But I don't understand whats the issue of the mistrust? I thought the whole idea was to increase the count of our allies and minimize theirs.
Acting against our own allies is not exactly contributing to that plan is it?
When you asked who not to touch, I expected you wanted to know who our allies are.
I'm very comfortable with evil characters, I just think it's not the smartest move to alienate people we try to get on our side. Thats not just in relation to "murdering them in a rampage". Stealing their equipment, for example, could lower their utility later. Putting blame for something on them may get them punished or killed.
I have no idea what you wanted to do with the people but I can't think of many actions that would not be detrimental to their utility later on.
But honestly I simply have no idea right now what is offending you. I apologize for that, but I really don't see it.
I was working under the premise that you asked because you did not want to hurt out allies, who would likely be our crew later if we succeed.
In other words, I thought you asked because you are a smart ratfolk who wants to maximize our chances by focusing hostile actions on our enemies rather than accidently targeting our allies because you don't know them.
Were you instead just asking for close personal friends? We were press-ganged a few days ago, I doubt anybody found lost family-members here or truly bonded with someone. I just went with the explanation that made most sense to me, if that is not what you meant, please clarify, but there's no reason to be angry.
I want to do nothing with those people. My character doesn't want to be told what to do.
Your goal is to make friends here, fine.
Rillum's goal is to increase his feeling of freedom.
I understand that your character was concerned for her and the ship's safely. So I, in character tried to give your character an in game reason for that trust. In response, you became exactly what Rillum feared. Used his honest responses to tell him what he can't do. Not that he is, but you told him no.
He doesn't trust people who try to control him. He jumped through a few hoops to explain his point of view so Nivian could feel better about associating with him. Your first response felt like a noose constraining his future actions.
We started with Nivian distrusting Rillum. We have ended with Rillum really distrusting Nivian.
It seems to me like he's upset because he got tricked into a deal that prevents him from doing what he wanted to do.
He wants to hurt the people who hurt him, and now he can't.
Seems pretty straightforward.
All we really need to do is give him a target.
Rill's probably the least complicated character among us. If we work with him, I think he'll be a handy guy to have around. If we put him in a cage, he's going to lash out. If we give him a direction and turn him loose, we can just walk along behind him and enjoy the carnage.
Arrrgh I was so careful to avoid posting as anyone but Baltzar or Romello, because I know merely posting in a game thread flags you for that game, but arrrrgh I just failed now my alias Zelda Marie Lupescu is tagged into this game... they really need to have an option for players and/or GM to "delete character" from the campaign page LOL
Or is there?
That is on your choice though.
"Please give my character the same consideration. I have spent the last two days trying to get us in a position where your character could trust mine only to end up where mine really distrusts yours."
"He doesn't trust people who try to control him. He jumped through a few hoops to explain his point of view so Nivian could feel better about associating with him. Your first response felt like a noose constraining his future actions.
We started with Nivian distrusting Rillum. We have ended with Rillum really distrusting Nivian."
I already tried to explain that seemingly I misread your intention there. If you WANT to take player misinterpretation and put it into the game as fact, sure, but then don't blame me.
As was said, it's hard to transmit meaning throught written text sometimes, and Rillum has a very unique way of putting things(which I enjoy, but may additionally mask meaning).
So, once more: If you could tell me WHAT you were saying there, I could clarify my response to you, but I still have no idea.
I gathered that you did not ask about who are our allies because you don't care about those except in specific cases like Rhemus and Rosie.
So I understand what you did NOT want to hear, and figured out I did it wrong.
But I can't do it right without clarification on what you were looking for there-
Arrrgh I was so careful to avoid posting as anyone but Baltzar or Romello, because I know merely posting in a game thread flags you for that game, but arrrrgh I just failed now my alias Zelda Marie Lupescu is tagged into this game... they really need to have an option for players and/or GM to "delete character" from the campaign page LOL
Or is there?
Yes. The GM clicks the edit button on the campaign info page and then switches any characters that aren't in the game to Inactive.
It seems to me like he's upset because he got tricked into a deal that prevents him from doing what he wanted to do.
He wants to hurt the people who hurt him, and now he can't.
Seems pretty straightforward.
Tricking him never was the intent, and if he'd stop blaming me for a second and either of you tell me what kind of response he was looking for in regards to our "pets" then I could go and fix this mess.
As for hurting the people who hurt him: That was the officers, and this whole "gather allies" thing is to take revenge on them. I doubt the other press-ganged members of the crew are to blame so there is more to it.
I was merely trying to share information regarding our current state of alliances with him, because I felt prompted to do so. Obviously that was the wrong thing to do, and I will keep information regarding allies to myself.
But to fix things and retcon a post, I would need to understand what he meant there, what classifies as our "pets" that he won't hurt unless they hurt him, if not our allies?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arrrgh I was so careful to avoid posting as anyone but Baltzar or Romello, because I know merely posting in a game thread flags you for that game, but arrrrgh I just failed now my alias Zelda Marie Lupescu is tagged into this game... they really need to have an option for players and/or GM to "delete character" from the campaign page LOL
Or is there?
Should be fixed.
Okay, I wanted to go to bed more than an hour ago, and stayed up in hopes of resolving this.
Rillum, I appreciate the willigness to compromise and would ask that we don't let this hard work to find common grounds and trust for the future go to waste over a misunderstanding.
While reasonably I could have misunderstood in-character as well, that should not be reason enough to make this into a problem. I thought you wanted to know who our allies will be, who our "pets" are that you should not hurt in your own best interest to maximize our chances for a mutiny against the real culprits. That was how I understood it. I was wrong, and have failed to see what the proper response would have been. Please help me, and then lets resolve it as soon as we can and turn it into a proper outcome.
I already tried to explain that seemingly I misread your intention there. If you WANT to take player misinterpretation and put it into the game as fact, sure, but then don't blame me.As was said, it's hard to transmit meaning throught written text sometimes, and Rillum has a very unique way of putting things(which I enjoy, but may additionally mask meaning).
So, once more: If you could tell me WHAT you were saying there, I could clarify my response to you, but I still have no idea.
I gathered that you did not ask about who are our allies because you don't care about those except in specific cases like Rhemus and Rosie.
So I understand what you did NOT want to hear, and figured out I did it wrong.
But I can't do it right without clarification on what you were looking for there-
If you want my character to be happy in this alliance, treat with him honestly. Don't lawyer up in his agreements. Be honest with him about what your character wants. Don't try to manipulate him. Trust he won't be stupid without your oversight. Give him the opportunity for revenge.
I expected one or two names per person. Rosie for Rhemus, Sal for Baltzar, maybe Owlbear. he wants to know who might be a special project to the player characters and the freedom to throw the others into the Kraken's mouth to save my own skin if the need arises. To melt their face if they kick him while he's down. You know, evil!
If we need more later, we recruit.
This is what Rillum wanted, not a statement that more than half the crew is now off-limits.
I'm sorry that I did not communicate Rillum's point of view effectively. I really thought I was being clear. In the future, riff off what Sandman is saying. He gets what I am trying to do with Rillum.
Again, only if you want Rillum cooperating willingly instead of begrudgingly. You run Nivian how you wish, but Rillum will react poorly to someone trying to control him. That is how he sees the last part of the in-game conversation. Nivian not trusting him and trying to control him.
And that, as said, was never the intent. She never meant to control you. Not once.
As said multiple times, I thought you wanted to know all our allies, to maximize our striking power against the officers.
And to know WHO to let burn and focus your anger on because they will stand in our way(all who remain and are not named by us) and be obstacles to our revenge.
As said, I am sorry I misunderstood Rillum there. I think the basic premise is not completely wrong, but too "tactical"/"grand-scale" rather than "inmediate"/"emotion-driven". Apologies.
I will post tomorrow as I'm really deadly tired now. But in that case, I will name Sandara and Syl.
Tricking him never was the intentIt seems to me like he's upset because he got tricked into a deal that prevents him from doing what he wanted to do.
He wants to hurt the people who hurt him, and now he can't.
Seems pretty straightforward.
I don't think its about intent. Its about effect. He feels tricked. Rillum's a very emotion-driven character, so we need to address his issues from that level. Saying "I didn't mean to" probably isn't going to be enough.
Basically, we need to make a deal.
I think its great that you don't understand him. Makes for some really cool character moments.
I think it is all going to work out in the end.
It doesn't help english's not my primary language and the period of highest activity here is around 4 am for me. -_-
it's just, i enjoy some character strife now and then, but when things come across in a way that makes people assume I want to be the only evil character and can't accept other people doing their thing, then I feel bad. I don't want that. Everybody should have fun and If I misunderstand something and then come across as complete asshat then that gets to me.
Sorry. And good night.
I want to repeat, because it keeps seemingly to get lost.
I have no specific plans to kill, steal from, give noogies to anyone at the moment. Rillum merely objected to what seemed like a trick. A way to tell him, "No, no, no. Bad rat can't be trusted to make good decisions. Here is what you are allowed to do."
Again, Rillum does not want to kill half the crew. He will not steal from half the crew.
He may make a decision that you might not personally agree with. I hope that is ok. Several folks have had their characters do things I wouldn't have. That's what a party is. If we agreed on everything, might as well be one person playing 6 characters. It's fun dealing with the unexpected repercussions sometimes.
Again, Rillum doesn't want to kill everyone.
(Just wanted you to know)
Don't worry. I think your head is completely posterior-free.
No one's really saying "don't do stuff"
We're just saying "please consider the wishes of your crew before you do stuff"
If you make a call, most likely all of of us will back you. We just don't want to be caught off guard.
This is all assuming that a group of 4 Chaotic Neutral and 2 Neutral Evil humanoids of all different races essentially enslaved on a pirate vessel against their will can not only agree on anything but can actually learn to work together in order to, well...rule the world?
And that's not even considering each individual's past history of mistrust and abuse...
I know I for one can't wait to see how this turns out.
Not related.
Hey if it makes everyone feel better, I completely misunderstood Rillum's intentions as well, and was pretty confused by his reaction in gameplay until he explained himself here. Nivian and Rillum have different approaches, and I think that is ok.
Rhemus fully supports Nivian's strategy of recruiting as many allies as possible, at this moment in time because we are in the middle of the ocean hundreds of miles away from land. We cannot afford to burn everyone right now. I know Rillum gets that, but not sure that is coming across in this conversation.
And trust that I will until I show differently. That is one reason I tried to open this dialog and get a more concrete idea about what everyone's goals might be. I have tried to only do actions so far that if they go wrong reflect only on Rillum.
I really enjoyed that scene. Good tension.
As long as we keep it from bleeding into the Discussion thread, i think we're on the right track.
Rillum is very fun to play, cathartic really. If he is coming off too chaotic-stupid, that isn't the intent. I really see him as neutral evil - supremely selfish.
Also, and quite possibly most important, Rillum is a skilled and crafty killer (heh, no pun intended), and a survivor.
Again, no relation.
I want to repeat, because it keeps seemingly to get lost.
I have no specific plans to kill, steal from, give noogies to anyone at the moment. Rillum merely objected to what seemed like a trick. A way to tell him, "No, no, no. Bad rat can't be trusted to make good decisions. Here is what you are allowed to do."
Again, Rillum does not want to kill half the crew. He will not steal from half the crew.
Then let me also reiterate, since it also seems to get lost:
I understand that. But what I got from your talk was that you were asking who our allies are, not our love interests.
Those people were not named because Nivian was afraid you would kill half of them and maim the other half.
Those people were named because the way you put it, I expected you were asking information about who will be "pets" as you worded it.
Non-close others that will be on our side if things turn bad.
Really, the choosen wording as "pets" made me think you referred to "any allies we made", rather than "someone special we care about".
I have not named all those people to protect them because I think Rillum is a loose barrel, I have named all these people because I thought, as a PLAYER, that that is the information Rillum was requesting so that he could better focus his actions against our common enemies and end up with improved chances to take revenge against the officers that forced him into this situation.
Rillum always claims he's smart, so I expected him to understand an overarching plan of revenge, rather than purely being instinct-driven.
Real culprits=Officers.
Best way to deal with them? Get as many pets as we can, while hurting their pets.
So knowing who our pets are, and who will be their pets would be useful to someone aiming to get back at the officers.
The fact you limited the duration of the deal until we reach shore seemed to support that. Those people would not be permanently off-limits. Just while we "need them" for our purpose, and until we reach land afterwards, as thanks for their help.
And if they act against you(or even speak against you), as per your suggested deal, you would be free to do as you please anyway.
Your equipment is located at the quartermaster store. You'll have to "earn" it back by bartering, purchasing, or coming to some other arrangement with the quartermaster.
I knew that, but Aerel didn't and he wanted to know if it was possible to get it back as easily as others were making it seem.
I want to repeat, because it keeps seemingly to get lost.
I have no specific plans to kill, steal from, give noogies to anyone at the moment. Rillum merely objected to what seemed like a trick. A way to tell him, "No, no, no. Bad rat can't be trusted to make good decisions. Here is what you are allowed to do."
Again, Rillum does not want to kill half the crew. He will not steal from half the crew.
Then let me also reiterate, since it also seems to get lost:
I understand that. But what I got from your talk was that you were asking who our allies are, not our love interests.
Those people were not named because Nivian was afraid you would kill half of them and maim the other half.
Those people were named because the way you put it, I expected you were asking information about who will be "pets" as you worded it.
Non-close others that will be on our side if things turn bad.Really, the choosen wording as "pets" made me think you referred to "any allies we made", rather than "someone special we care about".
The post you quoted is a good example of the limits of the Internet. This was my attempt to lighten the discussion, hense the use of 'noogies' as an example of my nefarious deeds.
But I think you may have found the root of the misunderstanding - the word 'pet.'
To me pet indicates something special. I have never had more than one or two pets at a time, and expect to have a relationship with a pet for the length of its or my life.
To extend the metaphor, Rillum considers the friendlies on ship as cattle, to be let alone till needed, but eaten if he gets hungry(not-literally, metaphor). He was asking who was your special Pooky-kins, so he wouldn't accidentally serve him for dinner.
Rosie was to serve as an example of specifically what he was looking for. He chose her because he saw that Rhemus had taken special attention to her. Same with Sal for Beltzer. These are the people Rillum won't sacrifice when the need arises; he'll make an effort to protect on your behalf when things are tense. Our other 'friendlies' are a resourse to be used when we need them. It denotes who he will choose to kill in an emergency, when there is no time to form a plan, just time to act.
Is this more helpful?
Aye, I think we found the root of the problem.
I agree that a pet, for us, would be something special if thinking of real pets.(or familiars, for an in-game example).
But if one uses that term for other humans, other sentient beings, at least in my primary language, it's pejoratively.
Basically, saying they are not worth being fully seen as equals, rather being playthings only worthy of attention when you feel like it, possibly liabilities that can't do anything useful by themselves, and are mostly kept around for their cute looks, and quite possibly they are exchangeable(like shorter-lived pets...it's sad if they die but 2 months later there's a new hamster in the cage and everythings fine again).
So, the meaning of the word "pet" changes depending of wether it's applied to an animal, or another person. I apologize, it's hard to get around such language-based constructs of thinking, and since that fit in so nicely with the rest of your post(as explained), I "locked in" on that meaning without considering other possiblities.
As mentioned, I would have intended to give you the "list" of allies later, in private, not during the talk, in public. So if you were to clarify what you meant instead of stomping off angry, that would be awesome to give me a chance to instead name Sandara(saved Carth) and Syl(since she may well be on a list of people you don't like but she's my project and already was a helpful source of information).
Thing is, at the table I only told you that I want to have a whole herd of pets scratching and biting our opposition. You could be angry about that, then when I approach later we could clarify things. While it's definitely a nice touch to have misunderstandings carry over into the game, I think we should end up with a mutually agreeable situation after all that work :)
It also, then, would still allow me to give you the names of prospective allies during our mutiny, so using your OWN judgement you can try and avoid them or deem it necessary to sacrifice any of those knowing it may make things harder later. As right now, in-character, I think you don't know who could possibly be on our side and who won't.
Thing is, at the table I only told you that I want to have a whole herd of pets scratching and biting our opposition. You could be angry about that, then when I approach later we could clarify things. While it's definitely a nice touch to have misunderstandings carry over into the game, I think we should end up with a mutually agreeable situation after all that work :)
It also, then, would still allow me to give you the names of prospective allies during our mutiny, so using your OWN judgement you can try and avoid them or deem it necessary to sacrifice any of those...
Considering Nivian's earlier insistence at Rillum following and agreeing to rules, his reaction to the misunderstanding was reasonable. To his point of view, you were trying to trick him. Stomping off in anger was easily his best possible reaction. I think the in game tension should remain until it is relieved in game. Rillum tried to make Nivian feel better about him, and felt manipulated and betrayed in kind. I pass the ball to you to repair the relationship, likely through Sandman - who seems to 'get' Rillum better.
Until then, it's likely he will view Nivian as a pampered control freak who can't be trusted not to twist honest agreements made in good faith. He certainly will not be honest about his motives with her again. Just like Nivian (used to??) think Rillum is an uncontrolled psycho killer likely to blow up the ship.
Out of character, we understand each other. We're good. In character, there will remain tension, until in character actions/conversations alleviate it.
Good with you?
all good.
But in that case, we retcon it to me already giving out a full list at dinner triggering your response?
Aside, in-character, Nivian also has no idea what triggered your seemingly psycho-episode, jumping from amiably talking to angrily stomping off.(so yeah, the psychokiller blowing the ship up is back on, currently ;)...I'd even say it wasn't so bad before- but also just takes that clarification.)
Rhemus also said he misunderstood you.
So yeah, probably Sandman needs to verify with you what you really meant is what he understood, then come to me and let me know, before I can approach you and try to show you where we misunderstood each other.
Yes. Though I don't think that is a retcon, is it?
That is why this whole thing started.
Sandman during the conversation made several posts clarifying his thoughts about Rillum. He was very insightful. Start by responding to one or more of those.
No, not really...
"Slightly startled, she responds:"It will do...for now. Know then, Rillum, that I intend to have a whole herd of pets on this ship, scratching and biting for us when the time comes...I will tell you later."
At the table during the talk, I just told you I'll have a whole herd of pets(or cattle, as you would call it) on the ship and that I'll let you know later in private.
Because she's basically handing over a list of possible mutineers, and the more people know the worse it is. Not just because someone COULD be a spy(which would be pure paranoia after telling you guys she intends to murder someone) but also because one of us may come in a situation of being questioned(leading to needing a bluff check VS not knowing) or even get tortured(need to make saves vs. nothing to learn).
It's also why I meant it would be easy enough to clarify that you did not mean the herds of cattle but specific pets we care about. But you are right, the tension is quite amusing regardless of the origin, so as long as nobody else is offended by this stretched-out drama, we can ride it out just fine.
Wait, I'm confused... Who is Sal? Do you guys mean Sandara Quinn?
I think I meant Syl. And on review, Nivian has been working with her, not you. Sorry about that. Was posting from, obviously faulty, memory.
Your equipment is located at the quartermaster store. You'll have to "earn" it back by bartering, purchasing, or coming to some other arrangement with the quartermaster.I knew that, but Aerel didn't and he wanted to know if it was possible to get it back as easily as others were making it seem.
You look for your equipment all over the ship. It'c clearly not int he crow's nest, or anywhere near the sails or rigging. You've spent enough time on the main deck to realize it's not up there. That can only mean it's below decks. You know it's not in your own footlocker, and have managed to steal a glance into enough others' foot lockers to know it's not in those, so where could it be. As you continue to search, you manage to overhear a conversation between two crew members and one going on about the quartermaster having his own blade and wanted full price for it just so he could buy it back. The nerve of the quartermaster. Still, what choice did he have.
@Aerel - it's 60 ft. of DC10 climb checks, but with your +6 modifier, the worst that you can do is make no progress on a move check, so since you technically can't "fall" and it's not a race, don't worry about rolling the check, UNLESS there are penalties.
@Aerel - it's 60 ft. of DC10 climb checks, but with your +6 modifier, the worst that you can do is make no progress on a move check, so since you technically can't "fall" and it's not a race, don't worry about rolling the check, UNLESS there are penalties.
Right, I forgot about failing by 5 or more. I also didn't write that I was working diligently and was an additional +4 on the check. That's why that +4 is in the rolls.
I'm beginning to really enjoy the Rillum/Nivian discussions. I love that it feels like an actual cultural barrier where neither can really relate to each other. I've dealt with that in real life. Its very interesting.
Ditto
The thing is that we are heading for a dead-end. I think a Mediator will be needed in the future. Maybe someone except Sandman who can work with Rillum(you two have a history, so if Rillum is seen as a loose gun by Nivian, any "mediation" by Sandman will be suspicious, too).
We will need to mend the rift before we get a chance to separate e.g. if we end up with a ship. I'm already downplaying the threat I'm feeling from Rillum on a personal level.
That part of "Then tell of rules Rillum will follow and punishments he will accept when his is bad, naughty. I will say yes and you will feel safe near me." actually makes her afraid of Rillum to an extent. On a plus side for Rillum, Nivian does not care about rules any more, since she expects key members to be unable to follow them anyway. She had hoped to find a compromise, but will just always watch her back, now, and look out for Sandara and Syl.
I am curious that knowing his previous reactions you again insisted he was going to have to agree on rules, and even mentioned punishments. This was an attempt to smooth thing over?
Nevermind. Nivian, you don't seem to be having fun with this, just tell me what you need Rillum to do in gameplay so your character can get past this. I'll tone him way down.
This is why we have discussion threads.
Its up to both of you to take a step back and realize that the game is more important that either of your characters' own personalities. These are the moments when you, the player, decide that your character needs to have some sort of experience or revelation that changed their mind. Those don't have to feel like some kind of forced change. If you approach them from the right mindset, they can be incredibly rewarding roleplay experiences. It gives your character an arc that you didn't expect.
Rillum sounds like he just made the offer to be the one to do that (Good job, btw).
There's a lot of ways we can approach this. Let's talk about them over here and implement them over there when we come up with a plan.
I just need some instructions. Nothing I have attempted on my own has worked.
I don't think this is a player issue. We can figure out a plan here.
If both of you feel your characters minds are too hard-wired to change on their own, remember that Sandman's a Medicine Man. We could do some kind of Spirit Quest or Dreamwalk scene that turns your character's brain inside out. Could be a fun way of handling it.
Sounds good. I joked about it earlier, but we can just make him the coven's familiar. Do a voodoo zombie thing.
Aright, here's how we'll do it. You have Rillum come to Sandman complaining about how he doesn't understand Nivian, or something like that, and Sandman will suggest a vision quest.
Then we'll feed Rillum some super cool drugs and Sandman will talk him down into his own subconscious.
Then you can entertain us all with Rillum's awesome hallucinations and the things he learns that help him adapt to this new situation.
Sound good?
No, I need the ideas and his final new personality to come from Nivian or I really feel they won't work. It'll just become something else. It's a good place to start, but I need the final result from her before I take it to gameplay. Her character already said your character is now tarred by the same brush as mine.
That's why things must change. It's effecting more than just her and my character now.
We can have her go on the dream quest with you? You can come out best buds.
Her character already said your character is now tarred by the same brush as mine.
That's why things must change. It's effecting more than just her and my character now.
Shrug. I don't see it being an issue.
I am curious that knowing his previous reactions you again insisted he was going to have to agree on rules, and even mentioned punishments. This was an attempt to smooth thing over?
Interesting dicussion, but I would like to state that she did not do these things.
Read it again, she never insisted he would have to agree on rules
The only part referring to that was the middle section of:
"I have never been in much of a position to give permissions to others, nor am I willing to endure partnership with people who lack sensible judgement of their own. Nothing good comes of that. The only thing I cherish about rules is that it establishes a baseline that everybody agrees to. Many people working together will have many different moral values, goals. Agreeing on a rule together means one less thing to worry about, as long as people stay true to their agreement regarding the rule. And if they fail to do so, there's a way for the others to punish them without having to argue about how severe the punishment should be. It is not about control or manipulation, not at all. It's about having one less thing on my mind to worry about, so I have more freedom to focus on more important stuff without having to watch my back"
where she even points out she does not give permissions to others and expects them to be able to judge their own actions.
Then she proceeds to explain WHY she prefers rules, and that liking rules is not about control or manipulation for her.
In that whole part, she never suggests that Rillum reconsider following rules, or insisted on ANYTHING being done. All she did was try and help Rillum understand HER, explaining from her side, because he seemed to completely misunderstand why she wanted rules(control, permissions, manipulate).
The mentioned fixed punishment was meant as a reminder for the attempt of sandman's mediation yesterday, with "what happens if the agreement is broken", and I even used a keyword of having "more freedom" to focus on important things. But all in all, it was only meant as an paragraph for Rillum to learn about Nivians reasons, so that he would not continue misunderstanding WHY she wants rules.
Nowhere did she try to push rules on him there.
And I am having fun with this, no worries here. Just saying before we get to a shore in our shiny new boat, we should have had some key experiences to form trust. Possibly by some other mediator, which, honestly, was also just another suggestion to get someone else involved with both our characters. If one of the other 3 wanted to take part, they could both have some bonding happen and help us reach a compromise in the end.