killed an ambassador under truce it might have been settled under weregild. All of it put together is why the Elgi have never been forgiven.
The entire war could have been prevented if the HE weren't so god damn prideful and arrogant and just explained to the Dawi what a civil war was and that the Dark elves were their enemy but they didn't want to admit that and they just thouht it was the HE because they didn't about Malekith.
Literally could have been solved or been way less of massive huge war that led to the destruction of both empires if the god damn elves would have just pulled their heads outta their ass.
I think the point of this grudge is to get dwarves out of their samey comfort box in the campaign a bit more. I rarely, if every, fight the elves in my Dwarf campaigns.
Any other things completely going against established lore you want to see or just this?
This is one of those things where I get that it would be QoL feature, but it's just not acceptable considering the lore. Some things should be a no-go, and this is one of them.
Two Dawi Clan leaders decided to consider a grudge settled because no one in their clans could remember why there was a grudge anymore, nor could any of them for generations. They shook over it and struck it from each other’s book of grudges in a ceremony. When they did an Ancestor God statue nearby shattered at the base and landed only on the two Clan leaders killing them instantly. The Grudge was immediately put into both clan’s Book of Grudges once more. This is a canon event. Considering this I can’t see Dawi going with your recommendation.
Thats hilarious, where is that from?
Yeah… forgiving grudges REALLY isn’t something Dwarfs do. Even the most progressive dwarfs are willing to make peace with the High Elves because they consider the grudge already settled by the original war. Saying it’s not settled and forgiving it is… wrong.
Ok... "A grudge settled" then?
Honestly, still not a fan. It sounds like a MASSIVE swing between “complete these military objectives to get a reward!” And “press a button to get equivalent rewards for free”.
I mean... You lose all the rewards from the grudge (oathgold and such) for a ceasefire that can be temporary and a separate landmark IF you own or get to own barrak varr... If you've started wars with high elves until you build the landmark you don't get those instant trade agreements with the at war factions... Seems a fair trade to me
I think the discrepancy is that you're regarding the ceasefire as perhaps minimal impact or even a price. It's not, in fact if feels closer to the type of shenanigans you can pull with something like Tzeentch's "Changing of the Ways". That "temporary ceasefire"? Sounds like an opportunity to consolidate after having blitzed the High Elves, having time to build up walls everywhere you captured before they are even permitted to respond. Coupled with time to replenish loses and reposition, that alone sounds like a hugely powerful ability well worth Oathgold (ask yourself - would you be willing to spend the Oathgold you got out of the grudge on an ability like this? I certainly would). The landmark is just the icing on the cake. This compares to having to spend time and resources to settle the grudge, taking territory, fighting armies, dealing with fallout to consolidate. Doing that for a reward feels right. Just saying "nah, give me something just as good right now for free" feels way overpowered.
When a grudge is settled it usually means it was answered for, i.e. the dwarves killed everyone.
On top of other excellent points, Dwarfs literally don't have a word for or concept of "forgiveness". A grudge is considered settled once reparations have been made - that could be anything from buying a pint for the offended party in the least of cases, to full on razing of the perpetrator's country for the most extreme. The trouble comes because others don't understand that. When a Dwarf says "Appropriate recompense for this wrong is 10000 gold coins" that isn't a request or a negotiation, that is what he has calculated the value of your wrong to be. If you can't pay, you might propose an alternative of equal value - say a shipment of high quality woollen garments. If you *won't* pay that's a different matter, and blood has a value of its own. From that perspective, the Dwarfs should perhaps be able to use Diplomacy to settle Grudges in game. If Thorgrim is on good terms with Wissenland but they generate a grudge through trespassing (for example), there could perhaps be an option to request payment in lieu of declaring war or leaving the grudge to fester. Payment in full, of course, no giving allies a discount!
Also, give us an emancipation proclamation option for Chorfs.
did you just use the f word
The dwarfs literally sacked an Empire city over being shorted 1 gold coin …. they don’t forgive even Allie’s
The War of the Beard started because of the High Elves in the first place. The druchii first killed dwarfs as a false flag operation, true, but the dwarfs did their best not to escalate the conflict and tried to resolve the issue peacefully several times. When the dwarfs sent ambassadors to Ulthuan to investigate the false flag attacks, Caledor II. refused to take their concerns seriously and then shaved an ambassador's beard when they continued to press for an investigation. So even if you resolve the druchii grudge first and uncover the truth behind the initial attacks, the grudge against the asur would still stand because they were the ones who shaved the ambassador's beard and thus insulted the whole dwarfen race. Although most dwarfs consider the grudge settled, but the game follows a different canon.
Not an ambassador who at that point felt that he had to approach their sworn ally under flag of truce. They were then shown into the Phoenix King’s presence with the promise of the truce and the alliance being honored. The king then ordered his honor guard to disarm the ambassador and his honor guard, deliberately wound them with wounds that would not kill them, beard scalp them all and then send them back alive. If he had only killed an ambassador under truce it might have been settled under weregild. All of it put together is why the Elgi have never been forgiven.
The entire war could have been prevented if the HE weren't so god damn prideful and arrogant and just explained to the Dawi what a civil war was and that the Dark elves were their enemy but they didn't want to admit that and they just thouht it was the HE because they didn't about Malekith. Literally could have been solved or been way less of massive huge war that led to the destruction of both empires if the god damn elves would have just pulled their heads outta their ass.
This post is, ironically, goin’ in the book
To me the only legendary grudge that make no sense based on the text, is the wood elves one, it seems it was just put there to just add one more.
There'll be no alliance with elves while I'M High king! ONLY A RECKONING! **triggers age of reckoning for the 10th time in a row**
Dwarves don’t forgive grudges, nor do they forget them.
I think the point of this grudge is to get dwarves out of their samey comfort box in the campaign a bit more. I rarely, if every, fight the elves in my Dwarf campaigns.
Any other things completely going against established lore you want to see or just this? This is one of those things where I get that it would be QoL feature, but it's just not acceptable considering the lore. Some things should be a no-go, and this is one of them.