Posted by Nepenthe(IMM) on October 24, 2000 at 17:36:08:
In Reply to: Honor has nothing to do with being a Rager #1, #2 They are Barbarians = viscious savage brutal, #3 The Battle Imms need to stop hiding and just show up and let the Village know what they expect. n/t posted by Shardak who thinks that a War with rules is just silly on October 24, 2000 at 17:09:17:
Ragers are supposed to be gutsy. Ragers are supposed to be the kind of people who think how you win is at least as important as if you win. Think about it. I could make one incredibly scary mage-killing warrior who got sancs, quaffed potions, and ran around with the staff of wonders. This guy hates mages and loves to fight. Would he be a good rager? I think we'd agree not. The whole thing about Battle and ganging, in my opinion, comes down to this. Whenever you do it, a "good" rager should feel like they lost, regardless of where it happens and regardless of the outcome. Do they let you get away with it in raids and defenses to keep the whining level (from Battle's opponents) down? Yeah. Does that mean you should go full gang on every guy who steps in the village? Nope. You just admitted you couldn't beat him alone. It's not a real good thing to admit when you're trying to claim to be this great warrior. The courage ideal is for practical purposes similar (not identical) to the honor ideal with respect to parity in combat, despite being very different in philosophy. There's no rule that says you can't gang every chance you get and demand help every time you think you might need it, but it's not being a good Rager.