Posted by Ingvar(VIP) on October 29, 2000 at 12:53:16:
In Reply to: Defining reality from a limited personal perspective (You live in your own little world) posted by Culhwch on October 29, 2000 at 11:14:33:
> Lets see, a member of a race that is born of the wilds decides to follow the precepts of a religion founded by the anti-thesis of nature, and eventually become the mortal "leader" as it were of same. How precisely would you Mr. Blade expect a Warder to respond to that? Having spoken quite a bit with other Warders (Flontinot, Kamal, Malaglen, Jheriohn, Sadrach, others), I can say that the situation was significantly more complex that you cared to see. Before Ingvar picked up the Initiate title, most people that RPed with him thought he was a Warder applicant, actually. Why? Ingvar's main tenets: Absolute personal freedom, exploration of his own instinctive drives, and a profound hatred for Theran society and what it taught the masses. Consistent with Scarab? Cyradia and Scarabaeus thought so. Consistent with Sylvan? Think about it. Sorry if it breaks your cookie-cutter archetypes, though. It would have been easier to write a Scarab role that cited the Sacraa verbatim, I suppose. As Voice of the Scarab, he made strong efforts to make his philosophy to others. (He was rather convinced that he was one of the few who saw things as they truly were.) An awful lot of people took up his gauntlet, and interacted. A few people, yourself included, shouted some threats, and hit chamo/noreply. Many others (several Maran, Servants, Ragers, Imperials, Arbiters, Warders, etc.) decided they hated what Ingvar stood for, but they heard him out, and could defend their own position. As to my perspective... well, suffice to say that other people who interacted with Culwhch came to a similar conclusion. Maybe it was just the crowd Ingvar spent time with. Maybe not. But in my mind, you stood out as an outstanding example of very simplistic roleplaying. > If I'd have known who those Warders were I'd have killed them for apologizing to you. And to come to the conclusion that Culhwch was not a good "Rper" from your perspective is fine. Just so long as you realize that your perspective is not the definitive, no matter how much you might like to think so.