Warlord Tourney Results

[DoS Archive]

From: joaknshld@aol.com (J Oaknshld)
Date: 25 Feb 1999 23:36:02 EST

Drake,

Two points I bring ta yer attention.

Da quote from our rules reads:

"If the Overlord should banish a Loyalist to a Renegade alignment then the Overlord must accept an immediate challenge of title if issued by that Baron."

Immediate does not imply he must accept, it actually says he must accept.

Secondly, I refer ta yer quote:

"However, the exact word Immediate, taken to extremes, indicates that the Baron and the Overlord should duel the very moment the Standing's Keeper receives the missive. After all, that's an immediate challenge, not an immediate right to challenge... true?"

A "challenge" is da whole process of submittin' peer wins (not applicable in dis situation), confirmation by our sports officials, settin' of da date and time, choosin' of a caller, and den actually steppin' inta da rings and sluggin' it out.

Immediate challenge cannot, even at an extreme, be equated with immediate duel. By sheer logic, no one could hold da Overlord or challenger ta duel at da exact moment our standin's keeper reads da letter. One or both could be in da bathroom takin' a shower, or on vacation, or involved in a million other activities.

Our rulebook's wordin' isn't so ambiguous we cannot apply a meanin', da conflict comes from two understandable clauses clashin' with each other.

We don't need ta change da wordin', so much as we have ta add another clause or two.

~J

[DoS Archive]

From: drakewyni@aol.com (Drakewyn I)
Date: 25 Feb 1999 23:52:40 EST

Jeff.

Thank you for making my point clear.
I wasn't seriously suggesting this be done. After all, Immediate could have meant that when Eros told Adonai Monday night that he was going to align him Renegade that they should have dueled right at that very moment.
The point I was making is that it's very dangerous to always follow the exact wording of the rules. In most cases the wording of the rules is just fine... but in rare cases, such as this one, it's important to note that the spirit of the rules must be considered more than the wording of the rules.
I refer you to my closing statement. "Just pointing out the ridiculousness of following the exact wording of the rules."


Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon.

[DoS Archive]

From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 26 Feb 1999 00:42:30 EST

Madame Silvertree,

Wouldst care to expound upon the meaning of "supersede" or the phrase "cannot be denied"? Or perhaps thee wouldst care to expound upon the phrase, "subject to the "Universal Terms of Challenge" in addition to expounding upon the meaning of "Immediate"?

Jonalyn Starfare

[DoS Archive]

From: iainmacknz@aol.com (IainMacKnz)
Date: 26 Feb 1999 00:50:21 EST

Jona:

I prefer to ponder the phrase "must accept," which is the key to the entire question of a challenge queue.

If, indeed, the Overlord MUST ACCEPT the challenge of a Renegade Baron, this certainly contradicts the other; essentially, the rules are saying there are two challenges here which the Overlord must accept.

I trust you understand this, given your agreement that, had Eric's challenge been given precedence, Adonai's would then have to follow in the event of Eros' victory.

Ian Rex.

[DoS Archive]

From: occurs@aol.com (Occurs)
Date: 26 Feb 1999 03:55:32 EST

::finding no fault with her husband - as it usually is - smiles and enjoys his prowess. Darts off to throw-up his prowess, as the pesky morning sickness falls upon her:::