From: hostdfcval@aol.com (HOST DFC Val)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 00:40:56 EDT
Duelists,
There are currently four open slots left for this weekend's upcoming tournament. If all of the slots are not taken, then there will be an odd number of teams after the second round (there will be three teams left at this point.) At this point, the team that has the greatest margin of victory in their combined matches will receive a bye into the semi-final round. Then the two remaining teams will duel to determine which team will be in the Best of
Three final round.
However, I was optimistic that all of the slots would have been taken by this point. Considering I haven't had any registration requests other than those I received in the first three days, I'm no longer optimistic. Therefore there will be a slight change in the registration. Effective 10:00 Wednesday night, the restriction requiring one Warlord per team will be lifted. So a team of two Commoners, or two Swordsmen, or a Commoner and a Swordsman
may be entered, among the numerous other possible combinations. Warlords have had plenty of time to find a partner and enter the tournament, so now I will offer those who cannot find a Warlord partner a chance to participate.
The tournament will begin at 8:00 on both Saturday and Sunday. There will be no regular dueling in the Arena on Saturday night due to the tournament.
Val Evermeadow
Tournament Update
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: xxmaxbluexx@aol.com (Xx Max Blue xX)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 00:47:39 EDT
If anyone is in need of a partner, I am willing to team up with them for this weekends tourney. Please contact me if you are interested.
Max Blue
Date: 05 Jul 2000 00:47:39 EDT
If anyone is in need of a partner, I am willing to team up with them for this weekends tourney. Please contact me if you are interested.
Max Blue
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: cptellisamorgan@aol.com (Cpt EllisaMorgan)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 01:01:29 EDT
Sir Evermeadow,
I have a few queries so please indulge me a moment of your time. If a team of non-Warlords should happen to win out over all others, will the ring then go to one of the non-Warlords?
Was this not a tournament for a Baron's ring and is this the precedent that you truly wish to set?
Will we be allowing those who are non-Warlords to enter the quarterly tourneys?
This is a matter of curiosity, as for my own personal opinion, I do not believe that non-Warlords should be allowed to hold a Baron's ring. The titles have already lost so much, need we drag the import of them down to ground level?
Sincerely,
Ellisa Morgan
Date: 05 Jul 2000 01:01:29 EDT
Sir Evermeadow,
I have a few queries so please indulge me a moment of your time. If a team of non-Warlords should happen to win out over all others, will the ring then go to one of the non-Warlords?
Was this not a tournament for a Baron's ring and is this the precedent that you truly wish to set?
Will we be allowing those who are non-Warlords to enter the quarterly tourneys?
This is a matter of curiosity, as for my own personal opinion, I do not believe that non-Warlords should be allowed to hold a Baron's ring. The titles have already lost so much, need we drag the import of them down to ground level?
Sincerely,
Ellisa Morgan
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: hostdfcval@aol.com (HOST DFC Val)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 01:32:54 EDT
Captain Morgan,
If a team of non-Warlords makes the final round, then they will indeed duel to see who the winner is. If they're able to defeat three or four Warlord based teams, perhaps they deserve the shot? And that is a rhetorical question for those of you reading along.
Before I made this post, it was still possible for a non-Warlord to win the Baron's Ring. Granted, that non-Warlord would have to beat the Warlord in the Best of Three, but it was still possible. The lack of registration requests shows to me that the Warlords are not very interested in this tournament. The recent Warlord's Tournament, which had three Baronial rings available, also had a poor turnout. It seems to me that it's a possibility that
some Warlords aren't very concerned with those rings. If non-Warlords are interested in actually participating, then I won't deny them the opportunity.
The quarterly tournaments are Warlord Tournaments. Their very name implies that only Warlords will be participating, which will not be changing. From it's very inception, this tournament has not been one strictly for Warlords.
On a final note, you state that we may be dragging the titles down to the ground level. This may be just me, but I don't consider non-Warlords to be ground level. Everyone that has ever dueled in the Arena has been a non-Warlord, and I think even you can agree that there are some non-Warlords right now that are worthier of being a Baron than some current Warlords, and current Barons for that matter, will ever be. And considering the current crop
of Warlords seemingly aren't interested in the titles, then I say let the non-Warlords have a shot if they're inclined to.
See you this weekend, Ellisa.
Val
Date: 05 Jul 2000 01:32:54 EDT
Captain Morgan,
If a team of non-Warlords makes the final round, then they will indeed duel to see who the winner is. If they're able to defeat three or four Warlord based teams, perhaps they deserve the shot? And that is a rhetorical question for those of you reading along.
Before I made this post, it was still possible for a non-Warlord to win the Baron's Ring. Granted, that non-Warlord would have to beat the Warlord in the Best of Three, but it was still possible. The lack of registration requests shows to me that the Warlords are not very interested in this tournament. The recent Warlord's Tournament, which had three Baronial rings available, also had a poor turnout. It seems to me that it's a possibility that
some Warlords aren't very concerned with those rings. If non-Warlords are interested in actually participating, then I won't deny them the opportunity.
The quarterly tournaments are Warlord Tournaments. Their very name implies that only Warlords will be participating, which will not be changing. From it's very inception, this tournament has not been one strictly for Warlords.
On a final note, you state that we may be dragging the titles down to the ground level. This may be just me, but I don't consider non-Warlords to be ground level. Everyone that has ever dueled in the Arena has been a non-Warlord, and I think even you can agree that there are some non-Warlords right now that are worthier of being a Baron than some current Warlords, and current Barons for that matter, will ever be. And considering the current crop
of Warlords seemingly aren't interested in the titles, then I say let the non-Warlords have a shot if they're inclined to.
See you this weekend, Ellisa.
Val
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: shadowrun@aol.com (Shadowrun)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 01:53:13 EDT
Milord Evermeadow,
Some of the most promising talents in the duels are presently counted among the lower ranks. Similarly, if truth be told, some of the less sharp blades (myself no doubt included) are titled Warlord or even higher.
Your "rhetorical question" regarding the granting of a Baronial seat to any lower-ranked duelist capable of winning this tournament leads me to a simple extension, however... Allow all ranks to gather wins against Peers of the sport (Warlords, Barons and the Overlord) and lay challenge to Barons and, indeed, even the Overlord when thus credentialed.
The system of ranks has ever stood as a measure of personal accomplishment and numerical advantage in one's matches -- at the end of the day, those who won more than they lost were granted titles of increasing grandiosity.
I am in agreement that a Master at Arms who has won nine of ten duels may be more skilled than a Warlord who has won thirty of forty-five... The natural extension, then, is to offer the privilege of holding higher rank to those who prove themselves in matches against Peers of the sport.
If a commoner is able to defeat ten warlords in single combat, perhaps he or she deserves to lay challenge to a Baron?
With all respect,
Fandral Kurgan
Date: 05 Jul 2000 01:53:13 EDT
Milord Evermeadow,
Some of the most promising talents in the duels are presently counted among the lower ranks. Similarly, if truth be told, some of the less sharp blades (myself no doubt included) are titled Warlord or even higher.
Your "rhetorical question" regarding the granting of a Baronial seat to any lower-ranked duelist capable of winning this tournament leads me to a simple extension, however... Allow all ranks to gather wins against Peers of the sport (Warlords, Barons and the Overlord) and lay challenge to Barons and, indeed, even the Overlord when thus credentialed.
The system of ranks has ever stood as a measure of personal accomplishment and numerical advantage in one's matches -- at the end of the day, those who won more than they lost were granted titles of increasing grandiosity.
I am in agreement that a Master at Arms who has won nine of ten duels may be more skilled than a Warlord who has won thirty of forty-five... The natural extension, then, is to offer the privilege of holding higher rank to those who prove themselves in matches against Peers of the sport.
If a commoner is able to defeat ten warlords in single combat, perhaps he or she deserves to lay challenge to a Baron?
With all respect,
Fandral Kurgan
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: cptellisamorgan@aol.com (Cpt EllisaMorgan)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 02:25:22 EDT
Sir Evermeadow,
By ground level I did not mean to imply that those that do not hold rank are worthless byways of temperament or intelligence, but rather the titles they currently hold are not on par with the rank of Warlord, I am uncertain if you misconstrued my words but hopefully this makes clear my meaning.
But if they deserve the chance during this tourney, why not others? This is a precedent you are setting. If another ring is vacated, for whatever reason, during the course of a cycle, and considered too far from the Tourney to allow it to lay fallow will another of these tourneys be held?
You say that the Warlord Tourney by its very name eliminates the lower ranks and yet it is also in the rules that you must be a Warlord before you may challenge, or hold, the highest ranks of this sport.
Please understand, if this is what you intend I will not start a rebellion or uprising; this is not a personal matter and I would hope that you fully understand that I am looking for clarification and no more.
As for some of the lower ranks being worthy of a Barons ring, well, this sport has never set a standard for the personality or values of a duelist, but rather has focused upon the skill of that person as measured by their wins above losses.
Everyone may have an off night, just as someone may have a night that his or her luck is at its peak.
In short, again, is this the precedent you wish to set?
As for Warlord Kurgan, I am somewhat surprised at his apparent reversal of a stance he has held for nearly eight years; that being that the achievement of Warlordship is the first and entirely necessary step on the road to Overlordship or Barony.
Sincerely,
Ellisa Morgan
Date: 05 Jul 2000 02:25:22 EDT
Sir Evermeadow,
By ground level I did not mean to imply that those that do not hold rank are worthless byways of temperament or intelligence, but rather the titles they currently hold are not on par with the rank of Warlord, I am uncertain if you misconstrued my words but hopefully this makes clear my meaning.
But if they deserve the chance during this tourney, why not others? This is a precedent you are setting. If another ring is vacated, for whatever reason, during the course of a cycle, and considered too far from the Tourney to allow it to lay fallow will another of these tourneys be held?
You say that the Warlord Tourney by its very name eliminates the lower ranks and yet it is also in the rules that you must be a Warlord before you may challenge, or hold, the highest ranks of this sport.
Please understand, if this is what you intend I will not start a rebellion or uprising; this is not a personal matter and I would hope that you fully understand that I am looking for clarification and no more.
As for some of the lower ranks being worthy of a Barons ring, well, this sport has never set a standard for the personality or values of a duelist, but rather has focused upon the skill of that person as measured by their wins above losses.
Everyone may have an off night, just as someone may have a night that his or her luck is at its peak.
In short, again, is this the precedent you wish to set?
As for Warlord Kurgan, I am somewhat surprised at his apparent reversal of a stance he has held for nearly eight years; that being that the achievement of Warlordship is the first and entirely necessary step on the road to Overlordship or Barony.
Sincerely,
Ellisa Morgan
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 03:18:23 EDT
Well, first there was the pseudo Baron's Tournament, and now we have this. Next we'll be replacing the "Warlord" tournament with just a "Tournament," allowing all ranks to partake in it.
If it's too difficult to adjust to the lack of participation, then perhaps we should scrap the idea or wait for a later time. This looks more like laziness and sloppiness instead of trying to set a precedent on a good note. Maybe I'm the only one reading it this way, but I don't like it. Then again, that's just me.
And before people start saying, "So now people who aren't warlords aren't good enough to take part in the tourney?" My opinion isn't based upon lack of skill, but it eliminates a certain feeling you get when you make Warlord.
"Finally, after all this hard work, I can finally fight my peers and challenge Baron X."
It seems meaningless now. The rank of warlord seems cheapened, to me.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Date: 05 Jul 2000 03:18:23 EDT
Well, first there was the pseudo Baron's Tournament, and now we have this. Next we'll be replacing the "Warlord" tournament with just a "Tournament," allowing all ranks to partake in it.
If it's too difficult to adjust to the lack of participation, then perhaps we should scrap the idea or wait for a later time. This looks more like laziness and sloppiness instead of trying to set a precedent on a good note. Maybe I'm the only one reading it this way, but I don't like it. Then again, that's just me.
And before people start saying, "So now people who aren't warlords aren't good enough to take part in the tourney?" My opinion isn't based upon lack of skill, but it eliminates a certain feeling you get when you make Warlord.
"Finally, after all this hard work, I can finally fight my peers and challenge Baron X."
It seems meaningless now. The rank of warlord seems cheapened, to me.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: drakewyni@aol.com (Drakewyn I)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 04:33:05 EDT
Point of order.
Upon at least four separate occasions there have been Barons who would not qualify for the rank of Warlord.
Upon at least one occasion there has been an Overlord who did not qualify for the rank of Warlord.
And I am certainly not refering to the honorary titles given to the winners of the Commoners and House Oakenshield Tournies.
Would anyone dare say that Simini should not have been a Baroness the moment that her record dropped below that required for a Warlord? Or, in a better example, how about Ford Prefect?
What of Ulath Fici, who won the right to challenge the Overlord in a Warlord's Tournament? His rank dropped to Master-at-Arms, yet his challenge was still valid.
And what of those who have held the rank of Warlord in the past... yet due to a string of bad luck do not hold it now? Are they automatically less worthy, simply due to bad luck?
Consider all sides of a situation before giving a blanket dismissal of any proposal.
Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon.
Date: 05 Jul 2000 04:33:05 EDT
Point of order.
Upon at least four separate occasions there have been Barons who would not qualify for the rank of Warlord.
Upon at least one occasion there has been an Overlord who did not qualify for the rank of Warlord.
And I am certainly not refering to the honorary titles given to the winners of the Commoners and House Oakenshield Tournies.
Would anyone dare say that Simini should not have been a Baroness the moment that her record dropped below that required for a Warlord? Or, in a better example, how about Ford Prefect?
What of Ulath Fici, who won the right to challenge the Overlord in a Warlord's Tournament? His rank dropped to Master-at-Arms, yet his challenge was still valid.
And what of those who have held the rank of Warlord in the past... yet due to a string of bad luck do not hold it now? Are they automatically less worthy, simply due to bad luck?
Consider all sides of a situation before giving a blanket dismissal of any proposal.
Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: gnrtdrgoon@aol.com (GnrtDrgoon)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 06:51:45 EDT
Well, Drake..
In actuality, I would say that Ulath, Simini, Ajay and Ford, plus whomever else lost their 15 Wins Over Losses deserved those titles and challenges for one reason.
When they challenged for the title, they were Warlords. Ulath was entered in the Warlords Tourney, and lost his Warlord rank the weekend preceding the tourney, so deserved entrance.
I find there is a difference here, as when those mentioned people became Barons and Overlords, they had to start with by being a Warlord, and issued challenge as such. What happened after they achieved that title is not the point here, I think.
The point here is that people who Are Not currently Warlords are being given the oppurtunity to hold a title everyone else who worked hard to earn their rank without any real effort other than entering a tourney.
What happens in that tourney is one thing. But I'm not so sure I like the fact that they could possibly hold a title without being a Warlord beforehand.
>Upon at least four separate occasions there have been Barons who would not
>qualify for the rank of Warlord.
Just to clarify this statement. Those four occasions, the Barons who would not qualify for the rank of Warlord qualified for the rank of Warlord before they issued challenge. Ford, Simini, Ajay, and the fourth(whose name escapes me at the moment) each held more than 15 wins over losses before becoming a Baron.
There is a difference.
A Commoner who can not issue challenge right now, could possibly become a Baron through this Tournement.
I'm not sure I agree with that.
Val, what I would suggest you do, instead of just opening this tourney to any ranks, is one of two things.
1) Open the tourney to ranks to GMs. Or..
2) Lessen the needed teams to enter. I.E. Move it from 16 to 12(Not sure of teh numbers.)
Thank you.
G
Date: 05 Jul 2000 06:51:45 EDT
Well, Drake..
In actuality, I would say that Ulath, Simini, Ajay and Ford, plus whomever else lost their 15 Wins Over Losses deserved those titles and challenges for one reason.
When they challenged for the title, they were Warlords. Ulath was entered in the Warlords Tourney, and lost his Warlord rank the weekend preceding the tourney, so deserved entrance.
I find there is a difference here, as when those mentioned people became Barons and Overlords, they had to start with by being a Warlord, and issued challenge as such. What happened after they achieved that title is not the point here, I think.
The point here is that people who Are Not currently Warlords are being given the oppurtunity to hold a title everyone else who worked hard to earn their rank without any real effort other than entering a tourney.
What happens in that tourney is one thing. But I'm not so sure I like the fact that they could possibly hold a title without being a Warlord beforehand.
>Upon at least four separate occasions there have been Barons who would not
>qualify for the rank of Warlord.
Just to clarify this statement. Those four occasions, the Barons who would not qualify for the rank of Warlord qualified for the rank of Warlord before they issued challenge. Ford, Simini, Ajay, and the fourth(whose name escapes me at the moment) each held more than 15 wins over losses before becoming a Baron.
There is a difference.
A Commoner who can not issue challenge right now, could possibly become a Baron through this Tournement.
I'm not sure I agree with that.
Val, what I would suggest you do, instead of just opening this tourney to any ranks, is one of two things.
1) Open the tourney to ranks to GMs. Or..
2) Lessen the needed teams to enter. I.E. Move it from 16 to 12(Not sure of teh numbers.)
Thank you.
G
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: darylkyle@aol.com (Daryl Kyle)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 07:49:36 EDT
I see everyone here making a good point....What I'm about to say is from my own experiences so.....
The Pros:
First, I've been dueling for over 1 year now and I became Baron of the 6th just 5 months of dueling....but when I first started I was in love with the Baronial Rings...Throughout my career they have been my driving force so to speak. I'm sure that all of these commoners and such feel almost the same way. If they are allowed to enter the tourney and feel the way I did then it is a shining point of thier careers and could produce many good effects
if they bring other patrons to the sport.
Second, At one point during my career I held 43 WoL...that has been my best. I've been on a losing streak for the past few months....Now, if my calculations are correct I am either at 15 or 16 WoL. I know that many of you don't think I'm a good dueler and then again some of you do. Just because someone doesn't hold the rank of Warlord doesn't mean that they don't have the skill to have it..they just haven't made it yet. It would be a good way
to see pretty much of what is up and coming to the Duels.
Third, I think that many warlords would be offended by this and many of these warlords are sitting on a goldmine of peers...I think that it might spur the challenges up again
Now for the Cons:
Dispite all that I just said I have to agree with Var and G'nort. Some of us warlords have been dueling since the arena doors opened. We've fought, struggled, killed ourselfs for the rank of warlord and to progress further to hold a ring or even the crown. To let a commoner who had his first duel Sunday night to enter and give him the same oppritunities that those of us have in this tourney isn't fair to the 24 warlords that did enter. If the
warlords just had an average night, but this commoner just got all the luck in the world and won...then everything that all u\of us have strove for is useless.
Daryl Kyle
Warlord of the Duel of Swords
Former Baron of the 6th Baronial Ring
Date: 05 Jul 2000 07:49:36 EDT
I see everyone here making a good point....What I'm about to say is from my own experiences so.....
The Pros:
First, I've been dueling for over 1 year now and I became Baron of the 6th just 5 months of dueling....but when I first started I was in love with the Baronial Rings...Throughout my career they have been my driving force so to speak. I'm sure that all of these commoners and such feel almost the same way. If they are allowed to enter the tourney and feel the way I did then it is a shining point of thier careers and could produce many good effects
if they bring other patrons to the sport.
Second, At one point during my career I held 43 WoL...that has been my best. I've been on a losing streak for the past few months....Now, if my calculations are correct I am either at 15 or 16 WoL. I know that many of you don't think I'm a good dueler and then again some of you do. Just because someone doesn't hold the rank of Warlord doesn't mean that they don't have the skill to have it..they just haven't made it yet. It would be a good way
to see pretty much of what is up and coming to the Duels.
Third, I think that many warlords would be offended by this and many of these warlords are sitting on a goldmine of peers...I think that it might spur the challenges up again
Now for the Cons:
Dispite all that I just said I have to agree with Var and G'nort. Some of us warlords have been dueling since the arena doors opened. We've fought, struggled, killed ourselfs for the rank of warlord and to progress further to hold a ring or even the crown. To let a commoner who had his first duel Sunday night to enter and give him the same oppritunities that those of us have in this tourney isn't fair to the 24 warlords that did enter. If the
warlords just had an average night, but this commoner just got all the luck in the world and won...then everything that all u\of us have strove for is useless.
Daryl Kyle
Warlord of the Duel of Swords
Former Baron of the 6th Baronial Ring
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: dreystarke@aol.com (DreyStarke)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 09:48:22 EDT
I don't want no commoner wearing a ring.
- Drey D'erest Sanchez SIZE=5 PTSIZE=16>Starke
Date: 05 Jul 2000 09:48:22 EDT
I don't want no commoner wearing a ring.
- Drey D'erest Sanchez SIZE=5 PTSIZE=16>Starke
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 13:27:37 EDT
"If it's too difficult to adjust to the lack of participation, then perhaps we should scrap the idea or wait for a later time."
Or perhaps we should simply get rid of the four superfluous Baronies which were so precipitously foisted upon us...
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 05 Jul 2000 13:27:37 EDT
"If it's too difficult to adjust to the lack of participation, then perhaps we should scrap the idea or wait for a later time."
Or perhaps we should simply get rid of the four superfluous Baronies which were so precipitously foisted upon us...
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 14:19:08 EDT
>Or perhaps we should simply get rid of the four superfluous Baronies which
>were so precipitously foisted upon us...
Precisely so. In my opinion, the fact that there are now so many rings is one of the major reasons that warlords are losing interest in those rings.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Warlord of the Duel of Swords
The White Duke
Date: 05 Jul 2000 14:19:08 EDT
>Or perhaps we should simply get rid of the four superfluous Baronies which
>were so precipitously foisted upon us...
Precisely so. In my opinion, the fact that there are now so many rings is one of the major reasons that warlords are losing interest in those rings.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Warlord of the Duel of Swords
The White Duke
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: novagreys@aol.com (Nova GreyS)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 15:52:05 EDT
Concerning this "commoners shouldn't have rings" silliness. There was a time when I would have said the same thing. Unfortunately, looking at the current and recent crop of barons, I'd say the Warlords aren't exactly the greatest baron material. Actions over record. If the Warlords insist on being petty idiots, give the goods to the lower class until they're on par with the biggest of the idiot Warlords. Maybe the
lower ranks will actually treasure or ... gasp ... revere their status.
Until you lords and ladies prove you're capable of otherwise, I'll applaud the first lower rank to fight their way into the Barony and actually show it a little respect.
-Nova Grey Shadow
Date: 05 Jul 2000 15:52:05 EDT
Concerning this "commoners shouldn't have rings" silliness. There was a time when I would have said the same thing. Unfortunately, looking at the current and recent crop of barons, I'd say the Warlords aren't exactly the greatest baron material. Actions over record. If the Warlords insist on being petty idiots, give the goods to the lower class until they're on par with the biggest of the idiot Warlords. Maybe the
lower ranks will actually treasure or ... gasp ... revere their status.
Until you lords and ladies prove you're capable of otherwise, I'll applaud the first lower rank to fight their way into the Barony and actually show it a little respect.
-Nova Grey Shadow
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: dreystarke@aol.com (DreyStarke)
Date: 05 Jul 2000 17:22:04 EDT
Oh wonderful and God of them all, Nova...
Before you go around casting words like, "look at the Barons of today. Pitiful!" Why don't you take a quick look at yourself in your wake of arrogance? Perhaps the wallowing in your own mindless ramblings blinds you from whatever truth you have locked in that pretentious head of yours. And of course, since your Royal "Heinous" knows exactly how a Baron should act, he should, presumably challenge. Alas, I don't see it.
To whomever is interested,
Even though I don't like Rix and Magnus, and a vast amount of others, at least they have the guts to challenge to make a difference. It's either that, or sit down and whine about how the Baron's currently act like G does. Then when he actually does something and challenges, taking the ring into his possession, what does he do? He retires and STILL complains to this day.
Even this current Tournament is a wonderful example of how much motivation runs through our Warlord's veins. I know if I was allowed to enter, I'd sure as hell be in it by now. I know someone that would take me in a second, believe it or not.
- Drey D'erest Sanchez SIZE=5 PTSIZE=16>Starke
Date: 05 Jul 2000 17:22:04 EDT
Oh wonderful and God of them all, Nova...
Before you go around casting words like, "look at the Barons of today. Pitiful!" Why don't you take a quick look at yourself in your wake of arrogance? Perhaps the wallowing in your own mindless ramblings blinds you from whatever truth you have locked in that pretentious head of yours. And of course, since your Royal "Heinous" knows exactly how a Baron should act, he should, presumably challenge. Alas, I don't see it.
To whomever is interested,
Even though I don't like Rix and Magnus, and a vast amount of others, at least they have the guts to challenge to make a difference. It's either that, or sit down and whine about how the Baron's currently act like G does. Then when he actually does something and challenges, taking the ring into his possession, what does he do? He retires and STILL complains to this day.
Even this current Tournament is a wonderful example of how much motivation runs through our Warlord's veins. I know if I was allowed to enter, I'd sure as hell be in it by now. I know someone that would take me in a second, believe it or not.
- Drey D'erest Sanchez SIZE=5 PTSIZE=16>Starke