Bribes
-
It's not the bribes themselves I'm talking about, it's just that the way they're done is implausible. As soon as the guard has the bar of gold, there's nothing to stop him attacking the dungeoneer anyway. And seeing that Lord F or Mogdred will be angry if they find out that the guard has accepted a bribe, it doesn't make sense that they let the dungeoneer pass instead. That's all I'm pointing out.
-
In my opinion, at least where gold was concerned, the guard was so overcome by their greed and so dazzled by the gold that nothing else in the world mattered to them at that time - thus giving the dungeoneer time to escape. Perhaps we could assume that the guard realized his mistake almost immediately but when he turned round to face the dungeoneer they had gone.
-
If their job is to guard say like a wellway or something, then they have some leeway to who they let in or not. It makes sense that if people give them something they will look favourably on them and let them through. Done on a regular or semi regular basis this could be a nice side-income for a greedy or poorly paid henchman type.
I guess they could attempt to kill everyone they come across and just take their stuff, dumping their lifeless carcass down a chasm. But a) this involves crossing a line as murdering and looting is a serious business, b) this involves way more effort and there's always the risk someone will turn the tables and the guard will come of worse; and c) if you have a reputation as bribe-able will people will offer you bribes, but if you known as a killer people who encounter you will be more likely to attack you, leading for a much more complicated life.
And in the so called real world, bribery does happen. Joseph Pistone's book on the mafia describes how everyone in that organisation steals money that is earmarked for their bosses even though they will be murdered to death if rumbled.
-
If their job is to guard say like a wellway or something, then they have some leeway to who they let in or not.
Somehow I doubt that that leeway would ever extend as far as, "You can let them through if they offer you enough gold". The guard taking the gold I'm not arguing with anyway, I'm just saying I don't think the guard would hold up his side of the bargain.
It makes sense that if people give them something they will look favourably on them and let them through. Done on a regular or semi regular basis this could be a nice side-income for a greedy or poorly paid henchman type.
I do realise that, I'm just saying, it's a hell of a risky sideline when it runs entirely contrary to their main job description, and their bosses are the likes of Lord Fear or Mogdred.
I guess they could attempt to kill everyone they come across and just take their stuff, dumping their lifeless carcass down a chasm. But a) this involves crossing a line as murdering and looting is a serious business
I don't see the likes of Skarkill, Fatilla or Gibbet being noticeably burdened by conscience, do you? It's a line they've clearly crossed many times before. (Gibbet once killed a dungeoneer for the heinous felony of lighting a lantern. Anybody who's going to commit murder because of that clearly won't be prone to a queasy conscience.)
b) this involves way more effort and there's always the risk someone will turn the tables and the guard will come off worse;
I'm afraid that goes with the territory, and they really should consider moving into a different industry if they're afraid of people fighting them. With the possible exception of Skarkill, I never really see any indication that they are particularly worried about that anyway.
And I repeat, surely the greater risk they run is that those in charge will find out that they've been doing these deals?
and c) if you have a reputation as bribe-able will people will offer you bribes
If you're in the Opposition and you are trying to nurture a reputation for corruptibility, Lord F or Mogdred are going to hear it in no time, and that'll be the end of you.
And in the so called real world, bribery does happen.
Yes of course, I never suggested otherwise. I repeat, it's not bribery itself I find implausible, it's the way it's portrayed in the series.
And before you say it, I do realise it would be difficult for the show to portray it more realistically, but that doesn't mean that what happens in Knightmare is convincing after all.
I honestly think it's an aspect that should have been left out altogether. There were plenty of offensive/defensive ways to neutralise a guard, through clue objects and spells for instance, and indeed, after a while the series did more or less go that way; from season 6, guards being bribed almost never happened anymore.
-
Yes of course, I never suggested otherwise. I repeat, it's not bribery itself I find implausible, it's the way it's portrayed in the series.
And before you say it, I do realise it would be difficult for the show to portray it more realistically, but that doesn't mean that what happens in Knightmare is convincing after all.
I honestly think it's an aspect that should have been left out altogether.
Although I see your point, I don't see what harm it did. It made a nice change from spells and the like for a few series. Variety = good, not bad.
Remember, you hated series 8 until you watched it again, you now prefer it over series 4, 5, 6, and 7.
Sozboz's point is just as valid as yours
And yes, I know you never explicitly suggested otherwise
-
I don't see what harm it did. It made a nice change from spells and the like for a few series
I used to feel that way myself, and I guess that it's a sign that it was good enough for a kids' show, therefore it was good enough, period. But I just find it very difficult to immerse myself in the show when scenes happen like that. It's a real trick to suspend disbelief at a key moment in the plot that depends on character-stupidity to carry itself.
Remember, you hated series 8 until you watched it again, you now prefer it over series 4, 5, 6, and 7.
Actually, I pretty much always preferred it to 4, 5 & 6, although I don't really see what that has to do with this anyway.
Sozboz's point is just as valid as yours. And yes, I know you never explicitly suggested otherwise
That's right, I didn't. Nor did I ever imply otherwise. This is why I protest your insinuating/misleading use of the weasel-word 'explicitly'. I was not attempting to silence, bulldoze or belly-rag Sozboz in any way at all, and I apologise to him if he got that impression.
But then I can't see the slightest indication that he did. You should think about that, Sir Hugh; you appear to be running to the defence of someone who doesn't want rescuing.
-
It's not the bribes themselves I'm talking about, it's just that the way they're done is implausible. As soon as the guard has the bar of gold, there's nothing to stop him attacking the dungeoneer anyway. And seeing that Lord F or Mogdred will be angry if they find out that the guard has accepted a bribe, it doesn't make sense that they let the dungeoneer pass instead. That's all I'm pointing out.
Mmm hmm - maybe. But perhaps the guard in question was thinking for the future: if they cross paths with the dungeoneer again (unlikely, but... you know) then they could expect to be given bribes again. Alternatively, if word got 'round to such guards that dungeoneers generally knew what previous dungeoneers had got up to in the dungeon, then it would make sense to cultivate a culture of accepting bribery.
And if said guards managed to make enough profit from accepting bribes then perhaps they wouldn't have to work for Lord F anyway. Perhaps.
-
Mmm hmm - maybe. But perhaps the guard in question was thinking for the future: if they cross paths with the dungeoneer again (unlikely, but... you know) then they could expect to be given bribes again.
That would still amount to being pretty thick though, wouldn't it? I mean, it sounds like a ludicrous risk to take for the sake of a future encounter that there was almost no chance of ever happening.
And if said guards managed to make enough profit from accepting bribes then perhaps they wouldn't have to work for Lord F anyway.
I suppose, but for me, it still comes back to the same thing; they could accept the bribe to make the profit, and then kill the dungeoneer anyway.
I should mention in defence of the series that on one occasion in season 4, Fatilla did take exactly the attitude I'm talking about. He accepted a bribe from team 7 and then admitted that he had lied to them when he said he'd let them through, and so they had to cast a spell to get past him. That scene makes far more sense plot-wise.
-
Wait a minute! I've got the most splendid idea!
If everybody who gets aggressive in pubs did that then there'd be no violence in high streets up and down the country on a Friday and Saturday night, right? The NHS would save money and everything!
If we can get today's impressionable youth to watch Knightmare and tell them* that's* how mindless violence works, nobody'll ever get glassed, punched or stabbed again! The victim would be half way home by the time the aggressor lands a punch!
BRING BACK KNIGHTMARE!
Genius idea...... would work in my home town.......
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login