Posted by Shokai(IMM) on April 6, 2000 at 14:32:58:
In Reply to: Re: a reply to your reply posted by Saerin on April 5, 2000 at 09:15:29:
>
>
> > I had been under the impression that I was actually doing a good job rping the role of the Honorable Paladin...and having had a few heroes prior, did not think of myself as such a newbie.
>
> I can understand why you might take offense at what he
> said, but he was speaking in generalities. For the most
> part, the cabal was plagued by the fact that people had
> a hard time playing an honorable character as defined by
> the cabal.
Really what I was kinda trying to point out to people, was that a lot of the people that I now see asking for Knights to return...well, they were the people that 2-3 years ago were the ones playing everything but Knights (not all of them, granted) because the role of a Knight was too hard (or "because Cador is a bastard" which was a common battle cry of the time, and one that personally...well, irked me since ya know...there were 3 other Knight immortals...glad you noticed us).
> > That being said...I am not sure I got Shokai's point exactly correct in his post.
> >
> > What I got out of it was this.
> >
> > "The elites of the day were to powerfull against the newbies of the day, to much carnage, so this was one of the main reasons they were disbanded"
>
> No, he's saying the elite players on CF were flocking to other characters,
> other cabals, and not playing Knights. The survival of the cabal was left
> to people who didn't have a lot of experience. It's not a combo for success.
>
*nod* (see the rant that was forming above) I'll give a current example of what I'm talking about...look at Battle currently, anyone playing a mage currently knows the swarms of ragers that are running around (which I really don't want to sound like I see a problem with...these things come and go in cycles) it takes a good deal of knowledge (of your spells, of Thera, of wand locations, of pk dos and don'ts, and just in general CF experiece) to get a high leveled mage that can hold thier own for a good bit. How does this relate to the Knights? Simple...Knights were a cabal that really couldn't ally themselves with anyone for long. (Arbiters-no, they're inherently dishonorable. Entropy, no...they change from person to person. Master-no, primarily evil. Battle-no, mages in Knights. Sylvan-not really) So this means that Knights had to develop thier own 'stronghold' characters....and while a good number of Knights were well rp'd...they couldn't hold or defend (in most cases) their item that well. A few more 'elite's' of the time thrown into thier mix, well...it would've helped. (more on this later really)
>
> > Um...is not this kind of thing just a temporary thing? the whole pendulum thing that everyone touts as being all powerfull and important? Would the imms actually destroy a cabal based on the swings of this pendulum?
> >
And here's the more part...what happened was (like Nep pointed out) a critical breakdown in what Knights stood for, and what they were fighting for. The leadership of Knights had become confused (add to this confusion that there was even a subtle difference of opinion with me and Cador...that we discussed MUCH later, about what they stood for) Knights had become the Light cabal with ideals of honor (though they were only loosely clung to) whereas there true philosophy was one of lightwalkers who put Honor above all else. I guess what I was ranting about the lack of 'experienced players' was leading to was that without people who knew the game and had something of an ooc idea about what Knights stood for, it was much easier for the comparative newbies of the cabal to get what they stood for more and more confused.
> > That is what I got out of Shokai's post...so I am not sure I read it correctly. Some clarification would be helpfull.
>
> There were a couple of problems that plagued the cabal in it's last days besides
> what Shokai mentioned...
>
> 1. Defining the cabal. Was the cabal about Honor? Or promoting the Light? Originally
> it was set up to do the former, and as the mud evolved it took on the latter with the
> former in mind ( a cabal that promoted both the light and honor). The imms watching the
> cabal took slightly different stances. So, what exactly were they about?
>
*nods emphaticaly* (part of this confusion was I'm sure brought on by me and Cador's subtly different take on the Knights)
> 2. Implementation of Empire. The Knight cabal really needed to be defined. With a large
> gangbanging cabal, how would the Knights continue? How would the Knights now deal with
> the large numbers they faced. Christina attempted to match numbers with numbers, and was
> unsuccessful. If you have a few well trained Knights, this largely cuts off the cabal to
> most of the mud, and basically requires that the more experienced players play Knights.
> Of course a cabal with Challens, Gareths, Zharradams would be formidable, you have very
> small numbers, and have relative difficulty in dealing with Empire.
>
> At least, this is how I see it. This was the first cabal I was ever inducted into, and one
> I had a tendency to play. I miss it.