When I Tried Strengthening a Rusty Sword, It Turned into an OP Magic Sword - Ch. 10 - Connect
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Wow, corruption to high degree. The rule said they would both be punished no matter their circumstances. But once they heard the circumstances the guild leader just waved away any punishment meant to be levied on mc, as if reason precedes over rule.
Also, gives high-value prisoner to guy who is total noob, not well-known or high ranked (which includes a measure of trust) and that they know sides with her..?
Also, gives high-value prisoner to guy who is total noob, not well-known or high ranked (which includes a measure of trust) and that they know sides with her..?
Little girl isn't a prisoner anymore. She's a target of protection. Obviously they'll send her off with someone who is on her side. The other points still apply.
Except...
...If you're suggesting that someone should be punished for protecting their own life from a one-sided attack: you're insane.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2023
- Messages
- 9,821
Many people mistake rules as a weapon for their own convenience this day.
No, last chapter I was clear that their rules are stupid for explicitly stating that circumstances don't matter.
But what's more stupid is that when the rules explicitly state that circumstances doesn't matter, some higher-up can still willy-nilly decide to ignore that and give ppl they like a free pass (usually dependent on amount of bribes). And then that they can give such a party what should be an extremely high-trust mission, only makes things worse. Particularly as the party normally shouldn't qualify for such a high-trust mission to begin with.
ps: targets of protection are still prisoners. Unless you want to let the escorts to be allowed to have their wards killed, by claiming the ward didn't want to be around them any longer. Especially so as the destination was set by the guild leader, and not by said escort target.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2020
- Messages
- 1,260
"My feelings to defend her were genuine"
So because you wanted to keep someone safe, you refused to elaborate on how they needed protection and potentially allowed unneeded harm to yourself (possibly them too) for what you claim was their sake? Weird way to say "I'm an idiot who doesn't understand basic conversational skills" but it's acceptable.
The antagonist's buddy is the only character I ended up liking so far, least he had the balls to step forward and be honest.
So because you wanted to keep someone safe, you refused to elaborate on how they needed protection and potentially allowed unneeded harm to yourself (possibly them too) for what you claim was their sake? Weird way to say "I'm an idiot who doesn't understand basic conversational skills" but it's acceptable.
The antagonist's buddy is the only character I ended up liking so far, least he had the balls to step forward and be honest.
Honestly I agree. I feel like the author should've made him not say anything because he thought he had no way to prove his innocence if the author was gonna make him do nothing.
Not that I think he should say nothing, but if he was gonna just t-pose the whole time basically, the excuse I explained i feel would've at least made more sense.
Similar threads
