The Dragoon Saga (Sabres of Infinity, Guns of Infinity, Lords of Infinity) - General Discussion



I guess the only question I want to ask, more in the sense of “You mentioned this earlier, so…”

We’re getting closer to finding out just how much fecal matter is going to hit the rotary impeller over the “Where has all the bane gone?”, aren’t we?

Whether or not anyone in Tierra realizes this.


Quite possibly, but I’ve thrown out enough herrings (red or otherwise).


Yeah. Just wanted to make sure you as a writer weren’t moving away from going

on both the Dragoon Officer and the userbase.

I don’t know if you’re a Weird Al fan, but the song title fits that level of “Wait, WHAT?!” at any rate.


I wonder if we marry Katarina, then will our child be baneless, perhaps? If so, then what an odd set of circumstances revolving around Cazarosta’s mother as well as Kat.


@Atlas @Rapid
Thank you both for your replies: they were educational and thought-provoking; it’s honestly wonderful to have stimulating debate occur so peacefully and diplomatically.


It doesn’t help that the belief that bane grants them leadership capability is tied to their religion.


Of course, that was (and remains, to some extent) a core feature of whiteness too. Organised religion often bends to reinforce the will of the powerful, especially when religion itself is an institution that benefits from the status-quo.


So I was wondering, have banks started investing money in industry yet? I would love to be a partner in an asset management arm in a bank and rake money in. Especially if it is other people’s money.

In other words, I want to be JP Morgan.


Do the Majority of baneless legitimately believe that Banebloods are superior to them at leadership? For that matter does Caius believe that too?


Same Bro.


Sort of? At this point, noble houses are still seen as the “safe” bet, especially since “industry” isn’t really the sort of rapid-growth field it was during our industrial revolution. That might change eventually, but not quite yet.

The Baneless do, Cazarosta just sees baneblood as another way for the Saints to shift gears, so to speak. People are baneblood or baneless for a reason.


It’s rather interesting that the most favorable response to “I go with Lewes’s plan.” from your men in Guns is “He could be good, he could be bad, we don’t know.” and the response to Cazarosta’s plan in Sabres is “I suppose if Captain Elson thinks this is a good plan, fine, but I don’t exactly trust deathborn.”

That’s some pretty deep rooted assumptions on who can lead and who can’t.


It’s a bit of an absurd question. It’s certainly not the situation we face in the secret mission. Success doesn’t hinge on Lady Aleksandra’s murder. Khorobirit loses, with or without us. Nations rise and fall, with or without us.

I’m not accepting or rejecting anything. Killing a child is evil, and no sane person can refute that. It may be that you can justify the act to yourself through some ruthless calculus of what terrible events might occur if you don’t go through with it, and there are plenty of people who would agree with you. Royal Intelligence and Cazarosta among them. But don’t expect everyone to line up to shake your hand and pat you on the back because you shot a girl in the neck. A lot of people won’t be okay with it, and that’s their right. “The ends justify the means” isn’t an objective truth readily accepted by everyone.

We all need to justify the things we do if we want to be able to live with ourselves. “Whatever I’m able to take for myself, I deserve” sounds like your character’s justification. “Animals aren’t people, really” is how I justified the bacon sandwich I just ate. It’s the way we maintain internal consistency, which allows us to function without suffering a nervous breakdown.

No judgement here. Just sayin’.


I think there is more gray area here than you are allowing. A child of a certain age is able to pick up a weapon and try to kill you. I would argue any death inflicted in self-defense, no matter how young the assailant, is justified.

Even by modern military standards I think there is a case to be made that Aleksandra was acting as an enemy commander.

Was she really? Probably not, but you might still get off on that assertion.


To add to what Sneaks said on justifications, I think the core of it (as related to dealing with the decisions the PC has made) - let’s take something that doesn’t involve kids or even (as it unfolds) actual physical violence:

Blaylock thinks that insulting the Dragoons is worth a duel. Some might agree, some might disagree, but we all have to decide whether or not doing so is - in absence of a better way to describe it - something we think produces desirable consequences, and determine what “desirable consequences” even are, based on something.

Maybe it’s justified because of pride. Maybe it’s not justified because its just words. Just to name two things.

“The ends are all that matter.” is a justification (or at least, an attempt at one) as much as “Free will is an illusion, we are merely tools to act as we are bid by the Saints.” or “It does more good to more people than it does harm.” or “It amused me.”


There is something to be said for the time allowed in a decision with moral implications. Societally we give more weight to intentions in situations that require hasty decisions than in situations where you have time to deliberate and gather facts. The dueling call certainly falls into the second category.



I’m trying not to get into what I think is justified in regards to the duel in particular more than I have to, to be honest.

I just picked it because I have an easier time writing arguments for either side without feeling one is overwhelmingly better than the other.


“Good” and “Evil” do not exist.


Good and evil definitely exist. It’s just rare to find someone or something that can be objectively classified as such.


“Good” and “Evil” only exist as a combination of multiple chemical reactions and electrical impulses within the brain. They only exist as thought. That is what they objectively are. An opinion. One persons “Good” is another persons “Evil”.