Two cents from an ex-leader

Two cents from an ex-leader:
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]

Posted by Aniedra on October 24, 2000 at 14:04:01:

In Reply to: Serious question about Battle, the direction its going, and its Imms posted by Cathoir on October 24, 2000 at 13:31:52:

Okay, I don't have a rager in now, nor have I since Aniedra.. but from what I saw of the cabal under Tarakh kind of saddened me. I saw people doing stuff I know I'd have uninducted them for, and none of the redeeming things I saw when I was in the lead.

I'll be one of the first to step up and say that courage is kind of a nebulous thing, but I've also seen many people take it way too far. Maybe the Battle Imms made a bad judgement call in a particular case here, I don't know, and I'm not going to second-guess them, especially not solely on forum hearsay. If I had to guess, I think they may have beent trying to send a message that things had gone too far in terms of what the cabal as a whole was considering 'acceptable'.. for example, some questions I myself had to consider when I was leader:

Is it acceptable for a battlerager to go around fighting someone else, while a battle bard sings him up and heals him, etc?
Is it acceptable for multiple ragers to attack a solo person who uses pets? (Necromancers, Conjurers, Druids, Arbiters, etc)
Is it acceptable to tag team somebody?
Is it okay for a second rager to spam closing a door while another rager fights, to stop the guy from fleeing?
and so on...
a lot of it is situational, but some people will take any advantage they think they can get away with.

There are two extremes, one being never help each other out period, and the other being do anything and everything including ganging to help each other.

Battle lies somewhere in between those two. Maybe the Battle Imms are trying to tell the village that they've headed way too far in the wrong direction, and need to stop being so quick to mass-aid each other.

And for what it's worth, I think that a leader can do a lot to hurt a cabal in the long run if she's too permissible in what she lets go, and inducts too many people of lesser quality. Sure, you win your fights in the short term, but in the end the lack of quality (and I mean roleplaying quality, not fighting ability) will wreck the Village when the Imms crack down like this.

Follow Ups:

three cents from someone w/o a clue (what are u doing?) Aniedra :P Sierothe/Yrastrius/Ayragus 15:13:34 10/24/2000 (2)
- Cool, your battle chars are really getting cooler and cooler, just like mine!!! *rofl*...nt The combo Jhunal/Kaejof 15:28:23 10/24/2000 (1)
  - hehe Kaejof eh??? (text) Sierothe etc... 15:48:16 10/24/2000 (0)
Brief Response Cathoir 15:03:23 10/24/2000 (0)
I couldn't agree more. (n/t) [Boogy] 14:59:45 10/24/2000 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Comments:	> Okay, I don't have a rager in now, nor have I since Aniedra.. but from what I saw of the cabal under Tarakh kind of saddened me. I saw people doing stuff I know I'd have uninducted them for, and none of the redeeming things I saw when I was in the lead. > I'll be one of the first to step up and say that courage is kind of a nebulous thing, but I've also seen many people take it way too far. Maybe the Battle Imms made a bad judgement call in a particular case here, I don't know, and I'm not going to second-guess them, especially not solely on forum hearsay. If I had to guess, I think they may have beent trying to send a message that things had gone too far in terms of what the cabal as a whole was considering 'acceptable'.. for example, some questions I myself had to consider when I was leader: > Is it acceptable for a battlerager to go around fighting someone else, while a battle bard sings him up and heals him, etc? > Is it acceptable for multiple ragers to attack a solo person who uses pets? (Necromancers, Conjurers, Druids, Arbiters, etc) > Is it acceptable to tag team somebody? > Is it okay for a second rager to spam closing a door while another rager fights, to stop the guy from fleeing? > and so on... > a lot of it is situational, but some people will take any advantage they think they can get away with. > There are two extremes, one being never help each other out period, and the other being do anything and everything including ganging to help each other. > Battle lies somewhere in between those two. Maybe the Battle Imms are trying to tell the village that they've headed way too far in the wrong direction, and need to stop being so quick to mass-aid each other. > And for what it's worth, I think that a leader can do a lot to hurt a cabal in the long run if she's too permissible in what she lets go, and inducts too many people of lesser quality. Sure, you win your fights in the short term, but in the end the lack of quality (and I mean roleplaying quality, not fighting ability) will wreck the Village when the Imms crack down like this.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]