Imarë wrote:I am supposing Morgan due to our belief that she is, at the very least, a follower of his.
She has, as Van says, the 'vibe.' She certainly doesn't come off as a Morgathian and certainly not an Agrikan.
Imarë wrote:I gave incomplete reasoning that the Baron may owe Morgan for some other incident or he could have been a mover in having the Baron pardoned after the last to do.
Doubtful. You have seen how the man operates and there is no evidence whatsoever that he intervenes directly in Thardic affairs - quite the opposite.
Imarë wrote:Just because Arren I is no longer the king (and presumed dead by most) does not mean that he would have forgiven anything owed to him.
No, but if he wished to be King he would still be King. Arren II is the King, and everything you've ever heard Morgan say has supported him. If the Baron owed him something, it seems more than likely the matter would have been taken care of already.
Imarë wrote:Having a noble killed and found in the city would tend to desabilize whatever situation the Morgathians and Agrikans like (them in charge). Somebody went to trouble to make sure he was found inside the city.
Perhaps, but doesn't seem to have done so. As you have speculated with Sir Felkar, it may also have been a crime of opportunity. While not a target specifically, this could be an example of taking advantage of an enemy's distraction.
Imarë wrote:Somebody has killed Morgathian guards.
Now this is obviously the more difficult task that snatching the Baron. Killing six guards inside the temple under the very noses of the Morgathian priests and their undead minions is not something one embarks on lightly. This one has destabilized things for that very reason.
Imarë wrote:Would Lord Morgan wish to bring Golotha to a boil again while his son is far away?
Why not? The Lord Chancellor is loyal, competent, and there are two full cohorts of the VIII Legion sitting in the castle. There is no Earl of Tormau running around the countryside either.
Imarë wrote:Could it be that Morgan waited until he was out of town (the country) to clean house himself?
Could it be that King Arren II staged the whole thing while he was out of the country so that his enemies would let down their guard?
The suggestion has also been made that Sir Auram, or the Lord Chancellor waited until he left. Maybe on his way out of the palace, Arren II said to the LC, "You know, Arthur, I think you need something to occupy your time while I'm gone. Look into the Golotha situation, willya?"
There has been a tendency to see Arren II as a figurehead, an amiable dunce, as it were. At 15, he defeated his older brother for the crown. At 18, he put down a rebellion in a matter of months. At 20, he is invading another kingdom. Throughout it all he has kept the loyalty and service of his father's best men
and his armies. He has ruled the largest kingdom on the island well for five years now. As you saw with King Darebor, this is a subtle, powerful family. Why should it be any different with Arren II? Is that not just the sort of successor Arren I would have chosen?
Imarë wrote:He would not be happy with the rebellion, nor the fact that some of the religions he detested held so much sway in the city where he was first crowned a King?
Nah, he dealt with the Agrikans as King and broke their real power. They used to hold castles and manors and had King and country as their playthings. He could easily have done the same to the Morgathians. Consider - Naveh holds no particular antipathy to the other evil gods, only Halea. A Navite would find allies amongst adherents of other evil gods, and go after the Laranians, the Peonians, and certainly the Haleans. Arren I did none of these things. The religious angle is a very thin reed to weigh Morgan's motivations.
Imarë wrote:The dispostion of the body fits what Morgan has done before, it was public and messy.
If so, then the party thwarted his intentions.