Then where do those royal children come from whom you’re painting?[/quote] All the other Royal Children were born before the Fall, and are based on real historical figures.
Then where do those royal children come from whom you’re painting?[/quote] All the other Royal Children were born before the Fall, and are based on real historical figures.[/quote]
I am not talking about them. I’m talking about the ones that the nursery-maids are failing to corral in the Royal Portrait commission. I don’t think that her adult children still have nursery-maids.
Then where do those royal children come from whom you’re painting?[/quote] All the other Royal Children were born before the Fall, and are based on real historical figures.[/quote]
I am not talking about them. I’m talking about the ones that the nursery-maids are failing to corral in the Royal Portrait commission. I don’t think that her adult children still have nursery-maids.[/quote]
Children born to her relatives are still royal children. They’re nieces, nephews.
Do we have text, or just speculation?
[quote=MidnightVoyager]
Children born to her relatives are still royal children. They’re nieces, nephews.[/quote]
I’m not sure you even have to stray that far. The real Queen Victoria had quite a herd of grandchildren (and great-grandchildren) by the 1890s. Not sure where the ones historically born post-fall to those things in the cellar fit into our little Neathy story, though. There clearly could literally be some little monsters running around somewhere in the palace judging by their parents/grandparents.
Was she born significantly after the Fall, though (i.e. at least 9 months after)? I think it was said she was born in the same year as the Fall, which is different.[/quote]
Not sure where you got that, but in any case: I’m under the vague and un-sourced impression that the Fall was in February. Her birth could be 9 months later and still in the same year. Or it could be a completely different number of months, for various reasons.
In any case: All of the other of the Traitor Empress’ issue have counterparts in historical, not-fallen London, and all of Queen Victoria’s issue are accounted for as characters. The Captivating Princess has no such counterpart, and is a new character. Her conception definitely occurred after the historical record of Fallen London diverged from our own.
So either the Prince-Consort sired her in his current state… or not. Given the timing of things, I think the most likely other scenario is that the Captivating Princess was, for reasons unknown, one of the conditions of the Contract by which London was taken.
Do we have text, or just speculation?[/quote]
It says that in the very storylet where you are commissioned
Do we have text, or just speculation?[/quote]
It says that in the very storylet where you are commissioned[/quote]
So it does! Wonder how I’ve missed it all this time? Anyway, that solves that.
Funny thing: I reread that text before I ever posted on here. Somehow, the relevant text I was looking for didn’t register at all. Funny thing, the brain.
edited by Siankan on 12/12/2017
it’s a carnivorous fly-trap. i’ve seen something similar a flower shop just, uh. less teeth (run, feducci, run). i’m more interested in what’s that long piece of lace wrapped around it and entwining with the bandage… it looks like… a garter? scandalous
vaguely wonders if the Captivating Princess found the honey-well and is going to try and drown Feducci in it
There are worse ways to go…
Thanks to the two people who kindly helped to dispel my memory fog regarding the princess.
A movement, on subject we have hoped there will be no movement.
Inquiries will have to be made, dignitaries in the Palace ought to have told me, not to mention the anarchists and those fellows from the Ribbon.
One way or another, someone will get proper bashing for this.
And Cathedral should get reinforced gate.
Will nobody think of the tailors?
Ah. I thought since the beginning of his term that Feducci was planning on killing the Royal family. Marrying one of their members definitely did not cross my mind.
… I wish Feducci would just stick to killing all of them. Stick to stabbing people with swords, Feducci, not… Other things.
What do you think is worth more: a month of subscription or this story? I haven’t gotten The Gift or Empress’s Shadow, so I don’t really know much about who the princess is. Will this kind of story be available later, because it seems a bit opportunistic to make this a seasonal exclusive.
The Gift and Empress’ Shadow are both available year-round, as far as I’m aware. They might be cheaper during the season.
We don’t know really anything about the upcoming story and what tie-ins it might have or what background knowledge it presumes.
A month of subscription will get you two stories, or occasionally three if you time it just right. The Gift and Empress’ Shadow were both about the length of a single ES, so technically not as much narrative bang for your buck, although both stories were top-notch. They also both rewards that were permanently unlocked after the stories were concluded, something that is exceedingly rare for ES stories. The Gift gave a single opportunity card, while the Finishing School is substantial in both content and gameplay. Based purely on precedent, I would assume that Feducci’s Marriage will also permanently unlock some sort of reward.
A month’s subscription will also give you more actions and cards while active.
In addion to the card, The Gift unlocks an option for certain Finishing School students and an option on Capering Relicker. The Finishing School has that open year round, something I can’t imagine being without now
Wait, what option unlocks on the Capering Relicker’s card?
Wait, what option unlocks on the Capering Relicker’s card?[/quote]
One of the gifts…I can’t recall what they specifically give you. Most of the earlier fate stories open some option.
ETA: I misremembered, ignore this sorry.
edited by Lady Karnstein on 12/14/2017