On Maelstrom legal systems,
I push for a unique court system exclusively for Lantern Bearers since our efforts (and crimes) are usually pretty far outside the realm of typical legal systems. The town as a whole would have a separate and probably far more traditional legal system that we would still all answer to for crimes related to the town itself like theft, murder of the citizenry, arson, etc. but having our own separate legal system as a group allows us to handle the extremely strange situations we get ourselves into "in house."
The reason I push for a court system within the Lantern Bearers with loosely framed 'laws' is because our situation here is so deeply, deeply complex. Laws are created (or, at least should be created) around what is common sense and what injures others- like no murder, no thievery, no assault. I could say that it is common sense to not make deals with the elementals, it's something that has hurt us many, many, many times, but then that would make the entire method of closing the Lightning gate... Illegal. As frustrating as many aspects of that gate closure was, it was still a great victory and one that may not have been successfully done if interacting with elementals was illegal. It's the same thing with interactions with our great enemy, it's common sense not to and can easily endanger us and those around us, but those who have (at great, great personal sacrifice) interacted with them have brought us key and incredibly necessary information.
I think it is foolish to create a system of laws with the addendum to all of them of "but if it's successful and nobody gets hurt, no big deal" as it completely undermines the legal system in the first place, in addition I think it is foolish to cut off the opportunities afforded by these potential actions. My experience has also been that people who are going to do these kinds of things won't care that there is a law against them, and it will only result in them not telling anyone what they are doing- which is a breakdown of communication and could be deadly.
Turning the system into a "concern" based system, where one person has a concern and the Lanter Bearers are gathered to vote on it, means that all the strange possible concerns we can get ourselves into don't have to fall into the brackets of traditional laws. It provides us the chance to bring forward- publicly- concerns. Not even necessarily legal action concerns, but just concerns. It provides the chance for interventions en masse, allows people to directly speak about their experiences, and prevents the spread of misinformation.
Our options for punishment here in the Maelstrom are severely limited. We don't have the resources or ability to keep long term prisons, and we are in an active war zone... The prison may honestly be the safest place around. I've seen pain- floggings and such- used a punishment in military systems before but I feel like these things have strikingly little effect on adventurers. I also hope that I won't be argued with when I say slavery or indentured servitude are unacceptable. We are effectively limited to fines, exile, and death. I also still truly believe that the majority of these 'trials' will actually just be a time to express frustration and communicate, rather than any actual punishment. I also don't anticipate there actually being that many of these trials- for the most part we all get along with each other and rarely have strife big enough to require official action (the last few months notwithstanding).
I believe that, despite how much some of our number like to casually threaten it, not very many of us are actually willing to call for the death of one of our own when it comes down to the reality of the thing.
A reasonable worry at that point would be the issue of popularity and favoritism. I think this would be a greater issue if we were on a larger scale- I would never suggest this system be used for even a town, but we have... Around 30 people in the Lantern Bearer group. How many of us are truly concerned about being dog piled? Look at your friends, your neighbors, the people who have fought with you- even if they're frustrated with you sometimes, do you truly believe that a voting majority would call for your death unless something had gone very, very wrong? Regardless, that would be the purpose of an officiant who is a member of the nobility- they would be responsible for gathering people, informing of the... Trial isn't even the right word, perhaps discussion? They would also be in charge of maintaining order, making sure everyone gets their say, tie breaking in votes, and ensuring that this wasn't a plotted attempt to 'gang up' on an individual.
I feel that this way, everyone can have their say, anyone invested or interested can be present to learn about goings on, and we may be able to communicate more with each other instead of coming down to true punishment or legal action.
My mental picture of how one of these discussions happens (I'll use a very trivial example though I don't expect anything this trivial being brought up often):
1. A Lantern Bearer brings a complaint to a member of the nobility. "I am concerned about Goodman Brevick because he's always skulking around while I'm baking, and then one of my pies always goes missing."
2. That member of the nobility sets a time for the meeting, personally informs Brevick of the complaint, and sends runners to go and inform the Lantern Bearers that there is going to be a meeting. It is the member of the nobility's responsibility to make sure that everyone present is informed and there are a reasonable number of people present and that this is not an attempt to dog pile Brevick. In a situation of extreme significance like one involving potential death, it is up to the member of nobility to make the judgement if the meeting should be postponed longer to give other people not present at the gather the chance to participate.
3. The meeting is called. The complaint-bringer describes his complaint to the gathered Lantern Bearers, then Brevick speaks to his defense and answers whatever questions (as managed by the member of the nobility) the gathered collected kneads to know. The gathered Lantern Bearers may also speak their piece, including if the complaint seems half-baked, they have a personal defense of Brevick or the complaint-bringer, or if they have additional details.
4. Once the discussion is done, if it was not resolved just by discussion (like if it turns out Brevick thought he was the official taste tester, or if Kobalds were having a competition to steal the yeast number of pies and Brevick just happened to be nearby), the member of the nobility will make any statements they wish about the case, including making any recommendations for punishment ("I doughnut think this is a situation where death is appropriate, please keep any punishment under that bar."). My expectation is that most, if not all, of these situations will be resolved with just formal discussion.
5. A vote (using a 2/3rds majority?) can then be called for if Brevick is guilty of being the sticky-fingered thief at that point. The member of the nobility breaks ties.
5. The collected Lantern Bearers may then suggest punishment and vote on the suggestions (using a simple majority?) to determine any official punishment. The member of the nobility breaks ties. The goal is to avoid all-or-muffin justice and to find ways to resolve conflicts rather than simply punish.
6. Unless it's a specific aspect of the punishment, the member of the nobility rises and ensures the punishment is carried out.
This is incredibly long so thank you for listening to my ramblings. I think it's incredibly important that we crepe a consistent system moving forward and I appreciate everyone being involved.
In service,
Lord Terren of Knight's Ferry
Head Clerk
Punner Unrepentant