Posted by The Pumpkin King on September 13, 2000 at 12:11:09:
In Reply to: Does it? I see a Battlerager getting rid of an Emperor mage... (oh yes there's text) posted by The First Apostle on September 13, 2000 at 11:00:35:
> On some level there is a matter of priorities here.
>
> In front of the rager we are presented with an imperial
> magus who happens to be the emperor. Next to the leader
> of Masters who might you consider a larger threat... the
> Emperor magus or the Maran priest who *may* be carrying
> some magical items.
>
> Nepenthe comments lower about Ragers getting a "bully"
> mentality. If I were a rager, I'd want to first and foremost
> get rid of the PRACTIONERS of magic. Items can always be
> destroyed but it's the PRACTIONERS who carry on the art.
>
> Of course, we'd rather focus our energies in killing those
> arbiters who "protect" mages.. the Servants who "protect
> mages.. and the Maran priest who may have a couple of magic
> flags on the items he carries. With this many enemies, does
> Battle ever expect to win?
>
>
> It never ceases to amaze me that we try to promote players
> who think for themselves, but we always hold them up to
> some sort of cookie cutter standard.
It's not that Balrahd may be carrying magical items, or that his items may have magical flags, or that his past adventures may have been aided by magic, it's that he's *wearing a magical item that casts frequently*.
The three ragers versus the three Imperials would have been a fairly decent fight, if you ask me. There was no reason to have Balrahd along, 'sides the fact that the battleragers are pansies.