[TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(29 Nov 2023 21:25 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Evyn MacDude
(29 Nov 2023 22:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jeff Zeitlin
(30 Nov 2023 00:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
David Johnson
(29 Nov 2023 23:35 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Alex Goodwin
(30 Nov 2023 04:15 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(30 Nov 2023 16:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Alex Goodwin (30 Nov 2023 17:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Evyn MacDude
(30 Nov 2023 20:03 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Ian Whitchurch
(30 Nov 2023 20:13 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jeffrey Schwartz
(30 Nov 2023 16:55 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Alan Peery
(30 Nov 2023 19:39 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(30 Nov 2023 20:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Phill
(30 Nov 2023 21:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(30 Nov 2023 22:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Alex Goodwin
(01 Dec 2023 05:55 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Alan Peery
(01 Dec 2023 10:51 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Ian Whitchurch
(03 Dec 2023 05:03 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(04 Dec 2023 02:24 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(07 Dec 2023 18:04 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(07 Dec 2023 20:42 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
NotKnown AtThisAddress
(08 Dec 2023 12:16 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(08 Dec 2023 16:56 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers
Jim Vassilakos
(09 Dec 2023 18:35 UTC)
|
On 1/12/23 02:36, Jim Vassilakos - jim.vassilakos at gmail.com (via tml list) wrote: > I agree with Alex. Locals should be able to arrest and even > temporarily detain (but NOT incarcerate NOR prosecute) Imperial Navy > personnel outside the extraterritoriality zone. That's the assumption > I was running with. Granted, I could see the local Imperial Admiral > (or whoever is the highest ranking officer) invoking some special > right (Section 678) in order to protect Imperial interests from local > law enforcement & politicians, and I could even see the Admiral > punishing the locals for anti-Imperial activities, including the > overuse of force against Navy personnel, but for a mere captain to do > this when there are higher ranking Navy authorities in-system seems a > bit much. I'm going to have to think about it, but I imagine it would > be a bad look for everyone involved, and both sides of the > confrontation might end up getting disciplined by their respective > superiors. Let me know what you all think. > Jim, Glad to hear us mob (and some wombat) helped you think the situation thru and come to a workable conclusion. As always, depends on circumstance (and what sort of curveballs you can lob at your players). To address the other side of my argument, I would take the tack that an Imperial high noble _within their demesne_ functions as HIM's viceroy and their persons are thus sacrosanct from the locals _in pursuit of their official duties_. Locals not wishing to brass the local bits of the 3I off would be wise to leave said noble in pursuit of their duties un-arrested, lest the 3I construe the physical assault implicit in the arrest as high treason _against the 3I_ and put the boot in accordingly. Bodyguard huscarles escorting their patron (deliberately kept rubbery, in MTU that even _have_ a 3rd Imperium) would likewise inherit their patron's immunities. Likewise, a wise(-ish) high noble has a good idea of how _far_ they can push things. The locals can always appeal to that noble's feudal superior if the noble in question overcooks it. Alex