Posted by KatTime on December 21, 1999 at 00:28:45:
In Reply to: You are forgetting one huge and undeniable difference: posted by Graatch(VIP) on December 20, 1999 at 21:33:18:
> Golmagus was a *Lich*, the epitome of evil, and is *supposed* to act in a selfish, and evil way. If he could get away with abusing his powers, he should. > Ihlrath was a knight, and not just any knight either, but tattooed by Andaren, and given the distinction of being blooded. He was *supposed* to be above such things, supposed to set the standard of proper behaviour. He didn't. Hey, Graatch -- long time. Didn't know Arcane was Challen, either. Yes, there is that difference, but: Golmagus was also an Arbiter. If an Arbiter abuses his powers, and we can generally agree that being able to place "wanted" flags is a pretty powerful ability/power, he should be removed. Golmagus acted in many ways as a terrible arbiter, but managed to avoid retribution because the Immortals that governed Arbiter action/abuse let him get away with it and swallowed his lame rationalizations for abuse. Likewise, Ihlrath conjured up a lame rationalization for his abuse, as well. He used his tattoo from Andaren as a justication to utterly eradicate every shred of evil in Thera to recreate Arvandor. Furthermore, anyone that stood between him and the utter eradication of evil was inherently aiding evil, and thus evil in intent despite their "cloak" of goodness, and they must be utterly eradicated, as well. Thus, we have Iomakh dying sixteen times consecutively: He got in the way of Ihlrath and the eradication of evil. Thus we have Woru being destroyed in front of Challen. Woru got in the way of eradicating evil. Using his lame rationalization, we have a lame roleplaying excuse for being an Andarite Knight, in fact, Andaren **EVEN GAVE HIM A TITLE**. Was his excuse lame? Yes. Silly? Yes. Was it accepted by Andaren and the Immortals as legitimate despite the fact that it only *very thinly* vieled his obvious obsession with racking up pks and abusing the game mechanics to do so? Yes. Any rational person could demolish the theory behind his actions and RP, yet the Immortals allowed it, because of who Ihlrath was, and the PK impact he had on Thera/the Knights. This is in direct parallel to what a terrible and abusive Arbiter Golmagus was. No rational person could possibly accept his lame justifications for his abuses, yet they were accepted by the governing Immortals because of who Golmagus was, and the PK impact he had on Thera/the Arbiters. I will also point out that when I say "who they were," I do not mean the coincidence that both were Immortals OOC, but who their individual characters were and the impressive way those characters destroyed other, well-thought-out, well roleplayed characters. This post is looking long, but I will also point out that, in addition to Ihlrath's possible justifications for the two situations Challen listed with Woru/Iomakh, the one with Amergin is justifiable also as a Knight. Amergin and Ihlrath were grouped. Arolin attacked, held Amergin, and fled. He returned to hold Ihlrath and failed, and did not know the hold on Amergin had worn off. Amergin held Arolin so he couldn't flee, and Ihlrath stunned him, at which point Amergin spelled Arolin up. Arolin was meat, regardless of the Forced Duel, but Ihlrath went ahead and did it anyway. At the time I questioned it, but Ihlrath said something like "He started that fight, I just finished it." And, along that rationalization, Ihlrath was right. Arolin chose the odds of him against those two. Arolin was the aggressor, and he gambled, and he got his butt kicked. Ihlrath did not choose the fight, and Ihlrath did not choose the odds for it. Yes, I had a Knight leader, and no, I would not have acted in the way Ihlrath did, but his actions in that situation and others were accepted and allowed by the govering Immortals, again, because of who he was and his PK impact on Thera/the Knights. Again, my original point is that it seems to me, looking down the PK-list and at the names people are tossing around as "big time PKers," that the vast majority of these people used cheesy, thinly veiled rationalizations to rack up those 269 pks. Some even used cheesy, thinly veiled rationalizations to always group with same-site buddies to gangbang their way through those 269 kills. Realistically, I do not find it possible that there can be legitimate roleplaying reasons to kill 269 people. I do not think the people that rack up those numbers really care, either, so long as they come up with a rationalization deep enough (deep being loosely defined) that will convince the Immortals not to punish them. And, again, I do not find it a coincidence that the list of "big time pkers" somehow corresponds with the list of "big time cheesy roleplayers who added little to nothing to Thera for their presence." Anyway, I run the risk of beating a dead horse here, talking too much and putting too much thought into something that doesn't really matter, so I go now. Take care, Graatch, see you around.