fairwater wrote:So then we can assume that the intrigue sequences should only be applied when both parties are attempting to get something out of the deal.....
From what we know so far, I'd tend to agree with you here. There may be additional intrigue options and mechanics in the corebook, of course, but it seems to me that situations in which only one party is actually trying to achieve something in a social or political situation, roleplaying and a single persuasion/deception test (or an extended test, perhaps) should be sufficient.
fairwater wrote:so lets set up the same secenario, where the cagey lord is trying to get the PC's to do that favor and go out to rid the country side of bandits. Now we have what would be a "Bargining" type intrigue, but statistically speaking the pc's - 3-6 of them have to only convince one lord only one "opponent" to face, while the lord must face off against all 3-6 pcs.
That's a good point. However, I think it will be up to the GM to balance things out, e. g. by giving the cagey lord some help (such as his heir, his lady wife, his steward, his bannermen, etc.) against the PC's in situations like the one you describe.
In that respect, it's similar to a combat situation in which the PC's only have to fight one opponent. Without additional challenges, they will win easily, of course, but where's the fun in that? A good GM will find ways to make things interesting.