You've been asked to weigh in on a matter in an elven court

The archmage raises good salient points, particularly the fact that the human's brain will literally fill up after a century, and they'll start to forget things. To say nothing of the potential for going insane.

Furthermore, this couple loves each other RIGHT NOW. This human says she will love her husband forever RIGHT NOW.

Human marriages generally last 2-5 years, on average. And that's with their normal short lifespans. Do you really expect me to believe this woman won't get tired of her husband after a few unchanging *decades*?

Elves simply have a different mindset then humans. They can handle centuries long marriages, and centuries of life, simply because when they get bored or sick of something they can fuck off for decades and look at flowers or some shit.

Giving a human mortal a multiple century lifespan is a recipe for disaster. They'll burn themselves out in one, won't be able to understand why their husband has "gotten bored of her" when really he's just on a ten year trip taking a walk through fuckoffistan, and generally be a cling possessive pyscho. Assuming she doesn't fuck off on him first because humans are literally not designed for that kind of long term monogamy.

Just be happy with the time you got, kids.

Wait, he loves his wife? What kind of irresponsible faggotry is this?

Marriage 'for love' or involving 'love' wasn't a thing until the 1930's. From it's inception is was a pure business/social contract

It is not the government's or court's place to interfere in a legal contract between two consenting parties that doesn't violate self-ownership.

Argue for the couple, create opportunity to observe the ritual so I can start harvesting a captive elf harem.

We didn't say they couldn't be married hippie, just that they couldn't perform necromancy

Said "necromancy" is the contract they are agreeing on, commie.

as with all magic of a ritual manner, if all participants are capable of, and give express consent to the ritual occurring - then there is nothing wrong with it

also this, and this slippery slope isnt even that bad

>Said "necromancy" is the contract they are agreeing on, commie.

Like fuck, they said till death do you part. It's not only implied, it's fucking STIPULATED.

>all these fucking 'awww side with the couple' faggots

Jesus christ you niggas are dumb.

Love is a modern marketing concept coined to cash in on the chemical reaction we experience during the first two years of an intimate relationship, and had NOTHING to do with marriage for the majority of history.

Having love in marriages in a fantasy game is like having potatoes in your setting. IT'S A NEW WORLD CROP YOU NORMIES, REEEEEEEE

There are countless reasons why a government or court should interfere in a contract beyond the question of "self-ownership." I don't even understand how you can begin to pretend that is the end-all-be-all.

He's a NAP fag

You are the only one talking about marriage here, mate-o.

Maybe I'm getting this post entirely wrong. Maybe it's completely wrong on purpose, trying to present an intentionally biased and arrogant display of an elven asshole detached from reality. If that is the case, just ignore the following.
If however, the poster was even slightly serious about these claims...
Holy shit this is dumb.

>particularly the fact that the human's brain will literally fill up after a century,
First of all, the archmage says nothing like that. Second of all - what? Human brain has a finite capacity of information retention, but there is absolutely no fucking reason to assume that it "fills up after a century". What kind of retarded understanding of human cognition is that? The problem is degradation of neuronal functions resulting in potential loss of retention and decreased learning capacity, but it has nothing to do with the capacity of brain to store knowledge: it's like mistaking a fridge that is becoming useless because it's breaking down and the food inside is rotting, for one that is so full that you can't fill anything in anymore. If the cognitive functions remain the same (e.g. brain does not go through physiological degradation), assuming that it just "fills up" is laughably stupid.

>Human marriages generally last 2-5 years, on average.
WHAT. THE. FUCK.
This is not true even for the completely broken decadent modern western societies which intentionally attacked and dissolved the institution of marriage: much less for any society that did not go full mental due to modern left wing stupidity.

Marriages - unless cut down by a tragedy - lasted a lifetime in majority of all societies, and around 12-16 years average AT MINIMUM, because that is the minimal necessary time the two need to raise at least one generation of offspring to a viable state. Humans form partnership for life: break of marriage happens when there has been some kind of fundamental fuck-up in the marriage, not because "it naturally dissolves after time".

please stop no one needs to hear this no one wants to anyway we all just need to calm down and not hear whatever edgy shit you are about to say for attention because this always happens always i dont why but always does so please break it break the cycle now so that we dont suffer like you want us to

I tell the couple to forget the ritual and go make some half elves. When the family is big enough I'll come back and set the wife up with an immortal construct body. Might take them a few centuries to pay it all off but I have time. Maybe offer the elf the same deal after the wife is all paid up.

Hey look it's a conservafag trying to pretend they know something.

cadivorce.com/news/you-are-not-alone/

>According to marriage scientist Terri Orbuch, PhD., about 40 to 50 percent of marriages end in divorce today. When J. Lo and Marc Anthony called it quits after seven years, thoughts of the infamous “seven-year itch” surfaced. But in reality, 10 percent of first marriages end in divorce in the first five years. According to Orbuch who has followed nearly 400 couples since 1986 as part of a National Institutes of Health study on relationships, it’s between the 3.5 and 5-year range where you’re most likely to experience a significant drop in marital quality and most likely to get divorced. The honeymoon effect has worn off and romance is trumped by problems like money worries and family drama. Stress levels peak at the three-year mark. What once was a minor irritation, like poor table manners, shifts to majorly annoying. This time slot is coined the “three-year glitch.”

hopesandfears.com/hopes/city/city_index/214133-city-index-marriage-lengths

While the national length of marriage in the United States is about 8.2 years, New Yorkers actually stick it out longer and average about 12.2 years. The rest of the state fares well, too, with most marriages lasting between 10 and 14 years. Surprisingly, however, is that the mythic 50% national divorce rate has turned out to be just that, a myth. At a 41% divorce rate, Americans are choosing to stay together.

Marriages 'lasted' longer in ye aulden days because women didn't have the fucking RIGHT to divorce, and when they did for a long time they had to prove their husband was fucking abusing them.

>he doesn't hate humanity as a whole but realize that the individual people make the life worth living
pleb

Another case has been brought to your attention

the deathknight Razilek (pic related) requests permission to preform a reversal of a traditional ritual of his order.

the ritual is normally used to utilize the souls of others to extend ones lifespan and powers, but the reverse ritual achieves the opposite - allowing for one to "feed" his soul to another to sustain another. the rite will involve the deathknight committing ritual suicide to utilize his soul as a substitute for his daughters for the illness, this will grant her the opportunity to lead a normal life.

Razilek intends to use the ritual to treat his daughter - who was born with a wasting illness that cannot be treated through conventional means, and would lead to a slow wasting death.

the case arguing against Razilek is led by archbishop Archibald of the order of the holy rose, who argue that these rites were forbidden for a reason, and that man should not damn souls -even willing. and that such a perversion of the natural order is worse than allowing the girl to pass onto the afterlife - as this darkest of magics deals in the destruction and the damnation of souls, matters that they claim must remain reserved to gods and demons

this disagreement has led to renewed antagonism between the order and the deathknight - who view it as a persecution of their beliefs and order.

ok, that doesn't deal with the reason many people side with the couple ( its between two consenting adults, and impacts only them - so why should the state prohibit it?)

That isn't how souls work. Also, I kill the Death Knight for being evil. His daughter too, probably. If I don't get her to fall in love with me and redeem her with my holy sword first. I may leave Razilek alive long enough to see his daughter recant darkness on the end of my dick, before I cut his fucking head off. Then I love and cherish her until sickness seperates us.

I'm a Paladin. Lawful Good doesn't mean 'nice'. Get fucked, Deathknights.

Do as you must, Sir Razikel.

Seriously if you have problems with soulslinging then make the whole thing illegal, not partially.

As the ancient ritual of the deathknights is basically the same anyway, doing it backwards should be held to the same regulations and no more.

>(and impacts only them)
But, it doesn't. You'd have to rather naive to think so.

And, it could negatively impact them to the point where it's not surprising the ritual requires state approval. This isn't about installing a bird feeder in your backyard, it's cutting off centuries of a person's life.

>you just killed a law abiding and respected member of the community
>expecting you actions to be justified by your order
>expecting to kill a deathknight be removing the head

nigga, you both fall and go to jail - probably get hanged too

yes, but its YOUR OWN LIFE, people dont need state approval to kill themselves - so why not allow them to donate some of their lifespan?

>>you just killed a law abiding and respected member of the community

Paladin, not obligated to follow evil laws

>>expecting you actions to be justified by your order

My actions are justified by GOD, infidel

>expecting to kill a deathknight be removing the head

Holy Sword.

Stay mad evil fags

>Lawful Good
More like neutral evil

>people dont need state approval to kill themselves

Who is Kavorkian and why did he lose his medical liscence

>people dont need state approval to kill themselves

Actually, they do.

It's actually illegal to try to commit suicide, and if you fail, you have to go through state enforced counseling.

>52121835
BUT HES LAWFUL NEUTRAL YOU ABSOLUTE RETARD

seriously, do you even detect evil?

also, your sword still doesnt do much, its not an evil magic

your mad only proves your moral bankruptcy and corruption, villain. Deus Vult.

this is why people hate paladins

So much wrong with this again. So first of all: an article written EXCLUSIVELY TO JUSTIFY DIVORCE is usually not the best source of unbiased data.
Second of all, actually fucking learn the difference between "Most marriages end up in a divorce", "Most divorces happen between 3-5 years into the marriage" and "Human marriage usually does not last past 3-5 years".
Because those statements are not the same, and actually only ONE of them is wrong. Even - once again - in the most COMPLETELY FUCKED societies that literally destroyed marriage by systematic attack on the institution, it's usually HALF of marriages that fail. Not most: HALF. And out of that half, another only 10% ends in the first fucking ten years: the remaining 90% actually falls apart somewhere else into the relationship. Those are actually conclusions from what you yourself posted.
If we further take into consideration the utter unreliability of these statistics due to what is called "divorce rate indicators" (the problem with crude divorce statistic and divorce-to-marriage ratio actually being based on very imprecise means of measuring), and the fact that the studies about time of divorce being pretty much exclusively based on American and Western societies (while in comparison, in Japan, D-t-M-R is around 30 and 30%, and currently 40% of all divorces happen PAST 25 years of marriage, it just shows how utterly full of shit you are - both in understanding the statistics, and actually knowing the divorce situation in the world.

Your numbers are still skewed by people who are serial divorcees.

Using mean instead of weighting by individual is disingenuous.

this is why statism is retarded

>Marriages 'lasted' longer in ye aulden days because women didn't have the fucking RIGHT to divorce,
Also... AHAHAHAHAHAHA JESUS FUCKING CHRIST YOU ARE AN IDIOT.
Divorce is a common institution across most of the world, even woman initiated, and always have been. Marriage lasted longer 60 years ago because people weren't systematically conditioned to value marriage less than career and one's individual selfish interests and desire. Plain and simple.

>only ONE of them is true
Sorry about that.

Kavorkian went to jail because he pushed the button for a vegetable he couldn't enable with a Rube Goldberg suicide machine.

>Conservafags don't like the numbers so they deny them

Stay mad. It is true this is largely cultural, but that is due in large part to the fact women now have the avenue to divorce open to them, and have been given options to actualize in life besides "make babies and tend house"

You can skew this as 'selfish' if you want - you'll be retarded, but you're free to do so.

a resounding NO
if an elf want to prove their love for a human they an hero on the humans grave, they don't fuck around with the natural order of things.

>muh natural order
Something something Quaritch, something something have fun living under your hippy tree on your shithole planet in the galactic backwaters.

I'm literally using the exact same numbers as you are, I'm just understanding them properly. Nobody needs to fucking ignore the numbers. In fact, conservative will be probably tempted to BLOW UP the numbers just to illustrate how much of a problem has this become, while a "progressive" person will be the one downplaying the numbers in order to show that things aren't that bad.

You, however, just simply DID NOT READ the articles and the numbers right.

Is that actually the case in terms of memory capacity? What's the medically accepted age where your brain would literally be full?

>What is the police trying to stop you and medical assisted suicide?

Does that take into account Mr. Bobbity Jones who had six divorces over twenty years?

>but that is due in large part to the fact women now have the avenue to divorce open to them
No, it's not. It's because A) people are trained to marry for love, with very little consideration for long term compatibility, often entering the marriage with completely false and poor expectations and unwilling to compromise or invest extra effort into the marriage, and B) divorce has been removed of stigma, making it the easier option. And C) because of people like you, who basically say "marriage is such a shit institution, the only reason why people would ever stay in it for longer than few years is because they are FORCED TO!"

You don't know SHIT about anthropology of marriage, actually. Divorce existed in all societies at every point of history. The reasons why it was more commonly male-initiated than female initiated (which is really only true in SOME societies, like those based on Abrahamic religious doctrines) was not because WOMEN WERE OPPRESSED BY THEIR HUSBANDS. In fact, the only commonly acceptable justification of divorce in Christianity was infertility, and without a proof of infertility, men were as powerless as women. The reason why divorce was initiated more commonly from male side of the family was because A) in some regions, including Europe, infertility was primarily attributed to women due to medical misconceptions and B), in patrilinear societies, such as ours, it was always the paternal side of the family who had the primary interest and responsibility for continuation of the bloodline. E.g.: the mother's side of family did not really care if their daughters have children, but the fathers side COMPLETELY relied on their sons having some. Therefor: male side of the family needed to take any measures to ensure existence of male heir, including divorce, while the female did not. By the way, the decision to divorce was NEVER done by the individuals in marriage, but due to agreement of the entire involved family or families.

The mind can't get full you start forgetting stuff because the brain deteriorates

There are twenty couples in a survey. 19 do not divorce and are happy while the 20th has divorced and remarried 20 times. The divorce rate in the sample group is 50% not 5%.

>19 do not divorce and are happy
Were they married for

Just because you can't get married doesn't mean you have to shit on the concept of marriage.

>Is that actually the case in terms of memory capacity?
It's absolute bullshit. Literally no idea about how brain works in that statement: it's painfully wrong. Your brain is never "full" because information is retained, not stored. Even memory is a constant active process, your memory is not a library where shit is just written in books and then placed on a bookshelf until the shelf is full. Memory has mutiple different levels and info consistently moves between various ones and gets consistently reviewed, renewed, re-constructed: it's a process of constant fuildity: each level has different ways to retain and circulate knowledge and different levels of accessibility to the consciousness: we don't know what is the full capacity of any of those levels, in fact, we don't know if the "capacity" is the right word to begin with.

There is absolutely no scenario in which we could ever claim that brain is "full". We can at absolute best say there is a point where our retention lowers, that is when more information is being "discarded" (though what "discarding" means is unclear, because we never truly know if a memory is completely lost, or whenever it was just moved to a less accessible part of the brain) becomes slower than the process of learning new shit. This usually happens with degradation of cognitive functions and may be simply caused by neuro-degeneration alone. It's usually identified with senility, dementia, Alzheimer, Parkinson etc, and those can manifest theoretically at nearly any age, it's just that with increasing age, the likelyhood of them appearing grows. But it's also heavily related to genetic and environmental causes.

In conclusion, that guy is so painfully full of shit it's not even funny.

Didn't answer my question

It's actually not that simple. In fact, all divorce rates are generally really kinda fucked up: as intuitive it may seemed, figuring out what divorce rate numbers mean is never an easy job.

There are different ways to count divorces. You never really do it on couples: you do it either by identifying number of divorces per 1000 people eligible to be married a year, or by ration between marriage entered vs. divorces within a particular time frame.
Both are misleading in their own ways. What you are describing is closer to the second model (DtMR), but in DtMR you don't actually EVER know how many people were there at the start of the study, so you can't really identify how accurate your data is, unless you run it through some other statistical tools.

I side against the couple not because I believe in some natural order that has to be maintained but only that the human is not mentally prepared for the sort mentality that vastly extended lifespans will entail although I balk at the idea that humans are only suppose to live a century and nothing more than that attributing such racist ideas to the elves smug sense of superiority and self righteousness. Regardless, this is a foolish fling by the woman and she will regret the long years of ennui that elves hold as some kind of pervese virtue.

I would argue the idea that the ritual will destroy both his and his daughters souls and essentially create a new being thereby rendering the entire ordeal pointless from the way it's been described to me. That said, is the wasting illness a metaphysical illness or a physical one? If such power magics exist the Death Knight would be better served seeking a way to restore his daughter's body then potentially condeming himself and his daughter to oblivion through foolishness.

Let them do it. They're not hurting anyone else. Who gives a fuck.

Who would have guessed, the elven woman makes the sound arguments right here.

I take the opportunity for I have been waiting and planning many years for such a chance.

Activating my already well laid out plan (See Emails to DM), I activate the binding ritual and seal the elf scum inside their court walls for eternity.

>Love live humanity. Just Humanity.

We get a vampire to turn the wife into a vampire, problem solved.

What the flying fuck is the scale of that graph. The first unit represents 10 years, then five, then fucking one? I don't give a shit about marriage or divorce, but I'm mad at whoever designed this. It's nearly on a fucking logarithmic scale.

the ritual wont merge their souls, it will essentially transfer the wasting the wasting diseases effects (a potent curse) onto the deathknights soul as opposed to his daughters, like an ablative layer on a tire

its a magical disease that saps the victims soul - like a vampires thirst but without any of the modifications, leading to an inevitable and slow death

Very well, as long as the Deathknight in turn does not transfer it to anyone else than I see no reason to oppose it

support them, then botch the ceremony granting them both eternal life. then they can always be that annoying couple that everyone hates. and when I get tired of the butthurt, just drop a few rumors to break them up in a colossal relational explosion.

Dark Elf please go.

As a brave and heroic soul, I offer a fragment of my own tremendous lifespan to the woman upon her solemn vow in the sight of the gods that her Love is pure and the swearing of both lovers to a binding, eternal oath to defend the defenseless and protect the Righteous.

I question why they're asking a human's opinion for what is clearly an elven issue, in spite of human involvement.
Regardless, I play the ego card and argue that they underestimate themselves if they believe that an elf can't handle their human lover even with increased lifespan. Even further if they don't think they as a race can defeat or even outlast a single human that only has half an extra elven lifespan. If nothing else, they can consider it an experiment to see if there can be exceptions to humanity's "centennial mania", which can be "ended" if the female shows signs of becoming a threat.

Is there such a thing as anti-edgelord?

For the couple, the archmage's reasoning is full of holes.

Yes, it's called a Paladin

I said anti-edgelord, not holy edgelord

I will offer him a different solution, make the daughter into a dragon their vitality traits and adeptation will help her out.

its not a matter of physicality - the disease will kill her essence, even if her draconic traits could prevent the diseases outwards effects she would still be left a completely empty husk

also, how exactly can you turn people into dragons? and doesent that sound even more questionable

I always run paladins as anti-edgelords. I guess other people have different ideas, but I like compassionate devotion to ideals of justice and stuff.

With my dragon blood and scales, dragonborn should be a good substitute if I could not get any dragon. Or steal their pearl which have great power.

>To say nothing of the potential for going insane
Assuming the ritual also does not extend the duration of a human being sane. Just because we normally start to lose mental cohesion at 65-70 in real life does not mean it'll happen when magic.

I intercede on behalf of this father with my Goddess, and swear to personally atone for or remedy each of the Father's misdeeds in exchange for Her saving this innocent girl with some holy boon. I will also vow to shepherd him and his order towards the Light for the rest of my days.

Easy to edgelord up a paladin when good chunk of gods' domains are like...varying degrees of things that you kill others with

And yet gay marriage issues.

Current character is a half elf. Human mom is dead, elven father is still mildly bugfuck crazy.

Who do you THINK I'm going to side with here?

>That isn't how souls work.
Citation needed.

I call the archmage out on her bullshit. I've been up and kicking for longer than she has with my mind unaddled. Although I might not be the best authority on what constitutes human or sane.

you are tasked with:
returning some library books he forgot about some 20 years ago
getting a local barkeep a new chair
and repairing a table in the local mages tower

>Marriages 'lasted' longer in ye aulden days because women didn't have the fucking RIGHT to divorce
Because in ye aulden days they didn't have the delusion marriage was about love. Love was a happy accident and marriage was about what every party could bring to the table: obedience for the woman, money and safety for the man. This is also why their divorces ensured that the man kept his money after the divorce, as to not incentivize divorce by rewarding unfaithful women. Also why the idea of "rape" within marriage was deemed impossible: marriage was the woman subjugating herself to the man in exchange for his protection and his finances. Her consent was already presumed from the moment she said "I do". Women who didn't like this simply didn't get married and became old spinsters or remained extramaritial lovers with the men they liked (which was a far less reliable option because back then "doctors" didn't hand out abortions like they're fucking breathmints). In short women could divorce/annull their marriage, but they had to face the consequences. They couldn't convince the state to force the man to give them a neat severance package.

The old system looked at men, looked at women and tried to figure out a system that was as stable as possible to favor childrearing, the backbone of any civilization that wishes to survive. The modern system starts with the false, dogmatic position that all genders are equal (but women more equal than men) and goes from there. In the first system the false notion of total gender equality suffers, in the last system childrearing is no longer emphasized. Guess which of the two results in such low birth rates politicians need to displace the population with foreigners just to keep the economy running.

I should be able to finish these tasks within a day or two, depending on the table!

May Her Light Shine Upon Thee!

>I don't know how statistics works

>yet another Depends on the Setting thread where most responses are ignored

Stop.

>mages complaining about madness
What a shitty archmage. The best mages are the ones without limits.

["leaving the shotguns lying around" intensifies]

>can't argue
>go autistic with capslock

Well...it's a ritual, so it's probably been done extensively enough to have presumably detailed records on proper casting. Therefore, there's already precedent and i would hazard that it's only because of excessively conservative rich elven nobles that the ritual was forbidden in the first place. Rich people tend to not like having someone lord something over them that they can't do themselves, see? Insanity might not even be a problem, as thus far the only ones i can think of who have attained a lifespan longer than their race's average have been insane or eccentric enough to count as insane to begin with. We have no point of reference which isn't corrupted by existing madness or influence stemming from a foreign force. As for villainy, that should be easy to handle. Just call a paladin to use Detect Evil on the two.

I'd argue for the couple. But, a good compromise would be to allow the ritual on the condition that the elven man keeps an eye on his wife's mental state, who will move in to elven lands for as long as the marriage lasts. Or as long as the ritual isn't leaked to the outside world.

I don't know how his holy nonsensicality has been raised, but i don't think your god is worth his faith if he'd refuse aid to an ailing girl. She could be a potential convert, after all, and while i'm no theologist, Pratchettian theology is probably in effect.

However, i will have to concede the point. Wasting disease has only unconventional cures, but unconventional does not mean impossible. While i really can't say anything or, god forbid, order a death knight, i strongly implore you to reconsider. However, in the case of an emergency such as accelerated wasting rate, the ritual is rendered as the only solution readily available. To reiterate, my recommendation is to find an unconventional cure, preferably one without a victim, and save the ritual for an emergency in case no other cure can be prepared in time.

See and also and also

It's difficult to establish consent when one or both parties suffer from debilitating mental illness.