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



“Your Grace, I’m afraid to tell you that Major (MC) was killed in a horrible misunderstanding.”


“Should I let Major Cazarosta know that he is now the field commander of the regiment?”

That would be very convenient for the Cazarostas, actually…


You really think Ellie will take no prisoner ? :-):thinking:


I don’t think she won’t take prisoners. To be fair, the MC’s squadron could very well kill her and her entire guard if she did end up shooting the MC.

I’m just saying if Katarina didn’t show up, she would have likely shot the MC for being an “impostor”


Is divorce a thing in Tierra? I could probably see it if one spouse was responsible for a deathborn or convicted of sedition or some such, but the possibility exists that you can be stuck in a marriage with a person you have grown to loathe. I don’t think Katarina would just snap and murder the MC over dinner, but I wouldn’t be surprised if she had simmering plot or ploy in the works.

Part of my fear stems from how idealistic they both are, in their very different ways. How would Kat interpret it if, when it comes time for budget cuts, you’re able to toss the RTI into the fire instead of the RTA and completely hamstring the former? Would she just be upset, or plot your disgrace/demise and try and restore RTI? Caz and Kat worry me because I think one wrong or serious step against their interests or beliefs means they jump straight to scorched earth. They’re easily two of the most ruthless people in the series (Not counting the MC), with only Lefebrve and Khorobirit in close competition.

She did ask us one more time to say who we were before Katarina came to the head of the column. I would hope that screaming that we were a diplomatic escort and producing Cassius as proof/human shield would at least get us a stay of summary execution.


You wouldn’t need a divorce when the punishment for giving birth to a deathborn is execution.


I don’t recall if it’s a thing in Tierra, but I would be very surprised if she plans to murder anyone who hasn’t actively earned her enmity or who is otherwise a pretty extreme scenario - “unhappy marriage” is one thing, but this is going way past that.

There are just too many other ways to deal with something like that.

“You’re an idiot.”

If Katarina <20:
-%50 Katarina.

otherwise set Katarina 10.

At worst. I can imagine that there are things that she’d kill the PC over. But jumping straight into scorched earth? Even thinks she would describe as foolish to the point of insanity, like trying to get Lord Cassius killed (as one might uncharitably describe certain decisions) don’t go into “Katarina permanently hates you.”

I guess what I’m trying to say is that I just can’t get my head around “Katarina is ruthless, so she’s going to jump to the most extreme action possible without hesitation or trying to solve it some other way.”


Agreed. (She’s really just misunderstood, guys, come on now.:stuck_out_tongue::joy:)

Fair point. “Untrustworthiness” is the wrong word. “Capability” perhaps? Or “Unpredictability”? Anyway, I just hope that she realizes my MC is a very capable ally indeed if pursued, and more trouble than he should be for a lowly baron if crossed (Kind of like a certain deathborn, in his status that is).

Why did this choice change for you?


Yours is as well very interesting. I would agree, biggest difference the ruthless and mercy stat. Funny just how much that one slider (both of them really) completely and utterly defines your character when it comes down to it.

Fair. My MC has had only “good” experiences with them and is avidly waiting to meet the patriarch. I do wonder, as we have potential to become very close to Cunaris, if will be able to form a similar bond with Calvin possibly. And if so, what conflicts of interest would that put us in. Interesting.

All true. (And just to make clear, she scares the hell out of me… but my MC does as well. Yes, she may have great resources and all, but my MC is on the rise and we shall see where he lands. Hopefully he lands within the Cazarosta family, furthering the scariness of that family.)

Yeah. Here, it is really the opposite for me because of the post limit.

It could. It could also be an inconvenience if the MC has only acted as a capable friend to Caz up until that point. Depends on the playthrough.

They certainly are.


Between her and Caz it’s more about the capacity to do so. You may earn the enmity of a variety of people, Renard for instance, yet none of them include the physical threat to an MC’s safety like Caz and Kat, except if you either kill Aleksandra, then Khorobirit’s wrath is another beast altogether. I don’t think that they are both “Murder is the best solution” individuals, neither are that stupid or brutish. However, I do think that they are, “Murder can be a pretty good solution”, individuals. I don’t understand why, two individuals, one of whom is a war criminal and the other is a spy/assassin, are believed to be able to easily revert to completely law-abiding and upstanding individuals in peacetime. Caz’s Patreon article even acknowledges that he’s a security risk given his ambitions and absolute lack of ability to advance, while Kat is linked to an “accident” that is almost certainly a murder but is being buried.

There is a large stretch between disliking someone and conspiring to kill them for ordinary people. I’d argue that most ordinary people are also not OK with plotting the assassination of a woman and child, or burning down dozens of villages full of innocent civilians. The Cazarostas are NOT ordinary people that possess basic morals and ethics and so I do not give them the same benefit of the doubt I may give someone else. If they hate someone enough, or they are enough of an inconvenience, I do not doubt they would take the opportunity to remove such an individual should the opportunity present itself.

Mainly because I realized that, between the annuity, half pay, and income from the estate, I should be able to break even on at least most MCs debt payments. At least, as long as the rest of the MC’s family remains either dead or nonexistent. The only playthrough I had 100% planned to spend at the estate was a Wulframite run through where I got my yearly interest payments down to ~310. Subtracting the annuity halves it, so as long as a Wulfram barony gets at least than 200 crowns a year, I’m turning at least a tiny profit before even making any improvements or spending my ~5500 crowns to further decrease my debt and interest payments.

Yep. Funnily enough it seems your character’s ruthlessness made them more accepting and open to characters that my merciful one would go on to condemn and work against. Your MC’s strongest allies are also mine’s biggest enemies, it is interesting how variable the MC’s relationship with the Cazarostas can be.

I doubt Cunaris is eager to invite the Earl to any dinner parties. Using the massive amount of money owed to you in order to strong-arm Cunaris to accept your adoptive deathborn son into his regiment probably cost more than a few relationship points. I wouldn’t be surprised if Cunaris and/or Earl Cazarosta are important targets to sway to the Royal or Wulframite side if we play politics.

Honestly, I think most players are supposed to be at least a little… unnerved by Cazarosta and Katarina. The latter may be intriguing for those interested in a more Femme Fatale character, but she is so ruthless that it has even Lefebrve pause and recoil from her in certain circumstances. The former has been pretty discussed to death, but the sociopath that views life as a meat grinder for the “unworthy” should be pretty off-putting for readers. The only time I’m supportive of them is when I force myself to role play as either the Dirty Scoundrel or Littlefinger-lite, and that’s mainly to manipulate or use them later on.


Caz is an outright sociopath. I would not be surprised if his ability to go from “dislike” to “murderous” remains what it’s been so far.

A spy/assassin? There’s a very wide gap between “perfectly law abiding and not likely to do anything more than grumble” and “has plans to kill a husband who steps out of line” that I don’t see Katarina leaping over based on her behavior so far.

An accident where even according to the guy in question, he can establish “motive” and “means”. Not actual “proof of involvement”.

Sure, I’d believe that if the Dragoon Officer well and truly alienated Katarina that she would be willing to consider killing him. But that to me suggests something like “if you systematically set out to make her life miserable or assault her friends.”

But I think most likely outcomes are more likely to crush his ambitions than his neck, and even that only if doing so suits her ends - I would expect if you act in ways she finds positives that it might be possible to build up a coolly civil relationship in Lords, if you put any effort into it.

“I don’t assume they have any moral scruples about this at all” based on what they were willing to do win the war seems…uncharitable. Especially for Katarina, given that we know Caius finds empathy alien.

I’m all for a certain degree of caution around her. I just don’t understand why that translates to such total mistrust.


Well… i decided to replay and actually got a scene where Katarina apologised for being rude to me, even when i chose to forgive her, she insisted on apologise again …
And when i chose to tell lord cassius he should remain behind the line for the lady’s sake , Katarina praise my wits but would want me not to use her as an excuse next time… for me, she is nothing but blunt and honest :wink:


See, the first part is because she was ‘insisted’ to apologise by a certain deathborn. The second part, which has her acknowledging the MC using his wit/charisma to get Cassius to fall back without seemingly upsetting him, though still putting the MC (sorta) in his place as to not use her as…I can think the right words, but let’s say as the basis of his argument, is her being her normal self.


Well… yes i agree of couse ! :-):grin:
So this actually shown that Katarina won’t hide her grudge waiting for a chance to “revenge” … she would utterly voice out any of her displeasure or her acknowledgement to us :wink:


Agreement regarding Caz, but I’m impacted by the way that Katarina reacts to the death of Anna, Aleksandra, or both. There is no remorse or repression of emotions like there is with Lefebrve, she is almost giddy with excitement. Yes you may be destroying House Khorobirit’s future, but she’s openly rejoicing at the death of a woman and small child.

Yes, “proof of involvement” may be sketchy, but then why even include the letter in her Patreon article if there is absolutely no connection to her. Innocent until proven guilty is still a thing, but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and murders other ducks without remorse, then well… the level of confidence I have in her innocence shrinks.

But the thing is you can completely make an enemy out of her and/or alienate her, without having an intense personal vendetta against her. Don’t pursue the partisans and then point out you don’t like running into ambushes. You don’t meet her at K, because why would you ever think you would constantly cross paths with her again? Ride with your men because you want to make sure they’re doing ok Post-1K. Convince Cassius to go back due to her concern, but head North because you fear running out of supplies in the middle of nowhere in an occupied enemy country. Though, admittedly there is little to no enemy presence on her suggestion, you choose discretion is not necessarily the best option. Then disagree with Welles at the dinner, over ideology or practicality. Boom, she ends up hating your guts by the end dock scene with Caz. You do disagree with her constantly, but two times were over tactical decisions that she has far less experience making, and the third was so controversial a topic that falling on her side of it can torpedo your reputation.

I do agree that her first plan of action will indeed be to try and stifle the MC and crush his ambitions, but what if she fails? What if the MC continues to rise in influence and power, sidelines Caz because of his issues we’ve discussed, and doesn’t take kindly to the woman who has tried to destroy his career/reputation? I don’t have faith that she will keep at the same plan if her efforts to destroy us fail. What’s the last thing she did when she was up against a foe that seemed impervious to traditional attacks? Caz may not know what empathy is, but Kat seems to just disregard it whenever she needs to.

Mmm, they may have done everything that they could have to win the war, but that doesn’t mean that they have morals. Depopulating Antar from Octobirit southwards would also win Tierra the war, does that mean that the individuals who execute such a plan inherently have morals and/or scruples?

My personal philosophy is that times of stress and great difficulty don’t change who a person is, but reveals who they really are. Caz and Kat have both revealed to us the kind of person they really are, and I reserve the right to mistrust a war criminal and a murderer who both display absolutely no remorse for their crimes.


I’m currently rereading SoI and no wonder Cunaris hates the war criminal type MCs; they literally swear to uphold the king’s law and be a model to be followed only to go against those words.

On the other hand, one can also use this passage as a reason to do the SM… “to follow, without compunction, the orders of HM the King.”

“I was following orders” was never abused by anyone, right?


Some of this is fairly brief, some of it may seem to be ignoring a particular point, but I’m trying not to write an overly long winded reply:

There is a connection. She had the means and motive according to a guy who may or may not be honest or accurate.

It’s hardly out of character for Cataphrak to post something misleading and that may be technically true, and I think speculation on if Lady Katarina may have killed her mom started on the forum before the article came up based on people’s opinions of her…

Yes, after you have time and time again made it clear that you have no interest in a friendly relationship. I’m not saying that any of the choices you name are invalid as such, but I’m not sure anyone else (Elson, say) would react well to the PC by the end of “I disagreed with them on every occasion we met.”

As I understand how Cataphrak wrote relationships as far as ups and downs, the assumption is that people who the PC isn’t basically unfriendly if not outright hostile to are going to be mixed positives and negatives, not “nearly all negative”.

So because someone in an extreme situation where they might think extreme and unusual measures are called for does X, therefore they are completely willing to do X on other occasions?

That seems pretty harsh to me. I’m pretty sure most people would consider “the fate of my country” a different situation as far as how far they’d go than “a political opponent is successful”.

Well, most strongly patriotic people, at least.


Besides I’m sure Lady Katarina was perfectly distraught when her mother was found dead of a suicide after falling down the rock.


“So many vows. They make you swear and swear. Defend the King, obey the King, obey your father, protect the innocent, defend the weak. But what if your father despises the King? What if the King massacres the innocent? It’s too much. No matter what you do, you’re forsaking one vow or another.”
-Jaime Lannister


No worries, if we always replied point for point, we’d each end up with a lengthy research paper by the end of the week.

True, the Intendant in question could very well have ulterior motives and just be attempting to undermine House Cazarosta. I also wouldn’t be surprised if it was just Cata tossing it out there just for suspicion’s sake. Like most policemen, though the comparison is a bit wonky, I would try to at least give the benefit of the doubt. The report seemed to me more of a detective that can feel a major break in the case is just outside of his grasp, but it’s being killed/stymied by his bosses.

Again, fair that most characters wouldn’t want or have a friendly relationship with an MC that disagrees with them multiple times (You can agree with her on Cassius remaining behind for instance). The difference is that when an MC takes a very popular position and ignores advice from a source that, while very skilled in her own fields, knows very little of the science of war, Katarina takes it as a personal affront, though some part of her reactions may be a result of having numbers represent complex human relationships, but that’s more of a game limitation than anything else.

I’d compare it to getting medical advice from someone with a PHD in Mathematics when you yourself are an EMT. The PHD may be very intelligent, even more than yourself, but they likely lack a lot more applicable knowledge when it comes to the situation at hand. They give you advice that, while maybe not incorrect, does not actually solve the problem, and you treat it as such and act in a different manner. Now the bad relationship that occurs as a result, is the EMT at fault for ignoring bad or misguided advice, or is it the PHD for giving advice unprompted on a situation they are unfamiliar with? I don’t see why an expert in a given field should bend over to accommodate the feelings of an amateur that keeps disagreeing with them.

Essentially, yes. Let’s say someone says that there is never a situation you should harm someone else, no matter the circumstances. Fast forward to an attempted home invasion where said individual panics and subdues the intruder using force. They may continue to preach pacifist philosophies, but their character is still that of one who is OK with violence when circumstances may demand it. Yet, once you do it one time, it becomes easier to do it the next and so on and so on. If something is able to become rationalized as a successful thing in a person’s mind, such as assassination, the stakes to utilize it will inevitably lower over time. We killed Princess Anna because she and Khorobirit were a threat to Tierra. At what point does Tierra begin to jump to assassinations, murder, and other war crimes to defend itself and justifies it by saying all the victims were “threats to Tierra”?

It’s also the reason that I am very unforgiving towards a lot of NFL players that get into trouble with the law. A good amount of the time they were intoxicated and say, “That wasn’t really who I am”. Yes, it was. You may not always act according to your true character, but should you be inebriated, panicking, or acting on adrenaline, and attack someone, that’s who you really are as a person. I’d say the choice with Strellyk and Aleksandra are two such moments in GoI.

That would be a good comparison if the political opponent was more along the lines of “I think tariffs on Callindrian steel imports should be a bit lower to spark some economic growth”. The picture of politics that seem to await us in LoI is far from sedate. A wildly successful political opponent in LoI will not just be a momentary annoyance, they could completely alter the RTA for the foreseeable future and probably impact Tierran politics for at least a few generations. At what point does dealing with that political opponent morph from “Minimize his impact”, to “Remove him from the board entirely” with such stakes in play? If everything was hunky dory in Tierra I wouldn’t worry as much about extremely ruthless and amoral enemies, but it isn’t and I do.


As soon as you have the ability to.


New head-canon: name MC’s sword “Oathkeeper”