Date: 9/10/97 2:43 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: LrdPrefect
::settles back and scribes a hopefully simple note::
Jeffrey has a half-way decent idea on first look, though I shall reserve any further comment on that for now.
The idea I am toying with and intend to use when the time is right is WoL record among Peers (as far as the Warlord Rank and Challenge System goes). What this would mean to me is some relative extensive record keeping as well as use of the Warlord's Corner and the ranking system listed there.
Whenever I re-achieve the rank of Warlord, I intend to track every one of my duels among my peers. I will have a listing of all warlords and mark my record against each one. The final results when I am ready to challenge will have my overall WoL record among my peers, which will be at least 10 WoL, as well as the record for each of the peers that I dueled. Therefore, in theory, I will have at least a 25-0-0 Overall record, witha 10-0-0 record among my peers, with those 10 wins being from 10 different
peers.
Bottom line, I feel a similar system would work nicely as the norm for all warlords. . . a positive WoL among peers, and a peer win my not be included unless the challenger has a positive WoL against that one peer.
Just my thoughts, goals and intentions on the matter. . .
The Duelist Formerly known as Baron Ford
::chuckles and tacks note up among the many other missives::
An idea ta kick around again
-
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
Date: 9/10/97 4:37 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Xyclone
Readin' ovah all th responses so far...tis me own humble opinion tha Lord Ford Prefect an Zsyber ha said it best...Havin th WL's maintain a WoL record gainst their Peers and a percentage above, say 55% wouldn't be askin too much. Righ nha we (the DoS community) haves almost as mannah WL's as Commonahs, with eithah rank greatly outnumberin th middle ranks...so o course th challenge rate is gonna be greatly increrased...these proposals ha th greatest chance ta succeed in limitin th numbah o challenges an
enhancin th skill o th Warlords/Ladies seekin ta gain th honor an stature tha a Barony woulds surely bring...
Xy
From: Xyclone
Readin' ovah all th responses so far...tis me own humble opinion tha Lord Ford Prefect an Zsyber ha said it best...Havin th WL's maintain a WoL record gainst their Peers and a percentage above, say 55% wouldn't be askin too much. Righ nha we (the DoS community) haves almost as mannah WL's as Commonahs, with eithah rank greatly outnumberin th middle ranks...so o course th challenge rate is gonna be greatly increrased...these proposals ha th greatest chance ta succeed in limitin th numbah o challenges an
enhancin th skill o th Warlords/Ladies seekin ta gain th honor an stature tha a Barony woulds surely bring...
Xy
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/10/97 6:41 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: PKardinal
This way, that way...
We can't make everyone happy. It's nearly impossible. If we all waited to agree on one system, we'd be dead before it gets done. So, we must take initiative here, and act upon this problem. Jeff has made a few good points, as well as others, and we must take these all into consideration, and just try to make the most people agree with what is to be done.
~Phil
From: PKardinal
This way, that way...
We can't make everyone happy. It's nearly impossible. If we all waited to agree on one system, we'd be dead before it gets done. So, we must take initiative here, and act upon this problem. Jeff has made a few good points, as well as others, and we must take these all into consideration, and just try to make the most people agree with what is to be done.
~Phil
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/10/97 9:03 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Drakewyn
::Takes the time to read the main posting and all subsequent responses before placing her own message.::
I have been called opinionated and outspoken, but once again I feel the need to voice my opinion.
As a dueler of no little experience, though not nearly as much as most of the higher ranking memebers of our community. If that, along with my less-than-sterling record against peers, makes my opinion less valuable, then so be it.
I have no doubt that during this coming weekend, I will achieve my tenth peer-win. Does this mean I will challenge? No, it does not. I entered the last WarLord's tourney to see how I could do, and to gain, if I could, the right to challenge the Overlord. If, for some reason, I could have managed to win, I would have taken the challenge right rather than the ring.
I believe that the recent rash of challenges will taper off now. Most of those able to challenge now will either hold off until they feel there is a real need for them to, or finish gaining the last of their peer wins and possibly face challenge if they win.
When my friend Gnort challenged, it was because he believed that Skyler's asking the Overlord about loyalty was not proper behavior for a Baron. If Skyler had not won, Gnort would probably held off challenging for some other, similar circumstance. Or, if Skyler had shown greater understanding of, and respect for, the title of Baron, Gnort would probably not have challenged.
With respect, most of those who have challenged have been the sort of people who show a great deal of respect to both the sport and those in it. Is it just that they challenge that makes them bad people?
Lastly, if there is someone you truely believe doesn't deserve to challenge, then don't duel them. You can't challenge without the right number of peer wins.
Another option for cutting down on challenges is to only allow peer wins to count for two months. This would require those that wished to challenge to duel more often, and work harder to gain that right. This, in part, would also mean that one would almost have to be in the top bracket to be able to challenge. I agree with the thought that an increase in the number of peer wins needed to challenge would help as well. These two idea's together would do even more to reduce the number of challenges
and yet keep the elitism from entering into it.
Finally, these are -my- thoughts. I don't claim to represent any group, house or organization and am more than willing to hear differing opinions... or even the rare agreement.
The Lady Drakewyn Alabaster the Tenth.
Lady of too many titles to list here.
From: Drakewyn
::Takes the time to read the main posting and all subsequent responses before placing her own message.::
I have been called opinionated and outspoken, but once again I feel the need to voice my opinion.
As a dueler of no little experience, though not nearly as much as most of the higher ranking memebers of our community. If that, along with my less-than-sterling record against peers, makes my opinion less valuable, then so be it.
I have no doubt that during this coming weekend, I will achieve my tenth peer-win. Does this mean I will challenge? No, it does not. I entered the last WarLord's tourney to see how I could do, and to gain, if I could, the right to challenge the Overlord. If, for some reason, I could have managed to win, I would have taken the challenge right rather than the ring.
I believe that the recent rash of challenges will taper off now. Most of those able to challenge now will either hold off until they feel there is a real need for them to, or finish gaining the last of their peer wins and possibly face challenge if they win.
When my friend Gnort challenged, it was because he believed that Skyler's asking the Overlord about loyalty was not proper behavior for a Baron. If Skyler had not won, Gnort would probably held off challenging for some other, similar circumstance. Or, if Skyler had shown greater understanding of, and respect for, the title of Baron, Gnort would probably not have challenged.
With respect, most of those who have challenged have been the sort of people who show a great deal of respect to both the sport and those in it. Is it just that they challenge that makes them bad people?
Lastly, if there is someone you truely believe doesn't deserve to challenge, then don't duel them. You can't challenge without the right number of peer wins.
Another option for cutting down on challenges is to only allow peer wins to count for two months. This would require those that wished to challenge to duel more often, and work harder to gain that right. This, in part, would also mean that one would almost have to be in the top bracket to be able to challenge. I agree with the thought that an increase in the number of peer wins needed to challenge would help as well. These two idea's together would do even more to reduce the number of challenges
and yet keep the elitism from entering into it.
Finally, these are -my- thoughts. I don't claim to represent any group, house or organization and am more than willing to hear differing opinions... or even the rare agreement.
The Lady Drakewyn Alabaster the Tenth.
Lady of too many titles to list here.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/10/97 11:25 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: DarkAngeIa
Just a quick question.
Kayne states at the end of his letter, "Someone has to get screwed."
With the Challenge Bracket, all but 10 warlords are getting screwed. And most of those warlords may not want to challenge at all. While others may wish to challenge because they feel issues are at stake, or insult must be paid, or, yes, simply for the title.
With the present system, who is getting screwed?
Honestly, I'd really like some answers here.
Angela de Miedo
From: DarkAngeIa
Just a quick question.
Kayne states at the end of his letter, "Someone has to get screwed."
With the Challenge Bracket, all but 10 warlords are getting screwed. And most of those warlords may not want to challenge at all. While others may wish to challenge because they feel issues are at stake, or insult must be paid, or, yes, simply for the title.
With the present system, who is getting screwed?
Honestly, I'd really like some answers here.
Angela de Miedo
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/11/97 7:58 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: TinyTopaz
Drake,
l have to agree with you. Why change something that works well the way it is. A Baron is made up of more then percentages and peer wins anyways. The ones with the most skill in the rings are not nesseccarily the best Baron material. And the rules are already there to have less challanges if the Barons would make use of them. You do not have to fight out a challange within in days of being challanged but can take your time in even answering such a challange.
Topaz
From: TinyTopaz
Drake,
l have to agree with you. Why change something that works well the way it is. A Baron is made up of more then percentages and peer wins anyways. The ones with the most skill in the rings are not nesseccarily the best Baron material. And the rules are already there to have less challanges if the Barons would make use of them. You do not have to fight out a challange within in days of being challanged but can take your time in even answering such a challange.
Topaz
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/11/97 8:45 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: Kalamere
> With the Challenge Bracket, all but 10 warlords are getting screwed.
No one is "getting screwed." What Jeff has proposed here, is a system that he and I brought up several months ago, and will bring up again at the time of the Rules council. The reason I say no one is getting screwed by this idea, is that the present rules are overly generous. It is a matter of perspective.
Presently, duelists in this sport enjoy a right not present anywhere else. The proposed system will still give the people of DoS more rights than they would have in another sport, yet less than what they presently have. Put in one perspective, you might compare the proposed system to the current system and see only what is being lost. In my own perspective however, I compare the proposed system to DoM and DoF, where a new holder of the Supreme title can only come about once every three months. In
order to hold either the ArchMage or Diamond titles, a duelist must win the quarterly tournament. In that perspective, DoS will still be much more generous in what it allows duelists to accomplish.
> With the present system, who is getting screwed?
1) The lower ranks. Peer wins are an evil by my eyes. They do naught but give incentive for warlords to fight only warlords. Every week there are more complaints about this from people of lower rank who wish to duel. I point no fingers here and don't wish to get drawn into a discussion of what everyone's philosophy on the issue is. I'm simply pointing out that, as things stand, warlords have good reason to duel only warlords. Take that reason away and perhaps the complaints from the lower ranks
will follow.
2) The Environment as a whole. Another evil of peer wins. Too many warlords are on a quest to get them in as quickly as possible. A thing oft refered to as "power dueling." Those who step into the arena and duel 20 peers in a weekend. This has two effects:
(a) it lessens the quality of the atmosphere.. these people appear to be in blood lust, caring nothing about the Arena itself, and only the winning of a duel. DoS is a sport, yes, but it is also a community to many. The dance of steele is a beautifull display of skill that I would not wish to lose. But the Arena itself has a larger purpose. We gather here and share our lives.. it is a shame that so many fail to take the time to share an ale and a bit of conversation with their fellow duelists. (in
ooc terms.. DoS was created to be a tool for roleplaying, not just a power game to be won.. the peer win system promotes the later)
(b) Peer wins create a strain on the Officials. Both the tracking of these wins and the continuos calling of the matches. If, and this is probably a far cry from reality, but if people satisfied clause (a) and began to enjoy each others company a bit more outside of the ring, it would go some distance towards lessening the numbers in queue and perhaps letting the staff breath on occassion.
3) Those who duel infrequently. The peer win system clearly favors those who "power duel." The sport is not intended for they alone, however. A warlord is no less dedicated to the sport if s/he only finds time for a duel or two a weekend than the warlord who finds time for 20, yet it is the latter who will be able to challenge in two weeks time. The former may well be present, yet taking the time to duel those of lower ranks, or perhaps s/he is there and just not dueling... enjoying an ale with
some friends instead.
4) Those who hold the titles. The more challenges that come from those who are brand new to the sport and yet to prove themselves in any manner, leads to the descending relavency of the baron title. The lack of respect for the titlescontinues to shown by the inability to issue proper challenge for them.
That is who is presently "getting screwed" ... in my opinion. Others will like this proposal for completely different reasons than mine. Thankfully, it can serve all, and maybe even do some good along the way.
~Kal...
From: Kalamere
> With the Challenge Bracket, all but 10 warlords are getting screwed.
No one is "getting screwed." What Jeff has proposed here, is a system that he and I brought up several months ago, and will bring up again at the time of the Rules council. The reason I say no one is getting screwed by this idea, is that the present rules are overly generous. It is a matter of perspective.
Presently, duelists in this sport enjoy a right not present anywhere else. The proposed system will still give the people of DoS more rights than they would have in another sport, yet less than what they presently have. Put in one perspective, you might compare the proposed system to the current system and see only what is being lost. In my own perspective however, I compare the proposed system to DoM and DoF, where a new holder of the Supreme title can only come about once every three months. In
order to hold either the ArchMage or Diamond titles, a duelist must win the quarterly tournament. In that perspective, DoS will still be much more generous in what it allows duelists to accomplish.
> With the present system, who is getting screwed?
1) The lower ranks. Peer wins are an evil by my eyes. They do naught but give incentive for warlords to fight only warlords. Every week there are more complaints about this from people of lower rank who wish to duel. I point no fingers here and don't wish to get drawn into a discussion of what everyone's philosophy on the issue is. I'm simply pointing out that, as things stand, warlords have good reason to duel only warlords. Take that reason away and perhaps the complaints from the lower ranks
will follow.
2) The Environment as a whole. Another evil of peer wins. Too many warlords are on a quest to get them in as quickly as possible. A thing oft refered to as "power dueling." Those who step into the arena and duel 20 peers in a weekend. This has two effects:
(a) it lessens the quality of the atmosphere.. these people appear to be in blood lust, caring nothing about the Arena itself, and only the winning of a duel. DoS is a sport, yes, but it is also a community to many. The dance of steele is a beautifull display of skill that I would not wish to lose. But the Arena itself has a larger purpose. We gather here and share our lives.. it is a shame that so many fail to take the time to share an ale and a bit of conversation with their fellow duelists. (in
ooc terms.. DoS was created to be a tool for roleplaying, not just a power game to be won.. the peer win system promotes the later)
(b) Peer wins create a strain on the Officials. Both the tracking of these wins and the continuos calling of the matches. If, and this is probably a far cry from reality, but if people satisfied clause (a) and began to enjoy each others company a bit more outside of the ring, it would go some distance towards lessening the numbers in queue and perhaps letting the staff breath on occassion.
3) Those who duel infrequently. The peer win system clearly favors those who "power duel." The sport is not intended for they alone, however. A warlord is no less dedicated to the sport if s/he only finds time for a duel or two a weekend than the warlord who finds time for 20, yet it is the latter who will be able to challenge in two weeks time. The former may well be present, yet taking the time to duel those of lower ranks, or perhaps s/he is there and just not dueling... enjoying an ale with
some friends instead.
4) Those who hold the titles. The more challenges that come from those who are brand new to the sport and yet to prove themselves in any manner, leads to the descending relavency of the baron title. The lack of respect for the titlescontinues to shown by the inability to issue proper challenge for them.
That is who is presently "getting screwed" ... in my opinion. Others will like this proposal for completely different reasons than mine. Thankfully, it can serve all, and maybe even do some good along the way.
~Kal...
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/11/97 1:04 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: JOaknshld
Out of curiousity..when is dis rules council I hear so much about? Da discussions seemingly exists, and I've heard formerly its just RDIs, and now perhaps da patrons as well. Have any dates been chosen yet? DoF just had dere Round Table discussion among refs and patrons alike..perhaps its DoS' turn ta get on dat ball?
From: JOaknshld
Out of curiousity..when is dis rules council I hear so much about? Da discussions seemingly exists, and I've heard formerly its just RDIs, and now perhaps da patrons as well. Have any dates been chosen yet? DoF just had dere Round Table discussion among refs and patrons alike..perhaps its DoS' turn ta get on dat ball?
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/11/97 10:11 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Drakewynx
I have said my piece, but I feel the need to add one last thing.
Topaz said it well, one need not accept a challenge and set the duel all within the same week. And, as I said in an earlier post, if you don't wish to be challenged every week as a Baron, declare yourself loyal.
As Angela said, being the best duelist does not mean you would be the best Baron, much less Overlord. These posts, and indeed even the rank of WarLord, make you someone that others look to for some level of guidance. If you say, "I never asked to be a role model." then you have no right to wear a Baron's ring, much less the Crown.
I still say that limiting the challenges to an elite few duelists is a mistake, and a grave one. What point in being a WarLord if you know that you will probably never make that "top ten"? I know that I will probably never be one of the very best, but should I be penalized so harshly for that? It should be noted that I will duel anyone who asks, save those very few that I know I cannot beat as of yet. I lose to, and win against, most every rank there is and I am not afraid to admit it.
There is little more I can say that I have not said previously on this very subject. If you have read my previous responce, do so again... there may be more there than you thought. If you have not read my previous responce, than I urge you to do so.
Drake.
From: Drakewynx
I have said my piece, but I feel the need to add one last thing.
Topaz said it well, one need not accept a challenge and set the duel all within the same week. And, as I said in an earlier post, if you don't wish to be challenged every week as a Baron, declare yourself loyal.
As Angela said, being the best duelist does not mean you would be the best Baron, much less Overlord. These posts, and indeed even the rank of WarLord, make you someone that others look to for some level of guidance. If you say, "I never asked to be a role model." then you have no right to wear a Baron's ring, much less the Crown.
I still say that limiting the challenges to an elite few duelists is a mistake, and a grave one. What point in being a WarLord if you know that you will probably never make that "top ten"? I know that I will probably never be one of the very best, but should I be penalized so harshly for that? It should be noted that I will duel anyone who asks, save those very few that I know I cannot beat as of yet. I lose to, and win against, most every rank there is and I am not afraid to admit it.
There is little more I can say that I have not said previously on this very subject. If you have read my previous responce, do so again... there may be more there than you thought. If you have not read my previous responce, than I urge you to do so.
Drake.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/12/97 11:14 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: KayneRune
>>I still say that limiting the challenges to an elite few duelists is a mistake, and a grave one. What point in being a WarLord if you know that you will probably never make that "top ten"? I know that I will probably never be one of the very best, but should I be penalized so harshly for that? <<
Drake,
While I agree with you somewhat on this, I still think their should be a challenge bracket. The only difference, though, is that there could be an unlimited number of people in it. This way, everyone would get their shot.
Setting goals gives people something to strive for.
Baronship should not come easily and should be reserved for those who prove themselves worthy, in *and* out of the ring.
PS: I'm not one to brag (too much, anyways), so I'll make this short....
I was never a great duelist. In fact, I used to be horrible. *Used* to, Drake. Right before my retirement I hit #1 in the warlord ranks with a 10-2 record....but my retirement forced me to withdraw, so my name was never listed. Anything's possible, you just have to work hard and strive for your goals.
In the words of the two people which I most admire in life, "To work hard is what is expected. To train like a madman is to exceed all limitations."
~Kayne
From: KayneRune
>>I still say that limiting the challenges to an elite few duelists is a mistake, and a grave one. What point in being a WarLord if you know that you will probably never make that "top ten"? I know that I will probably never be one of the very best, but should I be penalized so harshly for that? <<
Drake,
While I agree with you somewhat on this, I still think their should be a challenge bracket. The only difference, though, is that there could be an unlimited number of people in it. This way, everyone would get their shot.
Setting goals gives people something to strive for.
Baronship should not come easily and should be reserved for those who prove themselves worthy, in *and* out of the ring.
PS: I'm not one to brag (too much, anyways), so I'll make this short....
I was never a great duelist. In fact, I used to be horrible. *Used* to, Drake. Right before my retirement I hit #1 in the warlord ranks with a 10-2 record....but my retirement forced me to withdraw, so my name was never listed. Anything's possible, you just have to work hard and strive for your goals.
In the words of the two people which I most admire in life, "To work hard is what is expected. To train like a madman is to exceed all limitations."
~Kayne
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/12/97 12:14 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Occurs
MsgId:
>>I say increase everything.
Swordsman=5WoL
M@A =10 WoL
GM=15WoL
WL=20WoL<<
::looks thoughtfully at this idea, many of the others to convoluted and involved for her to understand without *much* reflection. Hesitates and scribbles underneath::
How 'bout mixin' it up a bit. Addin' a couple o' ranks.
Commoner > 1WoL 0 Fancy Maneuvers
Swords Woman 2 - 4WoL 1 Fancy Maneuver
Mistress-at-Arms 5 - 9WoL 2 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand Mistress 10 - 14WoL 3 Fancy Maneuvers
Warlady 15 - 30WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand WarLady 30+ WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers and right to challange
Baroness 30+ WoL
and challange by
Grand WarLady 5 Fancy Maneuvers and a Ring
Overlady 30+ WoL and
Challange stuff 6 Fancy Maneuvers
::scampers off forgetting to sign her name::
From: Occurs
MsgId:
>>I say increase everything.
Swordsman=5WoL
M@A =10 WoL
GM=15WoL
WL=20WoL<<
::looks thoughtfully at this idea, many of the others to convoluted and involved for her to understand without *much* reflection. Hesitates and scribbles underneath::
How 'bout mixin' it up a bit. Addin' a couple o' ranks.
Commoner > 1WoL 0 Fancy Maneuvers
Swords Woman 2 - 4WoL 1 Fancy Maneuver
Mistress-at-Arms 5 - 9WoL 2 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand Mistress 10 - 14WoL 3 Fancy Maneuvers
Warlady 15 - 30WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand WarLady 30+ WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers and right to challange
Baroness 30+ WoL
and challange by
Grand WarLady 5 Fancy Maneuvers and a Ring
Overlady 30+ WoL and
Challange stuff 6 Fancy Maneuvers
::scampers off forgetting to sign her name::
-
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
Date: 9/12/97 1:35 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: GIRVIN
>>How 'bout mixin' it up a bit. Addin' a couple o' ranks.
Commoner > 1WoL 0 Fancy Maneuvers
Swords Woman 2 - 4WoL 1 Fancy Maneuver
Mistress-at-Arms 5 - 9WoL 2 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand Mistress 10 - 14WoL 3 Fancy Maneuvers
Warlady 15 - 30WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand WarLady 30+ WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers and right to challange
Baroness 30+ WoL
and challange by
Grand WarLady 5 Fancy Maneuvers and a Ring
Overlady 30+ WoL and
Challange stuff 6 Fancy Maneuvers<<
Really, Occurs? Ye wish to make DoS that much more difficult for new people? Are the moves not trouble enough on their own, without adding in more ranks?
>> if you don't wish to be challenged every week as a Baron, declare yourself loyal.<<
So free choice isna an option? If ye find the current Overlord is desreving of less than loyalty ye are t' swallow you honor and declare loyal?? Tis no better option than the massive overturns we have now.
>>I still say that limiting the challenges to an elite few duelists is a mistake, and a grave one. What point in being a WarLord if you know that you will probably never make that "top ten"?<<
I think ye may need to look at what is being said a bit closer. Kalamere has explained his proposal to me and it seems to line up somewhat with what Draven suggested:
>> In order to hold either the ArchMage or Diamond titles, a duelist must win the quarterly tournament. <<
Ye must contend that while Dalamar has been lucky, he hasna exactly had much of a chance to enjoy his title no? Aye dueling is dueling but there should be reward for winning such an honor. Instead he is challenged as soon as he leaves the ring of his last defense. The simple fact is that I myself have expirenced what Kalamere mentioned. Warlords who made me feel verra small because they were only out for peer wins. I count only three warlords or higher that have ever bothered to duel with me,
Seamus, Jeff, and Gnort. The current system is only friendly to those with out the coushion of 20 or so peer wins to have options open. With the idea Kalamere explained to me t'would create an enviorment that would use the current warlord ranking system, ina way, to mark the best 10, no' just the ones that have 4 hours to kill on a friday and saturday night, thereby opening up to more than just those "power duelers."
Anna sporting event should be that, an event. A time to enjoy the company of friends and make new ones. To exchange ideas and share a laugh as a group of people sharing a common intrest, which by the way is one definition of guild and community.
I suspect that there are more than 1,000 people involved somehow with DoS, its time we treated them *all* with the same concern that peer wins get now.
~Brian
From: GIRVIN
>>How 'bout mixin' it up a bit. Addin' a couple o' ranks.
Commoner > 1WoL 0 Fancy Maneuvers
Swords Woman 2 - 4WoL 1 Fancy Maneuver
Mistress-at-Arms 5 - 9WoL 2 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand Mistress 10 - 14WoL 3 Fancy Maneuvers
Warlady 15 - 30WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand WarLady 30+ WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers and right to challange
Baroness 30+ WoL
and challange by
Grand WarLady 5 Fancy Maneuvers and a Ring
Overlady 30+ WoL and
Challange stuff 6 Fancy Maneuvers<<
Really, Occurs? Ye wish to make DoS that much more difficult for new people? Are the moves not trouble enough on their own, without adding in more ranks?
>> if you don't wish to be challenged every week as a Baron, declare yourself loyal.<<
So free choice isna an option? If ye find the current Overlord is desreving of less than loyalty ye are t' swallow you honor and declare loyal?? Tis no better option than the massive overturns we have now.
>>I still say that limiting the challenges to an elite few duelists is a mistake, and a grave one. What point in being a WarLord if you know that you will probably never make that "top ten"?<<
I think ye may need to look at what is being said a bit closer. Kalamere has explained his proposal to me and it seems to line up somewhat with what Draven suggested:
>> In order to hold either the ArchMage or Diamond titles, a duelist must win the quarterly tournament. <<
Ye must contend that while Dalamar has been lucky, he hasna exactly had much of a chance to enjoy his title no? Aye dueling is dueling but there should be reward for winning such an honor. Instead he is challenged as soon as he leaves the ring of his last defense. The simple fact is that I myself have expirenced what Kalamere mentioned. Warlords who made me feel verra small because they were only out for peer wins. I count only three warlords or higher that have ever bothered to duel with me,
Seamus, Jeff, and Gnort. The current system is only friendly to those with out the coushion of 20 or so peer wins to have options open. With the idea Kalamere explained to me t'would create an enviorment that would use the current warlord ranking system, ina way, to mark the best 10, no' just the ones that have 4 hours to kill on a friday and saturday night, thereby opening up to more than just those "power duelers."
Anna sporting event should be that, an event. A time to enjoy the company of friends and make new ones. To exchange ideas and share a laugh as a group of people sharing a common intrest, which by the way is one definition of guild and community.
I suspect that there are more than 1,000 people involved somehow with DoS, its time we treated them *all* with the same concern that peer wins get now.
~Brian
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/12/97 1:59 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: PrlUnicorn
>> >> if you don't wish to be challenged every week as a Baron, declare yourself loyal.<<
So free choice isna an option? If ye find the current Overlord is desreving of less than loyalty ye are t' swallow you honor and declare loyal?? Tis no better option than the massive overturns we have now.<<
I'm with Brian on this... and simply declaring yourself loyal doesn't stop challengers it just makes them think twice because the Overlord as the right of Intercession.
I'll reserve my comments on intercessions.
From: PrlUnicorn
>> >> if you don't wish to be challenged every week as a Baron, declare yourself loyal.<<
So free choice isna an option? If ye find the current Overlord is desreving of less than loyalty ye are t' swallow you honor and declare loyal?? Tis no better option than the massive overturns we have now.<<
I'm with Brian on this... and simply declaring yourself loyal doesn't stop challengers it just makes them think twice because the Overlord as the right of Intercession.
I'll reserve my comments on intercessions.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
Date: 9/12/97 3:06 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Occurs
>>How 'bout mixin' it up a bit. Addin' a couple o' ranks.
Commoner > 1WoL 0 Fancy Maneuvers
Swords Woman 2 - 4WoL 1 Fancy Maneuver
Mistress-at-Arms 5 - 9WoL 2 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand Mistress 10 - 14WoL 3 Fancy Maneuvers
Warlady 15 - 30WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand WarLady 30+ WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers and right to challange
Baroness 30+ WoL
and challange by
Grand WarLady 5 Fancy Maneuvers and a Ring
Overlady 30+ WoL and
Challange stuff 6 Fancy Maneuvers<<
>>Really, Occurs? Ye wish to make DoS that much more difficult for new people? Are the moves not trouble enough on their own, without adding in more ranks?<<
::spots Brian's response and slowly responds::Aye luv, if ya notice, ta additions be wi' ta War Ladies. I be thinkin' by ta time they get to those ranks, they be ready for added a bit more complication.
I do nae agree ta makin' ta WoL stricter at a lower level than ta GM. Ta first two ranks be hard enough ta achieve while ya be new an' learnin' moves an' ta strategies. I hear most o' ta moanin' comin' from ta higher ranks, I think they be able ta handle a bit more complication.
~~Summer~~
From: Occurs
>>How 'bout mixin' it up a bit. Addin' a couple o' ranks.
Commoner > 1WoL 0 Fancy Maneuvers
Swords Woman 2 - 4WoL 1 Fancy Maneuver
Mistress-at-Arms 5 - 9WoL 2 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand Mistress 10 - 14WoL 3 Fancy Maneuvers
Warlady 15 - 30WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers
Grand WarLady 30+ WoL 4 Fancy Maneuvers and right to challange
Baroness 30+ WoL
and challange by
Grand WarLady 5 Fancy Maneuvers and a Ring
Overlady 30+ WoL and
Challange stuff 6 Fancy Maneuvers<<
>>Really, Occurs? Ye wish to make DoS that much more difficult for new people? Are the moves not trouble enough on their own, without adding in more ranks?<<
::spots Brian's response and slowly responds::Aye luv, if ya notice, ta additions be wi' ta War Ladies. I be thinkin' by ta time they get to those ranks, they be ready for added a bit more complication.
I do nae agree ta makin' ta WoL stricter at a lower level than ta GM. Ta first two ranks be hard enough ta achieve while ya be new an' learnin' moves an' ta strategies. I hear most o' ta moanin' comin' from ta higher ranks, I think they be able ta handle a bit more complication.
~~Summer~~